Issue link: https://newsleader.uberflip.com/i/136775
Sarasota News Leader June 14, 2013 "We pulled samples at different locations along the ditch and at the point of the road ... the numbers were higher than they should have been for discharge," says MacFarlane. But the ditch offers "a treatment process" of sorts. The water may be polluted right near U.S. 41, but by the time it is flushed out, it's been cleaned up significantly. Achim and Erika counter that dredging the canal will only allow pollutants to flow more easily into the bay. In a recommended order filed with the court by Achim and Erika, they argued that the county still lacks concrete information about exactly how polluted the water is: "Without characterization of this ma- The canal has limited water flow. Page 18 jor outfall's discharge ... it would appear to be a hit-and-miss task to design a reliable treatment facility. Without compliant water quality monitoring of the design, the effectiveness of this sediment sump in waters of the State and US will never be authenticated." But Administrative Law Judge D.R. Alexander found that the county had no responsibility to monitor the water quality in the canal because "it can be reasonably presumed, without compliance monitoring or sampling, that the water flowing from the 46-acre urbanized watershed served by the ditch contains sediments and other pollutants typically associated with urban runoff."