Already too far from Lake Itasca?
June 11, 2009 3:34 PM
Subscribe
There are a couple of gorgeous beaches on the west side of the Mississippi river near Lake Street in south Minneapolis. Is it safe to swim or wade at them?
Maybe I'm crazy for considering this, or maybe worrying is silly. Swimming in nonchlorinated water has always squicked me out a bit, so the mental alarms yelling "don't swim there!" are often just crying wolf. I need your more rational judgment to prevail.
Now, I don't want to swim across the river or anything, and I know the current out in the middle is swift. I certainly wouldn't go out far enough to get myself hit by a barge. I just want to cool off. If I stayed near the shoreline, would the water currents/pollutants/pathogens/man-eating-fish be too dangerous? What about wading, is that out of the question?
I know there are lots of other (lake) beaches around the city, but this one is close and relatively deserted at most times. I'd love to be able to bask with a book and then take a dip when the heat overwhelms me, as long as I wasn't risking illness or injury. What say you, twin-citians?
posted by vytae to sports, hobbies, & recreation (7 comments total)
On the one hand, Minneapolis is no longer routinely dumping raw sewage in the river. On the other hand, it still receives all the surface runoff, including stuff like gas/oil drips and leaks from streets, yard fertilizers and pesticides, dog crap, etc. etc.
Plus, there's whatever sewage gets dumped in upstream. (And the nuclear power plant at Monticello, and so on.)
I'd just stick to the lakes.
posted by Kat Allison at 4:02 PM on June 11