Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 02-22-2013, 12:30 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Chuck Gould's Avatar
 
City: Seattle
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Dear Prudence
Vessel Model: Eagle 40
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 131
Coming to Puget Sound? Illegal to dump waste cleaner than shoreside teated?

It's already illegal to dump untreated waste in Puget Sound, and absolutely should be. The latest brainstorm from Washington State environmentalists is to make it illegal to dump waste that not only meets USCG standards, but has actually been (according to test results published by the EPA) sanitized well beyond the standards met by most shore side treatment plants! This lunacy will make the sound *dirtier*, not cleaner!

Email received from the State of Washington follows:

The Washington State Department of Ecology is dedicated to improving water quality in Puget Sound. Ecology is working on multiple fronts to address a wide variety of pollutant sources. As one part of this effort, the Department of Ecology is evaluating a “No Discharge Zone” for all (or portions) of the Sound. You are receiving this e-mail because we believe that you are likely to be interested in this effort and can provide us with important input.

A “No Discharge Zone” (NDZ) is a designated body of water where the discharge of sewage from boats is prohibited. This prohibition would apply to all boat sewage discharges, even those from vessels that provide treatment. Current regulations and commonly used vessel treatment technologies are not accomplishing enough to protect sensitive Puget Sound marine and aquatic resources. Elevated nutrient and algae concentrations and areas of low dissolved oxygen in many parts of Puget Sound have resulted in water quality standard violations. Unsafe fecal bacteria concentrations have been detected at many Puget Sound beaches and recreational shellfish harvesting areas, posing a risk to public health.

No decisions have been made to proceed with a petition for NDZ.However, Ecology has begun gathering information to evaluate whether to proceed with developing a petition. The following information is being considered:
· Pumpout facilities and capabilities currently available
· Data on boat usage patterns and user demographics
· Environmental conditions
· Costs and benefits of establishing a NDZ
· Marine sanitation device technology
· Lessons learn from NDZ processes in other states.

We are currently working with various stakeholders to better evaluate needs and concerns. We have a website that provides reports and information about this evaluation: Clean Green Boating | No Discharge Zone | Washington State Department of Ecology.
We are particularly interested in your concerns, ideas and suggestions. We would appreciate hearing any feedback by March 22, 2013 to:

Amy Jankowiak
WA State Dept of Ecology
3190 - 160th Ave. SE
Bellevue, WA 98008-5452
amy.jankowiak@ecy.wa.gov

Please forward this on to any others that might be interested. If you do not wish to receive further e-mails regarding the NDZ evaluation, please let me know.

Sincerely,
Amy Jankowiak

Amy Jankowiak
Department of Ecology, Northwest Regional Office
Water Quality Program
3190 160th Avenue SE, Bellevue WA 98008
(425) 649-7195 ajan461@ecy.wa.gov
__________________
Advertisement

Chuck Gould is offline  
Old 02-22-2013, 12:33 PM   #2
Guru
 
Alaskan Sea-Duction's Avatar
 
City: Inside Passage Summer/Columbia River Winter
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Alaskan Sea-Duction
Vessel Model: 1988 M/Y Camargue YachtFisher
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,147
Sounds like the Kookafornians that moved up to the Seattle area are trying to impose the same silly regulations they have down there.....
__________________

__________________
1988 M/Y Camargue Yacht Fisher
Alaskan Sea-Duction
MMSI: 338131469
Blog: http://alaskanseaduction.blogspot.com/
Alaskan Sea-Duction is offline  
Old 02-22-2013, 01:07 PM   #3
TF Site Team
 
Pineapple Girl's Avatar
 
City: San Mateo, CA
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Pineapple Girl II
Vessel Model: PT 35
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,165
wait a minute, I live in Kookafornia (LOL) and there aren't that many NDZs here! I can only think of one around me and it is a very small area in a large body of water. It is a bay that is full of liveaboards (who still dump overboard) so I can understand why they made that small area a NDZ. To make all of Puget Sound a NDZ is madness! I hope this does not go anywhere.

