EXPERIENCE

YOUR AMERICA

Fecal-coliform bacteria concentrations in streams of

the Chattahoochee River National Recreation Area,

Metropolitan Atlanta, Georgia, May–October 1994 and 1995

U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 00-4139

August 2000

U. S. Department of the Interior

U. S. Geological Survey

Significant Findings

• Fecal-coliform bacteria concentrations

in the Chattahoochee River were low

downstream from Buford Dam, especially nearest the dam, because of

dilution from water released from near

the bottom of Lake Sidney Lanier.

• Median fecal-coliform bacteria concentrations in the Chattahoochee River

increased steadily from less than 20

Most Probable Number of colonies per

100 milliliters (MPN col/100 mL) in the

tailwaters of Buford Dam on Lake

Sidney Lanier to 790 MPN col/100 mL

downstream of Metropolitan Atlanta.

During the 1994 and 1995 summer

recreation seasons, from 1 to 65

percent of samples collected at 14

Chattahoochee River monitoring sites

exceeded the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency (USEPA) review

criterion of 400 col/100 mL.

• Georgia Environmental Protection

Division standards and the USEPA

review criterion for fecal coliform

bacteria were commonly exceeded

during wet-weather conditions in most

Metropolitan Atlanta tributary streams

and during most streamflow conditions

in several tributaries that drain areas

dominated by urban and suburban land

uses. During the 1994 and 1995 summer

recreational season, from 27 to 100

percent of samples collected at 22

tributary stream-monitoring sites

exceeded the USEPA review criterion

of 400 col/100 mL.

• Statistically significant positive

correlations were found between high

fecal-coliform bacteria concentrations

and increased discharges and high

turbidities in less-developed tributary

watersheds dominated by nonpoint

sources such as runoff from parking

lots, lawns, and pastures.

• In some highly urbanized tributary

watersheds, there was an inverse

correlation between high fecalcoliform bacteria concentrations

and increased discharges and high

turbidities, which indicates possible

contamination from point sources

such as leaking or overflowing sewer

lines or discharge from combined

sewer overflows.

The Chattahoochee River National Recreation

Area (CRNRA) attracted approximately 2.9 million

visitors in 1999 with nearly 30 percent of the

visitors participating in water-based activities

such as fishing and boating (William J. Carroll,

National Park Service, oral commun., 2000). The

CRNRA contains about three-fourths of all public

green space in a 10-county area of Metropolitan

Atlanta (Kunkle and Vana-Miller, 2000).

Introduction

The Metropolitan Atlanta area has been

undergoing a period of rapid growth and

development. The population in the 10-

county metropolitan area almost doubled

from about 1.5 million people in 1970

to 2.9 million people in 1995 (Atlanta

Regional Commission, written commun.,

2000). Residential, commercial, and other

urban land uses more than tripled during

the same period (Frick and others, 1998).

The Chattahoochee River is the most

utilized water resource in Georgia. The

rapid growth of Metropolitan Atlanta and

its location downstream of the headwaters of the drainage basin make the

Chattahoochee River a vital resource for

drinking-water supplies, recreational

opportunities, and wastewater assimilation.

In 1978, the U.S. Congress declared the

natural, scenic, recreation, and other values

By M. Brian Gregory and Elizabeth A. Frick, U.S. Geological Survey
Lake Sidney Lanier

75

75

0 5 10 MILES 85

DOUGLAS

DE KALB

FORSYTH

HALL

GWINNETT

COBB

PAULDING

FULTON

20

285

CHATTAHOOCHEE RIVER

BASIN BOUNDARY

1

2

4 3

5

6

7

8

9

10 11

12

13 14

16

17

18

19 21 20

23

25 24

26

28 

30 

32

33

34

35

36

36

27

22

Bowmans 

Settles Bridge Island Unit

Chattahoochee River National Recreation Area 

Designated uses for the Chattahoochee River 

Drinking water and recreation 

Fishing

Municipal drinking-water intake

Municipal wastewater outfall

1994 and 1995 combined sewer overflow

GaEPD 1994 and 1995 fecal-coliform bacteria 

sampling site

N

Study area

GEORGIA

Atlanta

Site

number

Site

Site name number

Georgia Environmental Protection Division (GaEPD) 1994 and 1995 fecal-coliform bacteria sampling sites within the study area 

