What is the carbon footprint for the US MSD program?

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Show me one case where this is officially stated.

I've never said it's "officially stated". It's what we all know is done. As you go on to agree with below...

If a cop decides to, they can give you a ticket for 56 in a 55. That's a bad system because it doesn't use common sense and when it happens, the individual sees an injustice because as you say, most people know that cops don't usually pull you over for 1mph over.

You haven't yet confirmed what your preferred regime for MSDs would be. One-mile limit, I take it. Voluntary, or with enforcement? or are you in favour of the "Venice" approach?

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

The canal system is the sewer, always has been and working well for over 1000 years. Direct discharge... it's enough to make the average greenie weak in the knees.

1,000,000 visitors on any given day.

Nice try.

The canal system in Venice is tide-washed, which makes for reasonable washout of sewage, all things considered. Any knowledgable greenie like yourself would already know that sewage is a transient problem that goes away with time. If it's a smelly day, EVERYONE there gets a little weak in the knees.

So... an environmental concern? not really. Aesthetically gross?

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

I've never said it's "officially stated". It's what we all know is done. As you go on to agree with below...



You haven't yet confirmed what your preferred regime for MSDs would be. One-mile limit, I take it. Voluntary, or with enforcement? or are you in favour of the "Venice" approach?

I like the OP's approach. It should be based on actual documentable study that starts with documenting if there is even a problem to solve. Not what is politically expedient which seems to be your approach.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

I like the OP's approach. It should be based on actual documentable study that starts with documenting if there is even a problem to solve. Not what is politically expedient . . . . .

Here, here. If freedom means anything at all -- there should be a good, rational, objective reason -- with the common good clearly demonstrated -- for manipulating us, forcing us to do something, or forbidding something.

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Show me one case where this is officially stated.

If a cop decides to, they can give you a ticket for 56 in a 55. That's a bad system because it doesn't use common sense and when it happens, the individual sees an injustice because as you say, most people know that cops don't usually pull you over for 1mph over.

Of course, 55mph speed limits on non-freeways are politically determined not based on engineering. A great many rural 2 lane-2way roads should be 60-65mph.

Roll down 301 in Fla.. If the small town posts 35, you better not be going 36. I'm not sure adherence to the law is wrong? Granted it is a money maker and labeled a speed trap but the residence want it. Now what this has to do with discharge? I guess that's enacted by resident also. US, GB, NZ or whatever.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

I like the OP's approach. It should be based on actual documentable study that starts with documenting if there is even a problem to solve. Not what is politically expedient which seems to be your approach.

The OP's approach was pretty narrow (carbon impact), and requires the government to spend good money for a study that we have all agreed would be pointless. Or are you advocating that the US drops all MSD enforcement, and lets just watch what happens?

Me - I think that the value of responsible MSD usage has already been demonstrated. It has the most effect with the majority of recreational boating done in the US - the day-trippers, the weekenders... the small inland lakes and reservoirs as well as coastal - who generally converge on on popular hotspots... these are where indiscriminate discharge would become most apparent.

I suspect you're thinking mainly about the cruiser/liveaboard... not unreasonable; this IS CF after all.

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Nice try.

The canal system in Venice is tide-washed, which makes for reasonable washout of sewage, all things considered. Any knowledgable greenie like yourself would already know that sewage is a transient problem that goes away with time. If it's a smelly day, EVERYONE there gets a little weak in the knees.

So... an environmental concern? not really. Aesthetically gross?

If you'd ever been to the Med, you'd know we only have an 18 inch tide. Hardly a "tide wash." But still no matter, no disease, no smell, no problems.

[Cottontop]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

If you'd ever been to the Med, you'd know we only have an 18 inch tide. Hardly a "tide wash." But still no matter, no disease, no smell, no problems.

The French canals don't even have tide wash (lock wash, maybe) and doesn't seem to be a problem. People fish in them, but I wouldn't, and I sure wouldn't want to have to deal with a line around the prop.

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by Cottontop

The French canals don't even have tide wash (lock wash, maybe) and doesn't seem to be a problem. People fish in them, but I wouldn't, and I sure wouldn't want to have to deal with a line around the prop.

Exactly, a non-issue but something for the greenies to fret about. In San Giorgio di Nogaro not far from Venice and the same tidal situation because it's an estuary, I needed to dive under the boat, change anodes and do a quick cleaning... no big deal.

