Browsing by Author "Bourne, Amanda C."

Now showing 1 - 16 of 16
  • Thumbnail Image
    Assessing the Contamination Risk of Private Well Water Supplies in Virginia
    Bourne, Amanda C. (Virginia Tech, 2001-07-18)
    When well water becomes contaminated to the extent that is does not meet EPA drinking water quality standards, it is considered unsafe for consumption. Nitrate and total coliform bacteria are both health contaminants and are both regulated in public water systems. A nitrate concentration of 10 mg/L or higher is considered unsafe, as is the presence of total coliform bacteria. Well degradation, inadequate well construction, and aquifer contamination can all result in contamination of well water. Factors such as well type, well age, well depth, treatment devices, population density, household plumbing pipe materials, and nearby pollution sources may affect household water quality. The specific objective of this study was to determine which factors influence nitrate levels and total coliform presence/absence of household well water. If possible, these influencing factors would be used to develop a relationship that would allow household residents to predict the nitrate level and total coliform presence/absence of their well water. As a result, a means of predicting the contamination risk to a specific well water supply under a given set of conditions, in addition to increasing awareness, could provide the homeowner with a rationale for further investigating the possibility of contamination. Existing data from the Virginia Cooperative Extension Household Water Quality Testing and Information Program were assembled for analyses in this project. The data consisted of 9,697 private household water supplies sampled from 1989-1999 in 65 Virginia counties. Initially, the entire state of Virginia was analyzed, followed by the five physiographic provinces of Virginia: the Blue Ridge, Coastal Plain, Cumberland Plateau, Ridge & Valley, and Piedmont. Ultimately, Louisa County was investigated to evaluate the possibility that better models could be developed using smaller land areas and, consequently, less geological variation. Least squares regression, both parametrically and non-parametrically, was used to determine the influence of various factors on nitrate levels. Similarly, logistic regression was used to determine the influence of the same parameters on nitrate categories, presence/absence of total coliform, and risk categories. Using stepwise model-building techniques, based primarily on statistical significance (p-values) and partial coefficient of determination (partial-R2), first and second-order linear models were evaluated. The best-fitting model only explained 58.5% of the variation in nitrate and none of the models fit well enough to be used for prediction purposes. However, the models did identify which factors were, in a statistical sense, significantly related to nitrate levels and total coliform presence/absence and quantified the strength of these relationships in terms of the percent of variation explained.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Evaluation of household water quality in Accomack and Northampton Counties, Virginia
    Ross, Burton Blake; Allison, L. S.; Belote, J. N.; Diem, J. F.; Holden, B. E.; Kellam, P. M.; Parrott, Kathleen R.; Bourne, Amanda C. (Virginia Cooperative Extension, 2000-11)
    During Fall1999 in Accomack and Northampton Counties, Virginia, programs of household water quality education, which included water sampling, testing, and diagnosis, were conducted. Participation in the water quality programs was made available to any resident of these two counties who utilized a private, individual water supply. During the course of the projects, 353 households submitted water samples which were analyzed for iron, manganese, hardness, sulfate, chloride, fluoride, total dissolved solids, pH, saturation index, copper, sodium, nitrate, and total coliform and E. coli bacteria. These analyses identified the major household water quality problems in these two counties as iron/manganese, total dissolved solids, and bacteria. Additionally, a number of samples were determined to have concentrations of sodium high enough to possibly lead to health complications for at-risk segments of the population. Following completion of the program, a survey was mailed to the 353 participants. One hundred and ninety-seven participants returned survey forms on which they identified their reason(s) for participating in such a program; the primary reason was concern about safety of their water supply. Returned survey forms also provided insight into measures participants had already taken, or planned to take, to improve the quality of their water supply. Nearly two-thirds of the households who reported having at least one water quality problem had taken, or planned to take, at least one measure to improve the quality of their water supply. Ten percent or more of all participants had taken, or planned to take, one or more of the following actions: purchase or rent water treatment equipment, use bottled water drinking/cooking, and contact a state agency for further assistance.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Evaluation of household water quality in Amelia and Powhatan Counties, Virginia
    Ross, Burton Blake; Burke, K. W.; Henry, M. L.; Hobbs, F. C.; Pessner, E. D.; Parrott, Kathleen R.; Bourne, Amanda C. (Virginia Cooperative Extension, 1999-09)