1 Chattahoochee River—Buford Dam tailwater near Buford

 2 Richland Creek

3 Chattahoochee River—State Road 20 near Suwanee

 4 James Creek

5 Level Creek

6 Chattahoochee River—McGinnis Ferry Road at Suwanee

 7 Suwanee Creek

8 Chattahoochee River—Medlock Bridge Road near Norcross

9 Johns Creek

10 Chattahoochee River—Holcomb Bridge Road near Norcross

11 Crooked Creek

12 Chattahoochee River—Eves Road above Roswell

13 Big Creek

14 Willeo Creek

15 Chattahoochee River—Morgan Falls Dam Forebay at Sandy Springs

16 Marsh Creek

17 Chattahoochee River— Johnson Ferry Road near Atlanta 

18 Sope Creek

Site name

19 Chattahoochee River—Powers Ferry Road & I-285 near Atlanta

20 Long Island Creek

21 Rottenwood Creek

22 Chattahoochee River—Paces Ferry Road at Atlanta

23 Nancy Creek

24 Peachtree Creek

25 Chattahoochee River—South Cobb Drive near Atlanta

26 Proctor Creek

27 Nickajack Creek

28 Sandy Creek

29 Chattahoochee River—Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. near Mabelton

30 Utoy Creek

31 Sweetwater Creek

32 Chattahoochee River—State Road 166 near Ben Hill

33 Camp Creek

34 Deep Creek

35 Chattahoochee River—State Road 92 near Fairburn

36 Anneewakee Creek

20

85

Buford Dam

McGinnis Ferry Unit

Abbotts Bridge Unit

Suwanee Creek Unit

Medlock Bridge Unit

Jones

Bridge

 Unit

Gold Branch Unit 

Johnson Ferry Unit 

Cochran Shoals Unit 

Palisades Unit

Standing Peachtree

15 Island

Ford

Unit Holcomb

Bridge

Unit

Vickery

Creek

Unit 

Morgan Falls Dam

31 

River

29 

Chattahoochee

Figure 1. Location of the Chattahoochee River National Recreation Area and Georgia Environmental 

Protection Division fecal-coliform bacteria sampling sites in the study area, May–October 1994 and 1995.

EXPLANATION

Peachtree Creek

2
Urban

Forest

Agriculture

Water

Wetland

Barren

Land use

EXPLANATON

DOUGLAS

DE KALB

COBB

CHEROKEE

HENRY

PAULDING

FULTON

CHATTAHOOCHEE RIVER

Buford Dam

Morgan

Falls

Dam

FORSYTH

GWINNETT

Peachtree Creek

Lake Sidney Lanier

HALL

BOUNDARY

Chattahoochee

River

BASIN

Figure 2. Land use, Metropolitan Atlanta area, 1995 (data from U.S. Geological

Survey, 1977–80; U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991; Atlanta Regional Commission, digital data, 1995; http://www.census.gov/population/www/estimates/

countypop.html, 1996).

of 48 miles of the Chattahoochee River

from Buford Dam to Peachtree Creek to

be of special national significance. To

preserve this reach of the Chattahoochee

River, the U.S. Congress created the

Chattahoochee River National Recreational

Area (CRNRA), which includes the Chattahoochee River downstream from Buford

Dam to the mouth of Peachtree Creek and a

series of park areas adjacent to the river in

northern Metropolitan Atlanta (fig. 1).

