.
Feedback

Advisory Against Bathing at Town Beaches Due to Rainfall

The Suffolk County Department of Health Services issued an advisory against bathing at local beaches due to today's heavy rains.

The Suffolk County Department of Health Services has issued an advisory against bathing at all  Town beaches following the  caused by heavy rainfall on Tuesday, September 4th and forecasted heavy rain for tomorrow.

The SCDHS issued the advisory, which totalled 67 beaches across Suffolk County, for Amityville Village Beach in Amityville, Copiague Harbor in Copiague, Tanner Park Beach in Copiague and  in Lindenhurst due to the possibility of elevated bacterial levels from stormwater run-off.

The SCDHS said it recommends bathing and other water activity be suspended in these areas until the waters have been flushed by two successive tidal cycles (at least a 24-hour period) after the cessation of rainfall.

The town beaches technically on September 3rd, but remain open to the public with no lifeguards on duty.

Unless sampling done by the Department finds elevated bacterial numbers following the two tidal periodsthis advisory will be lifted on Thursday, September 6th at 10:00 p.m.

"The advisory is based on the potential that bacterial numbers in excess of New York State standards resulting from the heavy rain that occurred today will impact these areas," the SCDHS said in a release.

The beaches covered by this advisory are located in areas that were heavily influenced by stormwater runoff from the surrounding watersheds and adjacent tributaries, and because of their location in an enclosed embayment, they experience limited tidal flushing.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Babylon Village Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Adam Crowley May 15, 2013 at 06:53 pm
As I explained, my post was made on behalf of another village resident. However, I did take theRead More time to read the statute and do have an independent viewpoint on this subject. While I do not feel that all dogs require a muzzle at all times, if you have a dog that you know to be a threat to other dogs or humans, you would have a duty to take measures to eliminate that threat before bring that dog into public. If that measure is a muzzle, then that's what must be done. As my post indicated, I believe strict enforcement would be exceedingly difficult and, perhaps, unnecessary (at least with respect to the muzzle requirement). However, a total lack of enforcement is dangerous and unacceptable. I think a little common sense goes a long way and I have confidence that those charged with enforcing the Village code could do so selectively. I understand that selective enforcement may be a concept that many feel uncomfortable with. However, just because the law requires a muzzle, that is hardly a reason to disregard it in its entirety and allow dogs with vicious propensities to roam around unleashed. I will leave it up to Village lawmakers to remove the muzzle requirement (and suggest that they do so) if that is what it would take to make people comfortable with the leash requirement.
Concerned Citizen May 15, 2013 at 05:37 pm
Did you read the law? unless it be properly muzzled and effectively restrained by a chain or leashRead More I'll bet neither dog was muzzled Do you really want them to enforce this law