    During Summer/Fall 1998 in Amelia and Powhatan Counties, Virginia, programs of household water quality education, which included water sampling, testing, and diagnosis, were conducted. Participation in the water quality programs was made available to any resident of these two counties who utilized a private, individual water supply. During the course of the projects, 309 households submitted water samples which were analyzed for iron, manganese, hardness, sulfate, chloride, fluoride, total dissolved solids, pH, saturation index, copper, sodium, nitrate, and total coliform and E. coli bacteria. These analyses identified the major household water quality problems in these two counties as iron/manganese, corrosivity, and bacteria. Additionally, a number of samples were determined to have concentrations of nitrate high enough to possibly lead to health complications for at-risk segments of the population. Following completion of the programs, a survey was mailed to the 309 participants. Ninety-five participants returned survey forms on which they identified their reason(s) for participating in such a program; the primary reason was concern about safety of their water supply. Returned survey forms also provided insight into measures participants had already taken, or planned to take, to improve the quality of their water supply. Nearly two-thirds of the households who reported having at least one water quality problem had taken, or planned to take, at least one measure to improve the quality of their water supply. Thirty percent of all participants had, or planned to, shock chlorinate the water system.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Evaluation of household water quality in Amherst, Appomattox, Bedford and Campbell Counties, Virginia
    Ross, Burton Blake; Smith, Helen W.; Seay, William W.; Thaxton, J. P.; Irvin, K. C.; McClenny, L. C.; Eberly, Eric; Lee, A. O.; Baker, Scott M.; White, R. C.; Sanderson, R. L.; Parrott, Kathleen R.; Bourne, Amanda C. (Virginia Cooperative Extension, 1999-05)
    During Spring/Summer 1998 in Amherst, Appomattox, Bedford, and Campbell Counties, Virginia, programs of household water quality education, which included water sampling, testing, and diagnosis, were conducted. Participation in the water quality programs was made available to any resident of these four counties who utilized a private, individual water supply. During the course of the project, 490 households submitted water samples which were analyzed for iron, manganese, hardness, sulfate, chloride, fluoride, total dissolved solids, pH, saturation index, copper, sodium, nitrate, and total coliform and E. coli bacteria. These analyses identified the major household water quality problems in these four counties as iron/manganese, corrosivity, and bacteria. After the completion of the general water testing program, water supplies from 12 households were resampled for the testing of 16 pesticides and other chemical compounds. None of the samples had a concentration of any of these contaminants exceeding EPA Health Advisory of Maximum Contaminant Levels. Furthermore, there were no detections of any compound observed. Following completion of the programs, a survey was mailed to the 490 participants. Two hundred and fifty-six participants returned survey forms on which they identified their reason(s) for participating in such a program; the primary reason was concern about safety of their water supply. Returned survey forms also provided insight into measures participants had already taken, or planned to take, to improve the quality of their water supply. More than two-thirds of the households who reported having at least one water quality problem had taken, or planned to take, at least one measure to improve the quality of their water supply. Fifteen percent or more of all participants had taken, or planned to take, one or both of the following actions: shock chlorinate the water system and purchase or rent water treatment equipment.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Evaluation of household water quality in Augusta County, Virginia
    Ross, Burton Blake; Campbell, C. L.; Swisher, Jerry M.; Parrott, Kathleen R.; Bourne, Amanda C. (Virginia Cooperative Extension, 2000-07)
    During Summer 1999, a program of household water quality education, which included water sampling, testing, and diagnosis, was conducted in Augusta County, Virginia. Participation in the water quality program was made available to any Augusta County resident who utilized a private, individual water supply. During the course of the project, 153 households submitted water samples which were analyzed for iron, manganese, hardness, sulfate, chlorid fluoride, total dissolved solids, pH, saturation index, copper, sodium, nitrate, and total colifor and E. coli bacteria. These analyses identified the major household water quality problems in Augusta County as iron/manganese, hardness, total dissolved solids, and bacteria. Additionally, a number of samples were determined to have concentrations of sodium high enough to possibly lead to health complications for at-risk segments of the population. After the completion of the general water testing program, water supplies from 5 households were resampled for the testing of 23 pesticides and other chemical compounds. None of the samples had a concentration of any of these contaminants exceeding EPA Health Advisor or Maximum Contaminant Levels. A total of five detections were observed in three separate samples. Following completion of the program, a survey was mailed to the 153 participants. Ninety-four participants returned survey forms on which they identified their reason(s) for participating in such a program; the primary reason being concern about safety of their water supply. Returned survey forms also provided insight into measures participants had already taken, or planned to take, to improve the quality of their water supply. More than one-half of the households who reported having at least one water quality problem had taken, or planned to take, at least one measure to improve the quality of their water supply. Ten percent or more of all participants had taken, or planned to take, one or all of the following actions: purchase 1 rent water treatment equipment, improve existing water treatment, and shock chlorinate the water system.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Evaluation of household water quality in Bath and Highland Counties, Virginia