Even with this protection, waters of the

Chattahoochee River and many of its

tributaries in Metropolitan Atlanta did

not meet water-quality standards set for

designated uses during 1994 and 1995

(fig. 1 and table 1). Much of the degradation of water quality has been associated

with areas undergoing rapid urban growth

and sprawling suburban development. The

resulting conversion of mostly forested

land to urban land has multiple adverse

effects on water quality. Degradation of

water quality may be caused by a number

of factors including an increase in nutrient

concentrations, sediment and sedimentbound contaminant concentrations (e.g.,

metals and pesticides) (Frick and others,

1998), and fecal-coliform bacteria concentrations (Center for Watershed Protection,

1999). The presence of fecal-coliform

bacteria in streams and rivers indicates

that contamination by fecal material from

human or animal sources has occurred and

contact with these waters can result in

exposure to pathogenic bacteria often

associated with fecal contamination.

During 1994 and 1995, elevated concentrations of fecal-coliform bacteria were

the most common reason that the Chattahoochee River and tributaries did not meet

their designated uses of drinking-water

supply, recreation, and fishing. According

to the Georgia Department of Natural

Resources (1997), during 1994 and 1995,

67 of 77 stream reaches assessed in

Metropolitan Atlanta did not meet or only

partially met water-quality requirements

for designated uses. Excessive concentrations of fecal-coliform bacteria were a

contributing factor in 63 of the 67 streams

that did not meet or only partially met

designated uses. High concentrations of

fecal-coliform bacteria have the potential

to reduce the recreational value of the river

and pose a continued threat, with unknown

health risks, to humans that come in

contact with the water while fishing,

boating, rafting, wading, and swimming.

Project Description

In 1999, the U.S. Geological Survey

(USGS) and the National Park Service

(NPS) initiated a 2-year project designed

to better define microbial contamination

in and near the CRNRA, in Metropolitan

Atlanta, Ga. As part of the USGS and NPS

microbial project, a retrospective analysis

of a spatially extensive water-quality data

set for the upper Chattahoochee River was

analyzed. These data were collected by the

Georgia Environmental Protection Division

(GaEPD) from May to October in 1994 and

1995 as part of their Chattahoochee River

Modeling Project (Georgia Department

of Natural Resources, 1994a). These data

were collected from 18 mainstem sampling

sites and 35 tributary sampling sites located

along a 113-mile reach of the Chattahoochee River downstream from Buford

Dam. GaEPD water-quality samples

consisted of single grab samples collected

from the middle of the stream. Fecalcoliform bacteria concentrations were

determined using the Multiple Tube

Fermentation Technique (American Public

Health Association and others, 1985) and

expressed as the Most Probable Number of

fecal-coliform colony forming units per

100 milliliters (MPN col/100 mL). This

report describes the distribution and

occurrence of fecal-coliform bacteria

concentrations based on GaEPD data

collected at 14 Chattahoochee River and

22 tributary stream sites in the vicinity

of the CRNRA and the reach of the

Chattahoochee River immediately downstream of the CRNRA directly influenced

by Metropolitan Atlanta (figs. 1 and 2).

Distribution of Fecal-Coliform

Bacteria

From May to October of 1994 and 1995,

fecal-coliform bacteria concentrations in

many streams in the study area commonly

exceeded GaEPD standards and maximum

concentrations recommended for the

designated uses of drinking water, recreation, and fishing. During the 1994 and

1995 summer recreational seasons, 1 to

65 percent of samples collected from

14 Chattahoochee River sites and 27 to

100 percent of samples collected from

22 tributary stream sites exceeded the

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(USEPA) review criterion of 400 col/100

mL (U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, 1997).

