• V. Great Lakes
• VII. Heartland

• 1862 Land Grant Institution

• Indiana
• Iowa
• Michigan
• Minnesota
• Ohio
• Wisconsin

Five of our states are from Region 5. Iowa is the only state not from our region. They represent Region 7. Iowa was considered a good state to work with on this project as they have an extensive volunteer monitoring program. (IOWATER)

• Pollution Assessment and Prevention

Bacterial contamination of surface waters is a common public health concern. Laboratory analyses can be expensive, yet such monitoring is important to ensure safe recreational opportunities and to produce effective watershed management plans. This project focused on the ability and preferences of volunteers using “home test kits” to evaluate their local streams and rivers using E. coli as an indicator of stream health. Six states (i.e., IA, IN, MI, MN, OH, and WI) participated in the study, with collaboration among University Extension, state regulatory agencies, and volunteers.

A training manual was produced and used in 35 training sessions involving 151 volunteers during the three year study. Since then, E. coli monitoring workshops have been conducted by project staff at various state, regional and national conferences, and the training and methods have been adopted in at least two other states. An on-line database was developed that holds all project research data and is now available for other states’ use. A journal article is currently being written for publication.

Volunteers were surveyed concerning their attitudes and perceptions of test kit usability. At the close of the study, two-thirds of volunteers preferred the 3M™ Petrifilm™.

Reliability results from this three-year investigation will provide crucial information for state agencies considering using volunteer monitoring data in watershed planning and perhaps TMDL development. Final conclusions included:

Of six test kits used in this study, four were found to be more reliable than the other two. The following conclusions pertain to Coliscan Easygel® incubated, 3M™ Petrifilm™, IDEXX Colisure®, and IDEXX Colilert®.

1. The test kits results compared fairly well with certified lab analysis. Regression analyses comparing test kits with certified lab analysis yielded R2 values ranging from .51 to .60 for all samples from all states combined.

2. 3M™ Petrifilm™ and the IDEXX methods were essentially equal in performance followed closely by Coliscan Easygel®, when data from states were combined, based on regression and analysis of covariance. Two out of three volunteers preferred 3M™ Petrifilm™ over Coliscan Easygel®. Coliscan Easygel® and the IDEXX methods are currently EPA-approved for water analysis, whereas 3M™ Petrifilm™ is not.

3. The test kits are good tools for screening and for justifying additional monitoring.

4. There was variability in the bacteria analyses among the certified labs used in the project. Due to natural variation in bacteria concentrations in surface waters as well as differences in holding times, the amount of variability within and between labs was not surprising.

Additional impacts of this research reach into each participating state and beyond. For example, several states have implemented credible data legislation which will place added importance upon volunteer data as state budget and agency resources continue to diminish. In Wisconsin, the Eau Claire County Health Department was interested in receiving split samples from project volunteers to analyze for E. coli bacteria. This provided the project an opportunity to assess inter-lab variability of results. The lab analyzed 21 samples for this project at no cost. In addition to being of assistance to the project, the data were then available to that county's health department, leading to increased information about water quality of local streams. In Minnesota, $50,000 in state lottery disbursement funds were received in 2006-2007 to extend volunteer bacteria monitoring and augment 406 grant funds. These funds would not have been secured without the 406 funds and the initial work of the project to identify reliable test kit alternatives. With these additional grant funds, MN volunteers were able to collect extra samples and calculate geometric means (5 samples within 30 days) to compare with state standards.

In Michigan a study is being conducted to assess if length of holding time of a water sample prior to incubation has an effect on measured E. coli counts. The study is a direct result of this project’s findings and recommendations that further work be done to determine potential variability in holding times.

• The regional funding allows four land grant universities to share their testing methods via hands-on workshops to be held at the National CSREES Water Conference, 2008 National ANREP Conference etc. In Wisconsin, the Eau Claire County Health Department was interested in receiving split samples from our project volunteers to analyze for E. coli bacteria. This provided our project the opportunity to assess interlab variability of results. The lab analyzed 21 samples for this project at no cost to us. In addition to being of assistance to our project, the data were then available to that county's health deparment, leading to increased information about water quality of local streams. In Minnesota, $50,000 in state lottery disbursement funds were received in 2006-2007, to extend volunteer bacteria monitoring and augment 406 grant funds. These funds would not have been secured without the 406 funds and the initial work of the project to identify reliable test kit alternatives. With these additional grant funds, MN volunteers were able to collect extra samples and calculate geometric means (5 samples within 30 days) to compare with state standards.

