Do the potty police have science on their side?

[valhalla360]

How much do you want to bet, the Oyster rules have a similar knee jerk basis rather than sound scientific basis...more importantly, why are the rules not limited to a reasonable distance around the Oyster beds?

I think some people are confusing the issue still. No one is suggesting swimming next to the overboard discharge while discharging is a good idea. That can easily be proven scientifically. But once you are even a half mile from a sensitive area such as a public beach, the natural process breaking down the wast makes the scientific justification for large scale NDZ's sketchy at best.

[jtsailjt]

Lots of boaters will continue to dump untreated sewage inside the 3 mile limit whether inside a NDZ or not. I use a holding tank and don’t pump it out in a harbor but also don’t go 3 miles out to empty it because, due to many nearby islands, that would mean about a 25 mile round trip from where my boat is kept. I know I have lots of company in that policy, I’d guess about 90% of boaters I know. Since boats that spend time offshore must have the ability to dump waste overboard, Y valves can’t be outlawed. So cruising boats will always have the ability to dump overboard and it would be nearly impossible to effectively police the prevention of doing that inside 3 miles. That’s all reality. So, even though onboard treatment systems may not perfectly convert raw sewage to drinking water, if the goal is to actually decrease the amount of sewage dumped into coastal waters by boaters, then onboard treatment systems should be encouraged by the entities that claim to safeguard water quality. NDZ proponents are making the classic mistake of letting perfection become the enemy of good. I don’t expect that will ever change so most of us will go on dumping untreated sewage inside the 3 mile limit and NDZ proponents will go on feeling good about having “done something” for the environment. Some things never change.

[sailingharry]

The real problem with NDZ's is that they "sound good" and make good "optics politics" while costing a small number of people a very large sum of money (ever priced out adding a holding tank to a boat?) -- and accomplishing VERY LITTLE. The only people impacted by NDZ's are boaters with Lectra Sans. It's amazing how often, when I mention my Lectra San, the number of boaters that don't even know what one is. VERY few boats use them.

NDZ's have no impact on scofflaws that pump directly overboard (I know a cruiser who removed a Lectra San and installed a holding tank (their home waters became an NDZ) and now cruise 6 months a year discharging directly overboard. Also, as has been discussed in this thread, many many MANY people with holding tanks also pump overboard (and if I am forced to a holding tank, I will do that too). NDZ does not impact direct discharge, or pumping holding tanks overboard.

I mention this because the illegal discharge of sewage is included in the benefits of adding an NDZ -- and the discussion should focus ONLY on the small number of boats with Lectra Sans. When you narrow the impact to that small number of boats, the argument really falls apart.

Harry

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

... cruising boats will always have the ability to dump overboard and it would be nearly impossible to effectively police the prevention of doing that inside 3 miles.

You're right, policing this IS tough. One of the few ways to simplify this is to make the rules and detection simple: NO discharge allowed, and the position of the Y valve is what's looked for.

...if the goal [of an NDZ] is to actually decrease the amount of sewage dumped into coastal waters by boaters, then onboard treatment systems should be encouraged

.. except that Types 1 and 2 MSDs don't reduce the amount of sewage; they just chop it up and maybe reduce the count of harmful bacteria. But the same amount of human waste is still dumped. The only boat systems that reduce sewage from a boat is a holding tank + pumpout, or a composting toilet (?).

[senormechanico]

It would be pretty easy to have an ElectroScan for daily use and a Y valve mounted with a lock labeled in the tank position, which doesn't connect to any plumbing.

You know, for "inspections".

[LoudMusic]

*** I have not read any of this thread ***

I had a guy come to my boat to do some work and one of the first things he says is that it smells like someone is flushing overboard at the marina. I responded that I thought the marina just smelled like ****. We laughed, and then he said it's an extremely serious offense and the coast guard and local authorities will go full penalty if they catch you dumping in the local water ways.

The marina also just smelled like **** because there were pig farms near by.

[Lake-Effect]

[QUOTE=senormechanico;2747280]It would be pretty easy to have an ElectroScan for daily use and a Y valve mounted with a lock labeled in the tank position, which doesn't connect to any plumbing.

You know, for "inspections". [/QUOTE}

...except for the guy in the next slip ratting you out.

Seriously, you are highlighting how hard enforcement could be, if LEOs had to make on-the spot judgements if there was an exemptions for types 1 and 2... You could just stick an Electroscan sticker on your Jabsco

[jtsailjt]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

You're right, policing this IS tough. One of the few ways to simplify this is to make the rules and detection simple: NO discharge allowed, and the position of the Y valve is what's looked for.

(?).

Not too difficult to unlock and change the position of the y valve while you dump your holding tank while underway and then return it to the shutoff and locked position 5-10 minutes later when holding tank is empty. NDZ is pretty much unenforceable.

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

Not too difficult to unlock and change the position of the y valve while you dump your holding tank while underway and then return it to the shutoff and locked position 5-10 minutes later when holding tank is empty. NDZ is pretty much unenforceable.