3
GaEPD standard—

maximum

GaEPD standard—

geometric-mean

USEPA

review criterion

Bowmans Island Unit

Settles Bridge

McGinnis Ferry Unit

Suwanee Creek Unit

Abbotts Bridge Unit

Medlock Bridge Unit

Jones Bridge Unit

Holcomb Bridge Unit

Island Ford Unit

Vickery Creek Unit

Gold Branch Unit

Morgan Falls Dam

Buford Dam

Johnson Ferry Unit

Cochran Shoals Unit

Palisades Unit

Standing Peachtree

100,000

10,000

1,000

100

10

350 340

DISTANCE UPSTREAM FROM MOUTH OF CHATTAHOOCHEE RIVER, IN RIVER MILES

FECAL-COLIFORM BACTERIA CONCENTRATION, IN MOST

PROBABLE NUMBER OF COLONIES PER 100 MILLILITERS

330 320 310 300 290 280

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 12 13 14 15 1617 18 19 202122 2324 25 26272829 30 31 32 333435 36

8

77

42

42

18

74

24

1

27

65

68

59

32

93

60

60

88

94

48

44 64

85

96

39 39

83

24

78

20

90

36

93 74

50

100

59

Chattahoochee River National Recreation Area

Headwaters Mouth

Data from

GaEPD

See table 1

4

1/ Based on at least four samples collected from a given site over a 30-day period at an interval not less than 24 hours. The 

geometric mean of a series of N terms is the Nth root of their product. For example, the geometric mean of 2 and 18 is 

6—the square root of 36.

2/ Waters are deemed not supporting designated uses (impaired) when 25 percent or more of the samples have fecalcoliform bacteria concentrations greater than the applicable review criterion or standard (400 or 4,000 MPN col/100 mL) 

and partially supporting when 11 to 25 percent of the samples exceed the review criterion or standard.

3/ May–October is defined as the summer recreation season—the season when most water-contact activities are expected 

to occur. The State of Georgia does not encourage swimming in any natural surface waters because a number of factors 

beyond the control of any State agency contribute to elevated concentrations of fecal-coliform bacteria.

Designated use

Drinking-water supply 200

1,000

200

1,000

Recreation

Fishing

May–October3

November–April

Year round 200

—

4,000

—

4,000

—

400

—

400

—

400

May–October3

November–April

30-day

geometric

mean1

Maximum

single

sample2

Time of year GaEPD standards

that standards

and

criterion apply

USEPA (1997) 

recommended

review criterion to

evaluate once-permonth samples2

Table 1. Georgia Environmental Protection Division (GaEPD) fecal-coliform bacteria 

standards and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) review criterion 

[All standards and criterion are in Most Probable Number of colonies per 100 milliliters (MPN col/100 mL); 

 —, no standard or criterion. Modified from Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 1994b]

Figure 3. Fecal-coliform bacteria concentrations in the Chattahoochee River and tributary streams, Metropolitan Atlanta,

May–October 1994 and 1995.

Explanation

on page 5
1,800

490

3,300

4,900 4,900

13,000

24,000

490

1,300

2,300

1,400

790

330

11,000

3,500 3,300

1,700

2,300

170

1,100

35,000

490

1,300

310

2,300

230

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

DISCHARGE, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

30-day

geometric mean

MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT

GaEPD standard—

maximum

See table 1

GaEPD standard—

geometric-mean 

USEPA

review criterion

1994 1995

Sope Creek Data from GaEPD

FECAL-COLIFORM BACTERIA CONCENTRATION, IN MOST

PROBABLE NUMBER OF COLONIES PER 100 MILLILITERS

Chattahoochee River National Recreation Area

Percent of values exceeding

USEPA review criterion (see table 1)

Site number (see figure 1)

90

75

50 (Median)

25

10

Percentile

36 85

MainstemTributary

17 18

Chattahoochee River 

 frontage and park unit

Fecal-coliform bacteria concentration

Chattahoochee River 

 only

Designated uses for Chattahoochee River 

Fishing

Drinking

 water and

 recreation

EXPLANATION

Why are fecal-coliform bacteria monitored and how do concentrations

relate to water-borne diseases? Testing for individual disease-causing agents is

possible and is often done when there is a known or suspected outbreak of a waterborne disease. However, it is cost prohibitive, and in some cases technically impractical, to routinely monitor for all disease-causing bacteria, viruses, and protozoa that

may be found in contaminated surface water. For routine water-quality monitoring,

harmless bacteria that occur in higher numbers and originate from the same sources

as the disease-causing bacteria are typically measured. The fecal-coliform bacteria

group has long been the preferred indicator bacteria for Federal and State regulatory

agencies and until 1986, was the primary indicator bacteria for which Federal and