    Ross, Burton Blake; Leech, Rodney; Campbell, C. L.; Whitmore, S. A.; Parrott, Kathleen R.; Bourne, Amanda C. (Virginia Cooperative Extension, 2001-04)
    During Fall 2000 in Bath and Highland Counties, Virginia, programs of household water quality education, which included water sampling, testing, and diagnosis, were conducted. Participation in the water quality programs was made available to any resident of these two counties who utilized a private, individual water supply. During the course of the projects, 60 households submitted water samples which were analyzed for iron, manganese, hardness, sulfate, chloride, fluoride, total dissolved solids, pH, saturation index, copper, sodium, nitrate, and total coliform and E.coli bacteria. These analyses identified the major household water quality problems in these two counties as iron/manganese, hardness, and bacteria. Following completion of the programs, a survey was mailed to the 60 participants. Thirty-one participants returned survey forms on which they identified their reason(s) for participating in such a program; the primary reason was concern about safety of their water supply. Returned survey forms also provided insight into measures participants had already taken, or planned to take, to improve the quality of their water supply. Nearly three-fourths of the households who reported having at least one water quality of their water supply. Twenty percent or more of all participants had taken, or planned to take, one or more of the following actions: shock chlorinate the water system, improve the physical condition of the water source, and contact a state agency for further assistance.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Evaluation of household water quality in Bland and Giles Counties, Virginia
    Ross, Burton Blake; Danner, D. R.; Scott, J. A.; Barnes, L. Dawn; Childers, L. A.; Parrott, Kathleen R.; Bourne, Amanda C. (Virginia Cooperative Extension, 2000-01)
    During Spring 1999 in Bland and Giles Counties, Virginia, programs of household water quality education, which included water sampling, testing, and diagnosis, were conducted. Participation in the water quality programs was made available to any resident of these two counties who utilized a private, individual water supply. During the course of the projects, 153 households submitted water samples which were analyzed for iron, manganese, hardness, sulfate, chloride, fluoride, total dissolved solids, pH, saturation index, copper, sodium, nitrate, and total coliform and E. coli bacteria.These analyses identified the major household water quality problems in these two counties as iron/manganese, hardness, and bacteria. Additionally, a number of samples were determined to have concentrations of sodium and nitrate high enough to possibly lead to health complications for at-risk segments of the population. Following completion of the programs, a survey was mailed to the 153 participants. Seventy-two participants returned survey forms on which they identified their reason( s) for participating in such a program; the primary reason was concern about safety of their water supply. Returned survey forms also provided insight into measures participants had already taken, or planned to take, to improve the quality of their water supply. Nearly three-fifths of the households who reported having at least one water quality problem had taken, or planned to take, at least one measure to improve the quality of their water supply. Ten percent or more of all participants had, or planned to, take one or more of the following actions: shock chlorinate the water system, purchase or rent water treatment equipment, and contact a state agency for further assistance.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Evaluation of household water quality in Brunswick and Nottoway Counties, Virginia
    Ross, Burton Blake; Gregg, Cynthia L.; Morris, J. L.; Brydie, R. S.; Parrott, Kathleen R.; Bourne, Amanda C. (Virginia Cooperative Extension, 2000-12)
    During Spring 2000 in Brunswick and Nottoway Counties, Virginia, programs of household water quality education, which included water sampling, testing, and diagnosis, were conducted. Participation in the water quality programs was made available to any resident of these two counties who utilized a private, individual water supply. During the course of the projects, 115 households submitted water samples which were analyzed for iron, manganese, hardness, sulfate, chloride, fluoride, total dissolved solids, pH, saturation index, copper, sodium, nitrate, and total coliform and E. coli bacteria. These analyses identified the major household water quality problems in these two counties as iron/manganese, corrosivity, and bacteria. Following completion of the programs, a survey was mailed to the 115 participants. Fifty-seven participants returned survey forms on which they identified their reason(s) for participating in such a program; the primary reason was concern about safety of their water supply. Returned survey forms also provided insight into measures participants had already taken, or planned to take, to improve the quality of their water supply. Two-thirds of the households who reported having at least one water quality problem had taken, or planned to take, at least one measure to improve the quality of their water supply. Fourteen percent or more of all participants had taken, or planned to take, one or more of the following actions: shock chlorinate the water system, use bottled water drinking/cooking, and temporary disinfection, such as boiling water.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Evaluation of household water quality in Buckingham, Cumberland and Nelson counties