A close partnership has formed between the five land grant universities and Iowa, Wisconsin and Indiana DNR volunteer monitoring programs. Each of the Extension programs are also working with related state agencies.

An example of a collaborative partnership that has arisen from this project in Wisconsin is that the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resouces created a home for this project's data within its newly developed Surface Water Integrated Monitoring System (SWIMS). SWIMS is a database of water quality information collected by WDNR staff and partners, including volunteers and the State Lab of Hygiene (through which WI volunteers' samples were analyzed). The data in this system are used by biologists for making management decisions about waters and are shared with the EPS through their database system.

In MN, the Pollution Control Agency has encouraged us to enter the citizen-collected data into the STORET data base for use in assessing impaired waters. This came about because of the partnership established through this project and continued communication on results of the study.

University researchers have collected and organized the volunteer and lab data throughout the project. Volunteers have been surveyed concerning their attitudes and perceptions of test kit usability. This adds a human dimension to the E. coli reliability research. Michigan State has constructed an on-line database for all six state's data. Outreach efforts to date have included conducting 35 training workshops reaching 140 volunteers. In addition over twenty presentations have been made at regional and national conferences.

2007 presentations include:

Stepenuck, K., L. Crighton, J. Iles, B. Liukkonen, E. O'Brien, and L. Wolfson. Volunteer Monitoring of E. coli in Upper Midwest Streams: A Comparison of Methods and Preferences. CSREES National Water Quality Conference, Savannah, GA. January 30, 2007.

Stepenuck, K., L. Crighton, J. Iles, B. Liukkonen, E. O'Brien, and L. Wolfson. Volunteer Monitoring of E. coli in Upper Midwest Streams: A Comparison of Methods and Preferences. Indiana River Rally, Indianapolis, IN. June 7, 2007.

Stepenuck, K, L. Green, and E. Herron. Translating Science to the Community Through Volunteer Monitoring. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry National Conference. Milwaukee, WI. November 13, 2007.

Liukkonen et al. 2007. Citizens Monitoring Bacteria - Collecting Useful Data.MPCA Lakes & Streams Monitoring Workshop. St. Paul MN.

Wolfson et al. 2007. E.coli Monitoring - Effective Techniques & Test Kits for Volunteers. Michigan Clean Water Corps Annual Conference. Rossommon, MI.

Iles et al. 2007. Citizens Monitoring Bateria Preferences. Water Management Association of Ohio Annual Conference. Columbus, Ohio.

Our studies final conclusions included:

Of the six test kits used in this study, four were found to be more reliable than the other two. The following conclusions pertain to these four kits (EasyGel Incubated, Petrifilm, IDEXX Colisure, and IDEXX Colilert).

1. The test kits results compared fairly well with certified lab analysis. Regression analyses comparing test kits with certified lab analysis yielded R2 values ranging from .51 to .60 for all samples from all states combined.

2. Easygel incubated, Petrifilm, and the IDEXX methods were essentially equal in performance when data from all states were combined, based on regression and Kappa analyses. Two out of three volunteers preferred Petrifilm over Easygel. Easygel and IDEXX methods are intended for water analysis, whereas Petrifilm is not.

3. The test kits are good tools for screening and for justifying additional monitoring.

4. There was variability [in the bacteria analyses] among the certified labs used in the project. Due to natural variation in bacteria concentrations in surface waters as well as differences in holding times, the amount of variability within and between labs was not surprising.

August 2008 update (authored by Kris Stepenuck)

In July 2008 we surveyed 25 participants from our February 2008 workshop held at the CSREES National Water Conference in Sparks, NV. Nineteen people responded to the survey, representing a 76% response rate. The most common activity of participants since the training was to share the information with others. About a third have conducted E. coli monitoring, and 20% have adapted the program for their own uses and/or partnered with others to support volunteer E. coli monitoring. For full results please see the attached file "FollowUpSurveyResults2008August20.doc".

The project would not have been possible withour section 406 funding. It provided funding for regional partners to meet 8 times over the past 3+ years to collaborate on items such as data analysis as well as solve volunteer challenges. It funded support staff and students that have worked on statistical analysis of data, website development and update, on-line database construction at Michigan State and volunteer support staff in each of the six states. The 406 funds supported travel to regional and national conferences to help reach a larger audience than would have been possible. Finally the 406 funds paid for all manual publication costs, supplies, shipping and lab analysis costs. The additional regional funds allowed the project to further enhance supplies provided for volunteers. Supplemental regional funds assisted with additional lab analysis / test kit data collection and relevant equipment purchases.