State regulations were based. Recent advances in the use of indicator bacteria have

shown that Escherichia coli (E. coli) and Enterococci are more reliable for predicting

the presence of disease-causing organisms and are now recommended for use in

monitoring programs by the USEPA. Although the presence of indicator bacteria does

not prove that pathogenic bacteria are present in the environment, the presence does

show that contamination by fecal material has occurred. High concentrations of

microbial indicators and concentrations that exceed standards pose an increased risk

of exposure to harmful bacteria and the associated adverse effects.

Figure 4. Stream discharge and fecal-coliform bacteria concentrations in Sope Creek, May–October

1994 and 1995. Concentrations of fecal-coliform bacteria in individual samples are denoted by an asterisk.

In tributary streams of the Chattahoochee

River, fecal-coliform bacteria concentrations generally are higher than concentrations in the Chattahoochee River. Tributary

streams having the lowest median fecalcoliform bacteria concentrations drained

the least-developed areas, generally

upstream and downstream from Metropolitan Atlanta, whereas tributary streams

having the highest median fecal-coliform

bacteria concentrations drained densely

developed urban and suburban areas

(fig. 3). For example, in Sope Creek,

a 35-square-mile watershed in which urban

and suburban areas account for 81 percent

of land use in the basin (fig. 2), only a few

fecal-coliform bacteria concentrations

from samples collected during low-flow

periods were less than the USEPA review

criterion of 400 col/100 mL. During this

same period, the geometric-mean fecalcoliform bacteria concentrations was never

less than the level considered safe based

on the GaEPD fecal-coliform bacteria

standards (fig. 4).

5
Median fecal-coliform bacteria

concentrations in water released to

the Chattahoochee River from Lake

Sidney Lanier at Buford Dam were

less than 20 MPN col/100 mL.

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

FECAL-COLIFORM BACTERIA CONCENTRATION,

IN MOST PROBABLE NUMBER

OF COLONIES PER 100 MILLILITERS

Rottenwood Creek

Sope Creek

Willeo Creek

Big Creek

Crooked Creek

Johns Creek

Suwanee Creek 

James Creek

14

10

17

45

23

7

15

30

27

46

9

15

7

19

15

46

GaEPD

standard—

maximum

See table 1

GaEPD

standard—

geometricmean

USEPA

review

criterion

Data from GaEPD

90

75

50 (Median)

25

10

Percentile

Outlier

Number of 10 23 samples

BaseflowStormflow

EXPLANATION

6

review criterion of 400 col/100 mL.

Approximately 50 miles downstream of

the dam near Standing Peachtree, median

fecal-coliform bacteria concentrations were

consistently higher than the USEPA review

criterion of 400 col/100 mL. At the four

Chattahoochee River monitoring sites

downstream of the CRNRA, fecal-coliform

bacteria concentrations exceeded the

GaEPD maximum concentration limit of

4,000 MPN col/100 mL in as many as

25 percent of the GaEPD samples collected

during the summer recreational seasons in

1994 and 1995.

tributary with about 87 percent urban land

use (fig. 2), approximately 15 percent of

samples collected during baseflow conditions contained concentrations of fecalcoliform bacteria that exceeded the median

fecal-coliform bacteria concentrations

observed during storms (fig. 5).

Fecal-coliform bacteria concentrations in

the Chattahoochee River generally increase

downstream through Metropolitan Atlanta

(fig. 3). During the study period, measured

concentrations of fecal-coliform bacteria

were lowest in samples collected directly

downstream from Buford Dam where

water from Lake Sidney Lanier is released

into the river to maintain minimum flows

and to produce hydroelectric power to meet

peak demands. Median fecal-coliform

bacteria concentrations in the water

released through the dam were less than 20

MPN col/100 mL. As the Chattahoochee

River flows downstream, inflow from

tributaries and surface runoff increases the

median fecal-coliform bacteria concentration in the river. During the study period,

for about 30 miles downstream from

Buford Dam to the Island Ford Unit (figs.