I took a look at NDZs in CA and see that a lot of the bays in So Cal are 100% NDZ. Very interesting as I have always thought No Cal (where I live) was the more tree hugger environmentalist part of the state yet we only have the one small NDZ (thankfully, as I plan to put in a treatment device so I can discharge treated waste). Thanks for prompting me to take a look Mr Sea Duction.
__________________
-Jennifer
Pineapple Girl II 1984 PT 35
San Francisco Bay Area
www.pineapple-girl.blogspot.com
Pineapple Girl is offline  
Old 02-22-2013, 01:12 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Chuck Gould's Avatar
 
City: Seattle
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Dear Prudence
Vessel Model: Eagle 40
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 131
To Jennifer: Under the EPA no-discharge regulations, you may *not* discharge treated waste. That's the problem. There is no distinction between adequately and properly treated waste and good old fashioned raw sewage.
Chuck Gould is offline  
Old 02-22-2013, 01:14 PM   #5
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,711
The solution to pollution is dilution.

As long as the amount of pollution is small or/and the medium the pollution is diluted in is huge the above applies.

But there's Huge numbers of people living and polluting in Puget Sound.

I think the stats indicate that whales and cruise ships pollute the waters of SE Alaska much more than people.

So everything is relative.

Some boaters would hang it over the side in NY harbor and I spoze a Sierra Club type wouldn't pee in the ocean out of sight of land but if the waters of Puget Sound are polluted we all need to share the responsibility.

Chuck have you considered that shore side discharges may be WAY too "dirty" and that that is being addressed as well so the end result is acceptable discharges from all sources? There may be or probably is a wide variety of discharges into the Sound and the environmental types and/or agencies are doing their best to have human activity not destroy the Sound as we know it.

I don't know enough to make calls on this Chuck but the actions by the State of Washington Dept of Ecology may be entirely responsible and reasonable.
__________________
Eric

North Western Washington State USA
Nomad Willy is offline  
Old 02-22-2013, 01:17 PM   #6
TF Site Team
 
Pineapple Girl's Avatar
 
City: San Mateo, CA
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Pineapple Girl II
Vessel Model: PT 35
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuck Gould View Post
To Jennifer: Under the EPA no-discharge regulations, you may *not* discharge treated waste. That's the problem. There is no distinction between adequately and properly treated waste and good old fashioned raw sewage.
YES! I understand, thanks Chuck. That is why I am glad that where I am there is only the one small NDZ (and not someplace I ever go). So I WILL be able to discharge. I complete agree with you that NDZs are NOT solving a problem as the discharge from the treatment devices meets OR EXCEEDS EPA standards. I don't understand what science NDZs are based on but glad I do NOT boat in a NDZ!!

I SURE hope this does not happen to you in Puget Sound!!! I take it you have a treatment device?
__________________
-Jennifer
Pineapple Girl II 1984 PT 35
San Francisco Bay Area
www.pineapple-girl.blogspot.com
Pineapple Girl is offline  
Old 02-22-2013, 01:24 PM   #7
Guru
 
Alaskan Sea-Duction's Avatar
 
City: Inside Passage Summer/Columbia River Winter
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Alaskan Sea-Duction
Vessel Model: 1988 M/Y Camargue YachtFisher
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pineapple Girl View Post
wait a minute, I live in Kookafornia (LOL) and there aren't that many NDZs here! I can only think of one around me and it is a very small area in a large body of water. It is a bay that is full of liveaboards (who still dump overboard) so I can understand why they made that small area a NDZ. To make all of Puget Sound a NDZ is madness! I hope this does not go anywhere.

I took a look at NDZs in CA and see that a lot of the bays in So Cal are 100% NDZ. Very interesting as I have always thought No Cal (where I live) was the more tree hugger environmentalist part of the state yet we only have the one small NDZ (thankfully, as I plan to put in a treatment device so I can discharge treated waste). Thanks for prompting me to take a look Mr Sea Duction.
I was born in souther Cal so I can say Kookafornia. It was my understanding that all boats in Kookafornia are required to have a grey tank (dish water). Nothing overboard. So this is only for Sothern Cal?

It will be interesting to see how this situation plays out. Pumping black tank waste (Poop) overboard within the 3nm is illegal with federal regulations anyway.......Hence the reason OR and WA have "free" pumpout stations everywhere up here in the PNW.
__________________
1988 M/Y Camargue Yacht Fisher
Alaskan Sea-Duction
MMSI: 338131469
Blog: http://alaskanseaduction.blogspot.com/
Alaskan Sea-Duction is offline  
Old 02-22-2013, 01:37 PM   #8
Guru
 
caltexflanc's Avatar
 
City: North Carolina for now
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Small Incentive
Vessel Model: Boston Whaler 130 Sport
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,792
"It was my understanding that all boats in Kookafornia are required to have a grey tank (dish water). Nothing overboard. So this is only for Sothern Cal?"