I wouldn't choose to go swimming in the Venice canals, but the remarks and carp science regarding disease etc, are grossly exagerated and flawed.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

The OP's approach was pretty narrow (carbon impact), and requires the government to spend good money for a study that we have all agreed would be pointless. Or are you advocating that the US drops all MSD enforcement, and lets just watch what happens?

Me - I think that the value of responsible MSD usage has already been demonstrated. It has the most effect with the majority of recreational boating done in the US - the day-trippers, the weekenders... the small inland lakes and reservoirs as well as coastal - who generally converge on on popular hotspots... these are where indiscriminate discharge would become most apparent.

I suspect you're thinking mainly about the cruiser/liveaboard... not unreasonable; this IS CF after all.

The point was not the OP's specific study but the fact that he wants to use a fact based process not just do something and hope it helps.

If the value has been demonstrated to you, please share the "values" beyond it feels like you are doing something. How many deaths and illnesses have been eliminated? How many fewer red tides have we had? What is the commercial advantage to tourist towns? Beyond emotional appeals and misapplied data, I haven't seen anything demonstrated.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Cadence

Roll down 301 in Fla.. If the small town posts 35, you better not be going 36. I'm not sure adherence to the law is wrong? Granted it is a money maker and labeled a speed trap but the residence want it. Now what this has to do with discharge? I guess that's enacted by resident also. US, GB, NZ or whatever.

Exactly, the law should be consistent and justifiable not malicious and random, which is very similar to how MSD law is applied.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

If you'd ever been to the Med, you'd know we only have an 18 inch tide. Hardly a "tide wash." But still no matter, no disease, no smell, no problems.

Having watched the schools of "brown trout" as we took the gondola ride on a hot humid day, I have to question your no smell theory.

Of course, I suspect if you study the problem, there is a clearly measurable and identifiable issues. BUT in terms of this thread, the boating community is likely contributing almost nothing to the issue as cruising boats are generally not going thru the canals of the central city.

[buzzstar]

Originally Posted by Auspicious

In the US "bucket and chuck it" is illegal. The bucket counts as a boat system (i.e. MSD).

The law is the law. It doesn't have to make sense.

Law should not be confused with bureaucratic interpretation of the law in the form of executive bureau regulations which have the power of law. It is far, far more than a distinction without a difference. Laws usually make sense; regulations, not so much.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

The point was not the OP's specific study but the fact that he wants to use a fact based process not just do something and hope it helps.

If the value has been demonstrated to you, please share the "values" beyond it feels like you are doing something. How many deaths and illnesses have been eliminated? How many fewer red tides have we had? What is the commercial advantage to tourist towns? Beyond emotional appeals and misapplied data, I haven't seen anything demonstrated.

The CWA was first passed in 1948, and revised in 1972 and 1977, apparently. I wasn't able to make any of these events for various reasons. So you'll have to confirm for yourself whether any of those legislative efforts were justified by the facts.

I'd like to think that common sense would make it apparent that it's not desirable to have boats discharging human waste near other humans, and in restricted or enclosed places where it wouldn't dissipate quickly... but I guess I'm just subject to emotional appeals.

Here's an idea. Dump a turd in an anchorage, then loudly inform everyone around that if it offends them, they're just overreacting because you know it's actually harmless.

My impression was that the OP was looking for a thread to pull on in the hopes that MSD laws would unravel, and you seem to be onside with that. Well, for anyone looking to wind back the clock on environmental protection, this is the term to go for it. Have fun.

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

The CWA was first passed in 1948, and revised in 1972 and 1977, apparently. I wasn't able to make any of these events for various reasons. So you'll have to confirm for yourself whether any of those legislative efforts were justified by the facts.

I'd like to think that common sense would make it apparent that it's not desirable to have boats discharging human waste near other humans, and in restricted or enclosed places where it wouldn't dissipate quickly... but I guess I'm just subject to emotional appeals.

Here's an idea. Dump a turd in an anchorage, then loudly inform everyone around that if it offends them, they're just overreacting because you know it's actually harmless.

My impression was that the OP was looking for a thread to pull on in the hopes that MSD laws would unravel, and you seem to be onside with that. Well, for anyone looking to wind back the clock on environmental protection, this is the term to go for it. Have fun.

I believe there is what is called a dead zone out past Sandy Hook from NYC dumping sewage in days of yore. Great Kills park was made from land filling over medical waste. I'm glad some advances have been made. I am by no means a tree hugger but don't think three miles is unreasonable for discharge of human waste but probably not in large bays. Three miles from the COLREGS line may be unreasonable. I guess I am tripping over my own words as far as uniform regs.. Delineating the regs. should not be that complicated in this day of electronics.