1 and 3), median fecal-coliform bacteria

concentrations were less than the GaEPD

standard of 200 MPN col/100 mL for

drinking and recreational water. Within the

next approximate 25-mile reach of the

river, between the Island Ford and Palisades Units (figs. 1 and 3), median fecalcoliform bacteria concentrations were

higher than the GaEPD standard of 200

MPN col/100 mL for drinking and recreational water, but lower than the USEPA

Concentrations of fecal-coliform bacteria

depend on hydrologic conditions prior to

and during sample collection. Several

additional factors—including the amount

of sunlight, temperature, and distance from

the source of contamination—influence

concentrations of fecal-coliform bacteria

in a stream. During the study period, water

Baseflow at

Sope Creek.

Stormflow at Sope Creek.

Figure 5. Comparison of fecal-coliform bacteria concentrations during baseflow

and stormflow conditions in eight tributary streams, May–October 1994 and 1995.

Residential development adjacent to the

Chattahoochee River.

samples collected during or immediately

following a storm had fecal-coliform

bacteria concentrations as much as

10 times higher than samples collected at

the same site during baseflow conditions

(fig. 5). Higher concentrations of fecalcoliform bacteria often occur when the

contamination is the result of nonpoint

sources—when overland runoff carries a

high concentration of fecal-coliform

bacteria from many different sources.

When point sources are a significant

contributor of fecal-coliform bacteria, high

fecal-coliform bacteria concentrations may

be present during low flows as well as

during high flows. For example, in Rottenwood Creek, a Metropolitan Atlanta
Urban streams in Metropolitan

Atlanta often do not support

recreational uses because of

high levels of indicator bacteria.

HUMAN SOURCES

Sewered watersheds 

Combined sewer overflows 

Sanitary sewer overflows 

Illegal sanitary connections 

 to storm drains 

Illegal disposal to storm drains 

Leaking sewer lines

Non-sewered watersheds 

Failing septic systems 

Small, self-contained sewage- 

 treatment systems 

Marinas and pumpout facilities

NON-HUMAN SOURCES

Domestic animals and urban wildlife 

Dogs, cats 

Rats, raccoons 

Pigeons, gulls, ducks, geese

Livestock and rural wildlife 

Cattle, horse, poultry 

Beaver, muskrats, deer, waterfowl 

Table 2. Human and non-human sources of fecal-coliform bacteria in urban 

watersheds 

[Modified from Center for Watershed Protection, 1999]

Sources of Fecal-Coliform Bacteria

Fecal-coliform bacteria in an urban

watershed can originate from multiple

sources depending on hydrologic conditions (table 2) and concentrations may vary

in a manner similar to chemical contaminants, especially sediment-associated

contaminants. Studies have shown that

fecal-coliform bacteria enter streams more

often from nonpoint sources during storms

when fecal material from human and

nonhuman sources is washed off the land

and into streams. Recent research has

shown that much of the fecal-coliform

bacteria contamination from urban areas

may come from domestic pets, such as

dogs, that have high daily defecation rates

and are known to harbor the diseasecausing organisms Giardia lamblia and

Salmonella (Center for Watershed Protection, 1999).