Not true anywhere on the coast north or south. Tahoe maybe.

NDZs are far more prevalent on the east coast, harbors on Long Island Sound and New England and the Keys for example, and they don't dump treated sewage from land in those zones either. I think most NDZs are silly given the quality of the treatment the better marine devices produce, but on the other hand, the overall end result in places like Boot Key Harbor are hard to argue with.
__________________
George

"There's the Right Way, the Wrong Way, and what some guy says he's gotten away with"
caltexflanc is offline  
Old 02-22-2013, 01:44 PM   #9
Guru
 
Codger2's Avatar
 
City: San Diego
Country: US
Vessel Name: "Sandpiper"
Vessel Model: 2006 42' Ocean Alexander Sedan
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alaskan Sea-Duction View Post
Sounds like the Kookafornians that moved up to the Seattle area are trying to impose the same silly regulations they have down there.....
First, let me assure you that I am not a tree hugger or a conservation radical. I believe we have lost a lot of our freedoms because of silly EPA regs.

Now, let me tell you what I've seen with my own eyes in the last 17 years that I've lived in San Diego.

My first boat in San Diego was purchased in 1995 and at that time the Bay was pretty damn dirty. Over the years, new regulations & laws crept in, people complained (lost freedoms, etc) but even the divers were concerned about having to work in the "dirty water." Now there's a big debate raging, relative to the copper content in the water at the Shelter Island marinas and of course they are blaming it on "bottom paint. Sounds like the Libs have made a lot of inroads into our once pristine environment and we have lost a lot of our freedoms on the water. Right?

Wrong! It's true that we have many more regulations than we had 20 years ago but I have seen more wild dolphins in the Bay than ever before and they are mammals that love clean water! Recent testing of the waters in San Diego Bay also show a markedly improved aquatic environment. The U.S Navy has jumped on board, supporting this new awakening and has cleaned up their act.

The city of San Diego and the folks that recreate in our waters are, indeed, better off because of these regulations and laws.
__________________
Codger2

My passion for improving my boat(s) exceeds my desire to constantly cruise them.
Codger2 is offline  
Old 02-22-2013, 02:01 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Chuck Gould's Avatar
 
City: Seattle
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Dear Prudence
Vessel Model: Eagle 40
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 131
Hello, Walt

I'm with you, somewhat. I think that whatever we dispose of into the water should be cleaned up as much as possible. I am adamantly opposed to dumping untreated sewage into any body of water.

The thousands of gallons of year waste from my residence? The cleanest thing I can do with that is send to to the shoreside treatment plant. The hundreds of gallons of year waste from my boat? The cleanest thing I can do with that is treat it in a small batch on board my vessel. It will then enter the water cleaner than if I go to a dock and pump it into a shoreside treatment system instead.

Read the EPA report on Type 1 devices. Most of the time the amount of fecal coliform in the effluent was "non-detectable". The test that was supervised by the EPA hooked a device into the intake pipe of a city sewer system in order to get the raw effluent. The test ran the device at a much greater frequency than would anybody would aboard a boat, where there is not a constant flow of waste. (well, maybe during some tall tales told after dinner over cocktails, but that's not the sort of BS we're dealing with here)

During one period of the test, the testing crew allowed the brine tank to run out of salt, and the fecal coliform readings shot way, way, up. That proves that if you don't use the system properly, it won't work as designed. No brainer. It's important to note that the EPA test *disabled* the fail-safe software system which would have shut the system down and prevented any use at all if the system had been installed in a traditional manner aboard a boat.
Chuck Gould is offline  
Old 02-22-2013, 02:02 PM   #11
TF Site Team
 
Pineapple Girl's Avatar
 
City: San Mateo, CA
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Pineapple Girl II
Vessel Model: PT 35
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,165
Walt I believe what you have seen. I question whether that is because people have stopped pumping raw waste or because they aren't pumping treated waste?? Grey water still goes overboard, yes? It seems to me that onboard waste treatment systems are a GOOD thing! I am glad the environment is doing better!