My nearest pumpout is nearly an hour trip each way, and not in a direction I normally go. If NDZ comes to a waterway near me, and I have to remove my LectraSan, I have room for at most a 5 gallon holding tank (if I custom make an oddly shaped tank!). Yes, I will have a holding tank. Yes, I will have my valve locked shut. And, yes, I will pump overboard daily. I'd rather stay with my LectraSan, but if the politicians want to pick on me, I'll do what I have to.


Harry

[senormechanico]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

You could just stick an Electroscan sticker on your Jabsco

Or you could actually INSTALL an ElectroScan to meet the EPA and Coast Guard requirements.

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

You're right, policing this IS tough. One of the few ways to simplify this is to make the rules and detection simple: NO discharge allowed, and the position of the Y valve is what's looked for.

Unfortunately, Lake, the NDZ rules aren't a result of the cops not knowing how to inspect, and aren't meant to help solve enforcement issues. The politicians believe that the very small number of LectraSans are the issue, and that making an NDZ will solve discharge. What they don't realize is that the vast majority of boater discharge is NOT from LectraSans, but rather from boats that aren't affected by NDZ rules -- boats with holding tanks. NDZ doesn't affect them, because they are already prohibited from discharge.


As far as the Y valve, well, if I pull my LectraSan and put in a holding tank, I won't have a Y valve to look at. I'm 200 miles from the nearest water I can directly discharge, so I don't need a Y valve. I will, however, have a macerator pump (with a keyed switch) to a thru hull. But, no, they won't be able to look at my Y valve. They will be able to happily look at my straight-shot hose.

[senormechanico]

Sailingharry,
Just put in a fake Y valve to make the cops happy.
In their potty police role, it's a pretty good bet they are only in beaureaucratic mode.


It reminds me of when we added 4 feet to our dining room. We did it all with a builder and a permit, but we finished the interior ourselves.
There were three AC plugs in the wall where we pushed out the 4 feet.
It never occurred to me that I would need an additional permit to hook up a 4 foot extension to those sockets, but when we called for an inspection to close up with sheetrock, the inspector got all over me for not having an electrical permit. Not wanting to feed the beast, I said we'd take care of it.
He stated for emphasis that upon the reinspection, he would be accompanied by a "witness".
I didn't get a permit, but "staged the area" so that none of the wiring was visible.
I artfully reinsulated over the plug boxes and put up brooms, vacuum cleaners etc in the corners to obscure the areas where the wiring could not be completely covered.
No changes had been made since his original inspection.

When the inspector came, (same guy and accompanied by the witness) they both looked at the ceiling, and stated, "looks good, I don't see anything improper!", signed us off and left.


You just need to do the dance to justlfy their jobs.... GRRR.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

Not too difficult to unlock and change the position of the y valve while you dump your holding tank while underway and then return it to the shutoff and locked position 5-10 minutes later when holding tank is empty. NDZ is pretty much unenforceable.

I would venture to guess that most boaters would comply, more or less, because it's the right thing to do. The law is mainly prescriptive; enforcement will serve to catch those who didn't know about it, or are too lazy to comply. The small group of cruisers who think it's a massive injustice will of course find their way around it.

And again, here's someone else saying how hard it is to enforce, yet also supporting those who want an exception for Types 1 & 2, which would make enforcement even harder. Nice.

Originally Posted by senormechanico

Or you could actually INSTALL an ElectroScan to meet the EPA and Coast Guard requirements.

..except that no type 1 or 2 system meets the EPA or USCG standards for an NDZ. It's in the name...

Originally Posted by sailingharry

Unfortunately, Lake, the NDZ rules aren't a result of the cops not knowing how to inspect, and aren't meant to help solve enforcement issues. The politicians believe that the very small number of LectraSans are the issue, and that making an NDZ will solve discharge.

Wow, did you get that from Alex Jones? The idea is to get to no sewage discharge in an NDZ. From any boat. No government conspiracy.

What they don't realize is that the vast majority of boater discharge is NOT from LectraSans, but rather from boats that aren't affected by NDZ rules -- boats with holding tanks. NDZ doesn't affect them, because they are already prohibited from discharge.

ALL boats are governed by NDZ rules, not just the minority with types 1 & 2 systems. That's the point.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by senormechanico

There were three AC plugs in the wall where we pushed out the 4 feet.
It never occurred to me that I would need an additional permit to hook up a 4 foot extension to those sockets,

Seriously? or you just couldn't be bothered?

What circuits did you extend, and what was the box count after you were done? You're in the trade so there's a halfway good chance you did it right, but I've seen what most people do, and it ain't pretty. There's a reason for electrical permits and inspections.

[Sailmonkey]

Our local NDZ is a joke. When you pump out, your sewage is added to the municipal sewage stream that is piped to a treatment plant upstream of the NDZ. It’s a feel good regulation.

I’d have a lectrasan(scan) whatever in a minute if it would work for the water where we dock. Alas we’re tied to the inadequate holding tank.