Fecal-coliform bacteria sources, such as

combined sewer overflows and wildlife,

contribute bacteria mainly through runoff

during rainfall, whereas other sources, such

as sanitary sewer overflows and failing

septic systems, contribute bacteria during

low- and high-flow conditions. Bacteria

also can originate from point sources such

as leaking sewers or malfunctioning waste

water treatment equipment, or in leachate

from failing septic systems. Combined

sewers carry a combination of stormwater

runoff and untreated sewage and often

overflow during storms, resulting in the

discharge of untreated waste being discharged into streams. Although no combined sewer overflows exist within or

upstream from the CRNRA, sanitary sewer

lines are commonly routed along tributary

stream corridors. When sanitary sewer

lines overflow as a result of equipment

failures, these overflows are sources of

fecal-coliform bacteria contamination in

the CRNRA. Other research has shown

that bacteria may collect and settle within

dense urban drainage networks and may

persist for weeks or months before being

transported to local streams (Center for

Watershed Protection, 1999).

Current Research

Although concentrations of fecal-coliform

bacteria that exceed GaEPD standards and

the USEPA review criterion are common in

Metropolitan Atlanta streams, the situation

is not unique to the metropolitan area.

According to a nationwide study, bacterial

contamination was ranked as the third most

common cause for water-body impairment

in the United States during 1996 (Armitage

and others, 1999). Earlier in the 20th century, waterborne diseases (table 3) were a

greater threat to human health in the United

States than now. However, currently the

threat of waterborne disease exists for

humans living in densely populated areas

(Burke, 1993). These risks have the potential to be even greater in areas where undertreated or untreated wastewater effluent and

runoff from highly urbanized areas contribute to drinking-water source supply intakes,

or where recreational contact with contaminated water may occur.

Additional information on sources and

transportation pathways is needed to

support improved regulations, to reduce

current levels of fecal-coliform bacteria,

and to manage water resources in urban

areas. Factors determining the concentration of fecal-coliform bacteria, including

sources, must first be known and understood before any short-term management

plans are implemented. Part of current

USGS and NPS research is to utilize a

genetic fingerprinting technique using E.

coli bacteria present in fecal samples from

humans, domestic animals, livestock,

poultry, and wildlife to try to track microbial sources within the Chattahoochee

River basin. If successful, this research

may benefit the NPS and water-resource

managers in the Metropolitan Atlanta area

by determining the relative importance of

various sources of microbial contamination

in tributaries and reaches of the Chattahoochee River.

Canada geese are year-round

residents at Island Ford.

Overflowing

sanitary

sewer.

7
8

Table 3. Acute and chronic health effects associated with 

common waterborne microorganisms 

[Modified from American Society for Microbiology, 1999]

AGENT HEALTH EFFECTS

Bacteria

E. coli (O157:H7) Diarrhea Adults: death from 

thrombocytopenia

Children: death from 

kidney failure

Campylobacter Diarrhea Death from GuillianBarre syndrome

Salmonella Diarrhea Reactive arthritis

Shigella Diarrhea Reactive arthritis

Protozoa

Giardia lamblia Diarrhea Failure to thrive

Severe hypothyroidism

Lactose intolerance

Chronic joint pain

Cryptosporidium Diarrhea Death in immunocompromised humans

Viruses

Hepatitis viruses Liver infections Liver failure

Norwalk virus Diarrhea

Acute Chronic 

State Representative

U.S. Geological Survey

Peachtree Business Center

3039 Amwiler Road, Suite 130

Atlanta, GA 30360

(770) 903-9100

What are bacteria and which ones cause

waterborne diseases? Bacteria are a numerous and

diverse assemblage of single-celled organisms and are a

natural component of lakes, rivers, and streams. Over 60

genera of bacteria are present in these aquatic systems,

with absolute numbers ranging from 40,000 to over 12

million cells in the amount of water that would cover the

bottom of an average-sized coffee cup (Lynch and

Hobbie, 1988). Most of these bacteria are harmless to

humans; however, certain bacteria, some of which

normally inhabit the intestinal tract of warm-blooded

animals, have the potential to cause sickness and disease

in humans. Elevated numbers of these harmless bacteria

are associated with increased numbers of harmful

bacteria as well as other disease-causing organisms

such as viruses and protozoans. Consumption of, or

recreational contact with, water contaminated with feces

of warm-blooded animals can cause a variety of illnesses.