I was fairly disgusted to realize the PO of our boat had been dumping overboard, as evidenced by his thoroughly salted up waste discharge line from the head to the Y valve and the Y valve to the overboard through hull and his pristinely clean line from the Y valve to the clean 9 gallon (!!!) holding tank. He lived aboard in the one NDZ we have in this area!!!
__________________
-Jennifer
Pineapple Girl II 1984 PT 35
San Francisco Bay Area
www.pineapple-girl.blogspot.com
Pineapple Girl is offline  
Old 02-22-2013, 02:40 PM   #12
Guru
 
ancora's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,489
The wacko-enviros here in San Diego, are pushing for non-copper bottom paints even though they admit that most of the copper in the water comes from autombile brake pads. P.S. Currently there is no non-copper bottom paint on the market that come even close to the efficacy of copper bottom paint.
ancora is offline  
Old 02-22-2013, 02:45 PM   #13
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,711
PG,
Lots of really self centered people out there.
__________________
Eric

North Western Washington State USA
Nomad Willy is offline  
Old 02-22-2013, 03:40 PM   #14
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
I have no problem with all of Puget Sound becoming an NDZ. Parts of the Sound have very low rates of water exchange, particularly Hood Canal, and as a result the slowly increasing pollution levels have reduced the oxygen levels in the water to the point where fish and shellfish populations are dropping.

Making all of Puget Sound and the San Juans an NDZ will have zero impact on our own boating. Our marina has an excellent system of fixed and portable pump out stations that make it easy and fast to pump out a boat after a cruise. We do not have treatment systems on our boat, only a pair of holding tanks.

While making Puget Sound an NDZ might be annoying to boaters who have spent the money on a treatment toilet system for their boats, I view it as a total non-issue with regards on its impact on boating in general. These waters are a no-raw-sewage dump zone now. For most boaters, making it an NDZ isn't going to change anything and reducing the amount of pollutants in the water, treated to meet some government "standard" or not, is a good thing in my view.

While an NDZ would make no difference whatsoever to our own boating, I'd vote for it if it ever came to a public vote.

I agree with PG that dumping treated waste into the water is a good thing. But I think not dumping any waste into the water is a better thing.
Marin is offline  
Old 02-22-2013, 03:52 PM   #15
OFB
Guru
 
OFB's Avatar
 
City: Richmond bc
Country: Canada
Vessel Name: Invader no1
Vessel Model: Kishi Boat works
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 636
These pictures show the result of street run off. I get a little sick of seeing it so I came up with my M & M ( marine mop ).

From what I have seen the sum what cleaner waters here are a direct result of industry leaving this area. With most of the old technologies ( mills / factories ) simply moving to more industry freindly areas.

Pleasure boaters are percieved as a cash cow with any change directed at us resulting in minimal direct change to the over all enviroment here. IMO
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	oterand slick 029.jpg
Views:	88
Size:	81.4 KB
ID:	16680   Click image for larger version

Name:	oterand slick 033.jpg
Views:	83
Size:	78.9 KB
ID:	16681   Click image for larger version

Name:	oterand slick 043.jpg
Views:	85
Size:	143.8 KB
ID:	16682  
OFB is offline  
Old 02-22-2013, 04:12 PM   #16
Guru
 
Alaskan Sea-Duction's Avatar
 
City: Inside Passage Summer/Columbia River Winter
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Alaskan Sea-Duction
Vessel Model: 1988 M/Y Camargue YachtFisher
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marin View Post
I have no problem with all of Puget Sound becoming an NDZ. Parts of the Sound have very low rates of water exchange, particularly Hood Canal, and as a result the slowly increasing pollution levels have reduced the oxygen levels in the water to the point where fish and shellfish populations are dropping.

Making all of Puget Sound and the San Juans an NDZ will have zero impact on our own boating. Our marina has an excellent system of fixed and portable pump out stations that make it easy and fast to pump out a boat after a cruise. We do not have treatment systems on our boat, only a pair of holding tanks.



While making Puget Sound an NDZ might be annoying to boaters who have spent the money on a treatment toilet system for their boats, I view it as a total non-issue with regards on its impact on boating in general. These waters are a no-raw-sewage dump zone now. For most boaters, making it an NDZ isn't going to change anything and reducing the amount of pollutants in the water, treated to meet some government "standard" or not, is a good thing in my view.

While an NDZ would make no difference whatsoever to our own boating, I'd vote for it if it ever came to a public vote.

I agree with PG that dumping treated waste into the water is a good thing. But I think not dumping any waste into the water is a better thing.
So that would mean NOTHING overboard such as sink water (grey water)? Is this going to require each boater to "log" each and every pumpout or be fined?