    Ross, Burton Blake; Austin, Edith A.; Hanes, E. A.; Lachance, Michael W.; Parrott, Kathleen R.; Bourne, Amanda C. (Virginia Cooperative Extension, 1999-10)
    During Fall 1998 in Buckingham, Cumberland, and Nelson Counties, Virginia, programs of household water quality education, which included water sampling, testing, and diagnosis, were conducted. Participation in the water quality programs was made available to any resident of these three counties who utilized a private, individual water supply. During the course of the projects, 238 households submitted water samples which were analyzed for iron, manganese, hardness, sulfate, chloride, fluoride, total dissolved solids, pH, saturation index, copper, sodium, nitrate, and total coliform and E. coli bacteria. These analyses identified the major household water quality problems in these three counties as iron/manganese, corrosivity, and bacteria. Additionally, a number of samples were determined to have concentrations of nitrate high enough to possibly lead to health complications for at-risk segments of the population. Following completion of the programs, a survey was mailed to the 238 participants. Ninety-one participants returned survey forms on which they identified their reason(s) for participating in such a program; the primary reason was concern about safety of their water supply. Returned survey forms also provided insight into measures participants had already taken, or planned to take, to improve the quality of their water supply. More than four-fifths of the households who reported having at least one water quality problem had taken, or planned to take, at least one measure to improve the quality of their water supply. Ten percent or more of all participants had taken, or planned to take, one or more of the following actions: purchase or rent water treatment equipment, contact a state agency for assistance or additional information, and shock chlorinate the water system.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Evaluation of household water quality in Dinwiddie and Prince George Counties, Virginia
    Ross, Burton Blake; Parrish, Michael J.; Schmidt, W. W.; Parrott, Kathleen R.; Bourne, Amanda C. (Virginia Cooperative Extension, 1999-12)
    During Fall 1998 in Dinwiddie and Prince George Counties, Virginia, programs of household water quality education, which included water sampling, testing, and diagnosis, were conducted. Participation in the water quality programs was made available to any resident of these two counties who utilized a private, individual water supply. During the course of the projects, 520 households submitted water samples which were analyzed for iron, manganese, hardness, sulfate, chloride, fluoride, total dissolved solids, pH, saturation index, copper, sodium, nitrate, and total coliform and E. coli bacteria. These analyses identified the major household water quality problems in these two counties as iron/manganese, corrosivity, and bacteria. Additionally, a number of samples were determined to have concentrations of nitrate high enough to possibly lead to health complications for at-risk segments of the population. After the completion of the general water testing program, water supplies from 27 households were resampled for the testing of 25 pesticides and other chemical compounds. Only one of the samples had a concentration of any of these contaminants exceeding EPA Health Advisory of Maximum Contaminant Levels. Furthermore, a total of only seven detections were observed in four separate samples. Following completion of the programs, a survey was mailed to the 520 participants. One hundred and eighty-four participants returned survey forms on which they identified their reason(s) for participating in such a program; the primary reason was concern about safety of their water supply. Returned survey forms also provided insight into measures participants had already taken, or planned to take, to improve the quality of their water supply. Four-fifths of the households who reported having at least one water quality problem had taken, or planned to take, at least one measure to improve the quality of their water supply. Ten percent or more of all participants had taken, or planned to take, one or more of the following actions: shock chlorinate the water system, purchase or rent water treatment equipment, and use bottled water for drinking/cooking.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Evaluation of household water quality in Essex, King and Queen, King William, and Middlesex Counties, Virginia
    Ross, Burton Blake; Balderson, T. Keith; Lawrence, C. L.; Moore, David M.; Parrott, Kathleen R.; Bourne, Amanda C. (Virginia Cooperative Extension, 2000-03)
    During Spring 1999 in Essex, King and Queen, King William, and Middlesex Counties, Virginia, programs of household water quality education, which included water sampling, testing, and diagnosis, were conducted. Participation in the water quality programs was made available to any resident of these four counties who utilized a private, individual water supply. During the course of the projects, 342 households submitted water samples which were analyzed for iron, manganese, hardness, sulfate, chloride, fluoride, total dissolved solids, pH, saturation index, copper, sodium, nitrate, and total coliform and E. coli bacteria. These analyses identified the major household water quality problems in these four counties as iron/manganese, corrosivity, and bacteria, although the occurrence and extent of these problems varied across the four counties. Chloride and total dissolved solids were particular problems only in Middlesex County. Additionally, a number of samples in all four counties