Minor gastrointestinal discomfort is probably the most

common symptom; however, pathogens that may cause

only minor sickness in some people may cause serious

conditions or death in others, especially in the very

young, old, or immuno-compromised.

References

American Public Health Association, American

Water Works Association, and Water Pollution

Control Federation, 1985, Standard methods

for the examination of water and wastewater

(16th ed.): Washington, D.C., American Public

Health Association, 1,268 p.

American Society for Microbiology, 1999,

Microbial pollutants in our Nation’s water—

Environmental and public health issues:

Washington, D.C., 16 p. (Available online at

http://www.asmusa. org/pasrc/pdfs/

waterreport.pdf).

Armitage, T.M., Dufour, A.P., Hoffmann, W.F.,

Klieforth, B.I., Schaub, S.A., and Zarba, C.S.,

1999, Action plan for beaches and recreational

waters: Washington, D.C., U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, EPA/600/R-98/079, 19 p.

(Available online at http://www.epa.gov/ORD/

WebPubs/beaches).

Burke, Patrick, 1993, Preventing Waterborne

Disease—A focus on EPA’s research, Office

of Research and Development, National Risk

Management Research Laboratory, Cincinnati,

Ohio: Washington, D.C., U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, EPA/640/K-93/001, 20 p.

Center for Watershed Protection, 1999, Watershed

protection techniques: Microbes and Urban

Watersheds, v. 3, no. 1, p. 551–596.

Frick, E.A., Hippe, D.J., Buell, G.R., Couch, C.A.,

Hopkins, E.H., Wangsness, D.J. and Garrett,

J.W., 1998, Water Quality in the Apalachicola–

Chattahoochee–Flint River basin, Georgia,

Alabama, and Florida, 1992-1995: U.S.

Geological Survey Circular 1164, 38 p.

(Available online at http://water.usgs.gov/

pubs/circ1164).

For additional information contact:

Online at:

http://wwwga.usgs.gov/projects/chatm

Science and Resource Management

 Division

Chattahoochee River NRA

National Park Service

1978 Island Ford Parkway

Atlanta, GA 30350

(770) 399-8074

Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 1994a,

Chattahoochee River Modeling Project:

Atlanta, Ga., Environmental Protection

Division, 55 p.

___1994b, Rules and regulations for water quality

control: Atlanta, Ga., Environmental Protection

Division, Water Quality Control, chap. 391-3-

6.03. (Available online at http://www.dnr.state.

ga.us/dnr/environ/pdfdoc/wqrules.pdf).

___1997, Water quality in Georgia, 1994–95:

Atlanta, Ga., Environmental Protection Division,

97 p.

Kunkle, Sam, and Vana-Miller, David, 2000, Water

resources management plan—Chattahoochee

River National Recreation Area, Georgia:

National Park Service, NPS D-48, 244 p.

Lynch, J.M., and Hobbie, J.E., 1988, Microorganisms in action—Concepts and Applications

in Microbial Ecology: Blackwell Scientific

Publications, Pala Alto, Calif., 363 p.

U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991, Census of population and housing, 1990—Public Law 94-171

(Alabama, Florida, and Georgia): Washington,

D.C., U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of

the Census, digital data series, CD-ROM.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1997, EPA

guidelines for preparation of the comprehensive

state water-quality assessments (305b reports

and electronic updates): Washington, D.C., U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of

Water, EPA-841-B-97-002a, variously paginated.

U.S. Geological Survey, 1977–80, Land use and

land cover digital data, 1972–78, Apalachicola,

Atlanta, Athens, Dothan, Greenville, Macon,

Phenix City, Rome, Tallahassee, and Waycross

quadrangles: U.S. Geological Survey, scale

1:250,000.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Charles G. Groat, Director

U.S. Geological Survey

Branch of Information Services

Box 25286

Denver Federal Center

Denver, CO 80225-0286

Copies of this report can be

purchased from:

For information on all USGS products, call:

1-888-ASK-USGS

Design and layout by Caryl J. Wipperfurth