Now if the documented "science" proves what you are saying and the emotion factor is removed, then yes I would support it. Oregon and Washington has pumpout programs which allows for free pumpout of boat holding tanks. I disagree with your contentions that this will not effect boaters. They will be forced to modify their boats at great cost in an economy that is already seeing fuel costing over $5 a gallon. It will not be long until the only boaters on the water are the rich and unfamous.

George,

It is my understanding (I could be wrong) that all boats in coastal Kookafornia must be equiped with a "grey" tank with no discharge of soap water etc overboard. Not true?
__________________
1988 M/Y Camargue Yacht Fisher
Alaskan Sea-Duction
MMSI: 338131469
Blog: http://alaskanseaduction.blogspot.com/
Alaskan Sea-Duction is offline  
Old 02-22-2013, 04:21 PM   #17
THD
Guru
 
City: Seattle
Country: US
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,142
As with most newly proposed regulations, the low hanging fruit gets picked off first. We are the lowhanging fruit. I am with Marin, no discharge is better than any discharge. But, if it is to be put in place, my caveat is-it must apply equally to all. If the harm is substantial enough to require such regulation, then no entity, cruise lines, commercial, or governmental, should be granted any exception to the regulation. All of the largest dischargers will argue that the economic cost to them is too high so they should receive differential treatment-exemptions, long-tem phase-in or the like. To which the regulators should, but won't, reply-"Tough, deal with it!"
THD is offline  
Old 02-22-2013, 04:31 PM   #18
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
I don't believe the NDZ regulations in effect or being considered include gray water. Even if they were, this would not impact our own boating at all. We use very little fresh water on a cruise. Washing dishes and showers are all and we use very little water in each case. And it would be comparatively simple to plumb the sinks and shower to go to the holding tanks.

But I'm not advocating this other than thinking it would be a good idea for new-built boats to incorporate it in their designs.

Toilet sewage, treated or not, is the issue at hand here. And I see no penalty whatsoever to boaters to making all of Puget Sound an NDZ. Other than the relative (I suspect) few who have a treatment system on board and who won't be able to use it anymore.

Everyone else is supposed to pump to shore facilities now, so nothing changes.
Marin is offline  
Old 02-22-2013, 04:35 PM   #19
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,711
AkSD wrote;

"I disagree with your contentions that this will not effect boaters. They will be forced to modify their boats at great cost in an economy that is already seeing fuel costing over $5 a gallon."

OK ... well who and in what way do you propose that polluters be reined in to the extent that our waters be only acceptably polluted? Ideally it's the people that "use" what's in question that should pay the price whether it be tools on a new bridge, construction of new ferries or too many people slopp'in their waste into such places as Puget Sound. It could come to the point that pleasure boaters won't be allowed on the Sound and then who will be paying the price of the present day outlaws?
__________________
Eric

North Western Washington State USA
Nomad Willy is offline  
Old 02-22-2013, 04:40 PM   #20
Guru
 
Alaskan Sea-Duction's Avatar
 
City: Inside Passage Summer/Columbia River Winter
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Alaskan Sea-Duction
Vessel Model: 1988 M/Y Camargue YachtFisher
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marin View Post
I don't believe the NDZ regulations in effect or being considered include gray water. Even if they were, this would not impact our own boating at all. We use very little fresh water on a cruise. Washing dishes and showers are all and we use very little water in each case. And it would be comparatively simple to plumb the sinks and shower to go to the holding tanks.

But I'm not advocating this other than thinking it would be a good idea for new-built boats to incorporate it in their designs.

Toilet sewage, treated or not, is the issue at hand here. And I see no penalty whatsoever to boaters to making all of Puget Sound an NDZ. Other than the relative (I suspect) few who have a treatment system on board and who won't be able to use it anymore.

Everyone else is supposed to pump to shore facilities now, so nothing changes.
OK so my point is this: Is it not currently illegal to pump raw sewage from your boat within 3nm zone now? If so why do we need more regulation? Why not enforce the current law? I would think anyone anyone not pumping out and dumping within Puget Sound would be in violation of the current law. Just say'in
__________________

__________________
1988 M/Y Camargue Yacht Fisher
Alaskan Sea-Duction
MMSI: 338131469
Blog: http://alaskanseaduction.blogspot.com/
Alaskan Sea-Duction is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012