were determined to have concentrations of sodium and nitrate high enough to possibly lead to health complications for at-risk segments of the population. After the completion of the general water testing program, water supplies from 15 households were resampled for the testing of 29 pesticides and other chemical compounds. None of the samples had a concentration of any of these contaminants exceeding EPA Health Advisory or Maximum Contaminant Levels. Furthermore, a total of only five detections were observed in five separate samples. Following completion of the programs, a survey was mailed to the 342 participants. One hundred and seven participants returned survey forms on which they identified their reason(s) for participating in such a program; the primary reason was concern about safety of their water supply. Returned survey forms also provided insight into measures participants had already taken, or planned to take, to improve the quality of their water supply. Nearly three-fourths of the households who reported having at least one water quality problem had taken, or planned to take, at least one measure to improve the quality of their water supply. Thirteen percent or more of all participants had taken, or planned to take, one or both of the following actions: shock chlorinate the water system and use bottled water for drinking/cooking.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Evaluation of household water quality in Floyd County, Virginia
    Ross, Burton Blake; Barnes, L. Dawn; Gardner, D. L.; Parrott, Kathleen R.; Bourne, Amanda C. (Virginia Cooperative Extension, 1999-02)
    During Spring 1998, a program of household water quality education, which included water sampling, testing, and diagnosis, was conducted in Floyd County, Virginia. Participation in the water quality program was made available to any Floyd County resident who utilized a private, individual water supply. During the course of the project, 101 households submitted water samples which were analyzed for iron, manganese, hardness, sulfate, chloride, fluoride, total dissolved solids, pH, saturation index, copper, sodium, nitrate, and total coliform and E. coli bacteria. These analyses identified the major household water quality problems in Floyd County as iron/manganese, corrosivity, and bacteria. Following completion of the program, a survey was mailed to the 101 participants. Forty-nine participants returned survey forms on which they identified their reason(s) for participating in such a program; the primary reason being concern about safety of their water supply. Returned survey forms also provided insight into measures participants had already taken, or planned to take, to improve the quality of their water supply. Nearly two-thirds of the households who reported having at least one water quality problem had taken, or planned to take, at least one measure to improve the quality of their water supply. Fourteen percent or more of all participants had taken, or planned to take, one or more of the following actions: improve existing water treatment equipment, shock chlorinate the water system, and purchase or rent water treatment equipment.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Evaluation of household water quality in Louisa County, Virginia
    Ross, Burton Blake; Riddell, J. E.; Robinson, P. H.; Parrott, Kathleen R.; Bourne, Amanda C. (Virginia Cooperative Extension, 2000-07)
    During Summer and Fall 1999, a program of household water quality education, which included water sampling, testing, and diagnosis, was conducted in Louisa County, Virginia. Participation in the water quality program was made available to any Louisa County resident who utilized a private, individual water supply. During the course of the project, 383 households submitted water samples which were analyzed for iron, manganese, hardness, sulfate, chloride, fluoride, total dissolved solids, pH, saturation index, copper, sodium, nitrate, and total coliform and E. coli bacteria. These analyses identified the major household water quality problems in Louisa County as iron/manganese, corrosivity, and bacteria. Following completion of the program, a survey was mailed to the 383 participants. One hundred and sixty-three participants returned survey forms on which they identified their reason( s) for participating in such a program; the primary reason being concern about safety of their water supply. Returned survey forms also provided insight into measures participants had already taken, or planned to take, to improve the quality of their water supply. More than three-fourths of the households who reported having at least one water quality problem had taken, or planned to take, at least one measure to improve the quality of their water supply. Eleven percent or more of all participants had taken, or planned to take, one or more of the following actions: shock chlorinate the water system, pump out septic tank, contact a state ageny for additional assistance, and purchase or rent water treatment equipment.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Evaluation of household water quality in Richmond and Westmoreland Counties, Virginia
    Ross, Burton Blake; Tabulenas, T.; Johnson, Sam; Liddington, Kelly J.; Parrott, Kathleen R.; Bourne, Amanda C. (Virginia Cooperative Extension, 1999-04)
