From: ludwig@cm.deakin.OZ.AU (Ludwig Omachen)
Newsgroups: alt.surfing
Subject: Re: Polluted Beaches in Australia
Date: 6 Jan 1993 11:39:43 GMT
Organization: Deakin University, Geelong, Australia
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: aragorn.cm.deakin.oz.au

In article <smith-060193092817@esumac21.csu.murdoch.edu.au> smith@csuvax1.murdoch.edu.au (Scott Smith) writes:
>I have just got back on the net and have read the stories regarding poluted
>beaches.  Lud may be able to shed some light on the following, but at least
>its a start.
>
>Around Lud's neck of the woods is a beach known as 13th Beach which wasn't
>a bad surf beach albeit is fairly dangerous for the inexperienced.  A
>certain organization decided a sewerage plant would look nice along the
>coastline and established the formentioned facility just west of the main
>surfing area at 13th.  The rest is one murky battle between the surf
>riders, the surf lifesavers, the Australian Environmental Security Force
>and of course environmentalists in general.
>
>They started a campaign known as Stop the Crap - Save 13th Beach.  It ran
>for a number of years.  Maybe Lud could share his views on this,
>particularly about the state of the beach and its environs.
>
>Keep ridin'
>
>Scott Smith
>External Studies Unit
>Murdoch University
>MURDOCH  WA  6150
>Tel: (09) 360 6016
>Fax: (09) 310 4929
>
>International Fax: + 61-9-3104929

The only treatment at the sewage plant is filtration to take out the
chunky bits, but condoms etc still get through and float around like
jelly fish.
This visible pollution is generally only evident at the southern end of the
beach , near the outlet.
At the main breaks (northern end of beach, 3 or 4 km away)
it is not generally apparent, though the water always has a frothy and
efferevecent (sp ?) appearance, quite different to other beaches in
the area.
The oulet itself used to be only a short distance offshore, but has
recently been extended to about 1.5 or 2 km offshore, but all this has
really achieved is to spread the pollution over a wider range.
There have been a number of occassions when the water at Bells has had
the same frothy apearance that you find at 13th Beach.
The surfactants (from detergents I think) get blown onto plants by the
onshore winds and give any vegetation a pretty rough time, ie no
trees, though I'm not sure if there ever were any at 13th.
We had a period of onshores a number of years back, after which many
of the trees in the Bells area (some 20 km from 13th Beach) suffered
from badly burnt foliage which was probably from the surfactants.

As for surfing at 13th, ear, eye and nose infections are common, but
the best breaks are 3 or 4 km away from the outlet and are not too
bad, but surfing near the southern (outlet) end of the beach is a no-no,
unless you want to get really sick.
My Son tried it once, and it put him out of action for about 3 weeks.
I tend to avoid the place, but as it picks up a little more swell in
summer, and works in a northerly wind (which is cross-shore at Bells)
I'll still surf the place on occassions.

The problem in upgrading the treatment plant here, as elswhere I guess
is money. The population here is fairly small, and the rate increase
required to pay for a decent treatment plant would be considered
excessive by most people here. Not that that is any excuse, just one
of lifes unpalatable facts.

Cheers, keep surfing,
Lud.
Newsgroups: alt.surfing