    During Spring 1998 in Richmond and Westmoreland Counties, Virginia, programs of household water quality education, which included water sampling, testing, and diagnosis, were conducted. Participation in the water quality programs was made available to any resident of these two counties who utilized a private, individual water supply. During the course of the projects, 135 households submitted water samples which were analyzed for iron, manganese, hardness, sulfate, chloride, fluoride, total dissolved solids, pH, saturation index, copper, sodium, nitrate, and total coliform and E. coli bacteria. These analyses identified the major household water quality problems in these two counties as iron/manganese, corrosivity, and bacteria. Additionally, a number of samples were determined to have concentrations of sodium and nitrate high enough to possibly lead to health complications for at-risk segments of the population. After the completion of the general water testing program, water supplies from 7 households were resampled for the testing of 23 pesticides and other chemical compounds. None of the samples had a concentration of any of these contaminants exceeding EPA Health Advisory of Maximum Contaminant Levels. Furthermore, a total of only four detections were observed, all of which were trifluralin. Following completion of the programs, a survey was mailed to the 135 participants. Forty participants returned survey forms on which they identified their reason( s) for participating in such a program; the primary reason was concern about safety of their water supply. Returned survey forms also provided insight into measures participants had already taken, or planned to take, to improve the quality of their water supply. More than one-half of the households who reported having at least one water quality problem had taken, or planned to take, at least one measure to improve the quality of their water supply. Ten percent or more of all participants had taken, or planned to take, one or more of the following actions: use bottled water for drinking/cooking and shock chlorinate the water system.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Evaluation of household water quality in Rockingham County, Virginia
    Ross, Burton Blake; Bendfeldt, Eric S.; Dransfield, M. G.; Whitmore, S. A.; Parrott, Kathleen R.; Bourne, Amanda C. (Virginia Cooperative Extension, 2000-08)
    During Summer 1999, a program of household water quality education, which included water sampling, testing, and diagnosis, was conducted in Rockingham County, Virginia. Participation in the water quality program was made available to any Rockingham County resident who utilized a private, individual water supply. During the course of the project, 300 households submitted water samples which were analyzed for iron, manganese, hardness, sulfate, chloride, fluoride, total dissolved solids, pH, saturation index, copper, sodium, nitrate, and total coliform and E. coli bacteria. These analyses identified the major household water quality problems in Rockingham County as iron/manganese, hardness, total disolved solids, and bacteria. Additionally, a number of samples were determined to have concentrations of sodium and nitrate high enough to possibly lead to health complications for at-risk segments of the population. After the completion of the general water testing program, water supplies from 16 households were resampled for the testing of 23 pesticides and other chemical compounds. None of the samples had a concentration of any of these contaminants exceeding EPA Health Advisory or Maximum Contaminant Levels. A total of eleven detections were observed in seven separate samples. Following completion of the program, a survey was mailed to the 300 participants. One hundred and thirty-eight participants returned survey forms on which they identified their reason(s) for participating in such a program; the primary reason being concern about safety of their water supply. Returned survey forms also provided insight into measures participants had already taken, or planned to take, to improve the quality of their water supply. More than one-half of the households who reported having at least one water quality problem had taken, or planned to take, at least one measure to improve the quality of their water supply. Fifteen percent or more of all participants had taken, or planned to take, one or both of the following actions: purchase or rent water treatment equipment and shock chlorinate the water system.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Evaluation of household water quality in Smyth and Washington Counties, Virginia
    Ross, Burton Blake; Childers, L. A.; Parrott, Kathleen R.; Bourne, Amanda C. (Virginia Cooperative Extension, 2001-06)
    During Spring and Fall 2000 in Smyth and Washington Counties, Virginia, programs of household water quality education, which included water sampling, testing, and diagnosis, were conducted. Participation in the water quality programs was made available to any resident of these two counties who utilized a private, individual water supply. During the course of the projects, 109 households submitted water samples which were analyzed for iron, manganese, hardness, sulfate, chloride, fluoride, total dissolved solids, pH, saturation index, copper, sodium, nitrate, and total coliform and E. coli bacteria. These analyses identified the major household water quality problems in these two counties as iron/manganese, hardness, and bacteria. Following completion of the programs, a survey was mailed to the 109 participants. Fifty-two participants returned survey forms on which they identified their reason(s) for participating in such a program; the primary reason was concern about safety of their water supply. Returned survey forms also provided insight into measures participants had already taken, or planned to take, to improve the quality of their water supply. Nearly three-fourths of the households who reported having at least one water quality problem had taken, or planned to take, at least one measure to improve the quality of their water supply. Fifteen percent or more of all participants had taken, or planned to take, one or more of the following actions: use bottled water for drinking/cooking, shock chlorinate the water system, and purchase or rent water treatment equipment.