Do the potty police have science on their side?

[Exile]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

But so what? Is the requirement so onerous that cruisers need to be given an exception? Who else wants an exception? Speak up.

Nobody else. Everyone who wants to discharge untreated waste has to do it at a dockside pump-out or beyond the 3-mile limit. Any vessels (not just cruisers) with approved onboard treatment systems are exempt, except in NDZ's.

Comprende? Why else would you install one if you were subject to the same rules as those who haven't? And back to the thread topic again, why would you lose your exemption if your waste is being treated? Where do you think all the treated waste goes from municipal treatment facilities?

Again, comprende?

[a64pilot]

My understanding is that the ban on discharge at least in the Dry Tortugas is not based on bacteria or viruses in the waste, but the effect of the nitrogen content of the waste on Coral. The fertilizer if you will.

I don’t know about other areas

[Exile]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

My understanding is that the ban on discharge at least in the Dry Tortugas is not based on bacteria or viruses in the waste, but the effect of the nitrogen content of the waste on Coral. The fertilizer if you will.

I don’t know about other areas

Makes sense. And if makes sense most will comply. For those who don't there's the enforcement regimen in such sensitive areas. I don't think many find this objectionable.

[Sojourner]

I understand and support concepts of zero footprint sailing and travel in general....ethically it's the only right thing to do. However, I also think the impact of cruisers is overblown. If I (or any of us) jump into the water, the first thing we do is pee. Don't deny it, don't you even try to front In fact, my swimming schedule on the boat is often dictated by how much beer I had...it's easier and more fun to pee in the ocean. Yet if I pee in my marine head, then pump it out, I'm suddenly a criminal or culpable for algae blooms? Even regular toilet paper biodegrades in a matter of days; we use the special stuff which biodegrades pretty much as I'm wiping That said, the shower hose is also a good bidet, and we don't like wasting paper. It's like hiking, ain't nobody holding a pee or packing out their feces in a ziploc till they get home. Yes, if the population of Denver were to all go hike the same trail and do their business, that would be a problem. But there just isnt the numbers of cruisers to make an impact by pumping their waste in normal conditions. The regulations should be solely targeting large, commercial vessels that charge money and so can cover their additional treatment/holding expenses...ever seen the vids of a Carnival cruise discharging their holding tanks at sea?? Google it, just not while having breakfast. But even that, in the grand scheme of the ocean, is nothing. If you're anchored next to me, you can bet I'll be peeing in your swimming pool while I'm waving at you from the water. And you'll be doing the same to me. And it's all good. Come over for a beer and we'll pee together

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

There are relatively few cruisers. If every cruising boat tossed one "venti" sized coffee cup into the water every day, it wouldn't really amount to a lot of pollution, compared to the millions of cups tossed by landlubbers that end up in the water. And cruisers don't have that many takeout coffees anyway.

Ergo, every cruiser should be allowed to toss their disposable coffee cups overboard.

Are we talking biodegradable cups?

If yes, and they break up in a couple of days, it's the same situation.

It's mostly a visual issue. 1 cup dumped miles out, will likely never be seen by another human before it breaks down. Thousands of cups dumped off the Chicago waterfront each day and there will always be visible partially decaying cups in view.

Very much like the sewage issue where it's the concentration that is the problem.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Cheechako

"Treated sewage" doesn't go away. It's just been poisoned to not be a biological hazard. Still not fun to be snorkeling and watching Baby Ruth chunks float by...

I believe this falls under "abducto ad absurdum" (spelling?).

No one is suggesting you motor over to the local beach to dump right next to someone swimming. We could pretty easily document in a scientific manner, why that is not a good thing.

This is the whole point of the discussion. We should be applying sound logical and scientific principals not the knee jerk emotional arguments.

As mentioned, these rules need to be mostly self enforcing. If you give people sound logical principals with the science to back them up, most reasonable people will comply (yeah, there is always the outlier but if you gt 95% compliance, you've addressed most of the problem. When it's obvious, that there is no value to the rule, compliance is only possible if you send in the troopers to beat them into submission.

[Lake-Effect]

Can anyone point to an example of a municipality or a cruise ship discharging sewage in a NDZ?

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Can anyone point to an example of a municipality or a cruise ship discharging sewage in a NDZ?

https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/...gan/712021002/

The examples are plentiful where raw sewage winds up in NDZs.

Even treated municipal waste water dumped into lakes (which happens 24/7/365) wouldn't qualify to dump in a NDZ if it came out of a boat, so why are boaters held to a higher standard?

[Jammer]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Can anyone point to an example of a municipality or a cruise ship discharging sewage in a NDZ?

Here's a recent local (to me) example of a 1 million gallon dump into a small river, amounting to about 1% of stream flow rate. It was characterized as posing a "small risk to public health." The river is an NDZ under state law.


A deliberate decision was made to pump the sewage into the river, rather than go to the trouble and expense of pumping it into a holding tank.



https://www.mprnews.org/story/2018/0...d-cannon-river

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Exile

Everyone who wants to discharge untreated waste has to do it at a dockside pump-out or beyond the 3-mile limit. Any vessels (not just cruisers) with approved onboard treatment systems are exempt, except in NDZ's.

Treated sewage is still sewage.

You can buy "certified" appliances and systems, but there's no regime to ensure that they've been installed correctly, or the right chemicals are always used. Enforcement nightmare.

Why else would you install one if you were subject to the same rules as those who haven't?

There's lots of reasons besides wanting the right to dump your waste wherever and whenever the mood takes you.

And back to the thread topic again, why would you lose your exemption if your waste is being treated? Where do you think all the treated waste goes from municipal treatment facilities?

... which is why I asked whether anyone can point to sanctioned large-scale dumping (treated or not) in a NDZ... and so far, all that's been mentioned were two abnormal situations - an unusual rainstorm and a system breakdown. At this point, it still seems that NDZ means NDZ for everybody.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Treated sewage is still sewage.

So why are you fine with municipalities that dump treated sewage into NDZs 24/7/365?

[Captain Bill]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Can anyone point to an example of a municipality or a cruise ship discharging sewage in a NDZ?

https://www.wilmingtonnc.gov/departm...h/get-educated

The Cape fear river is in a NDZ.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

So why are you fine with municipalities that dump treated sewage into NDZs 24/7/365?

I'm not aware of any municipalities dumping treated sewage into NDZs 24/7/365... that's why I asked.

[edit] - ok - Cape Fear River (and other watersheds)

Offishul verbiage for Cape Fear River. Interesting.

I couldn't find the exact location of the sewage discharge for Wilmington.

btw - y'all know that municipal sewage treatment is different from the "treatment" of type I and II MSDs, right? If your boat's sewage treatment was up to the standards of modern municipal treatment systems, I'd grant you an exception here and now

[Sailmonkey]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

I'm not aware of any municipalities dumping treated sewage into NDZs 24/7/365... that's why I asked.

[edit] - ok - Cape Fear River (and other watersheds)

Offishul verbiage for Cape Fear River. Interesting.

I couldn't find the exact location of the sewage discharge for Wilmington.

btw - y'all know that municipal sewage treatment is different from the "treatment" of type I and II MSDs, right? If your boat's sewage treatment was up to the standards of modern municipal treatment systems, I'd grant you an exception here and now

Clear lake in Texas is a NDZ, however the Clear lake watershed is home to 3 municipal discharges and 5 industrial discharges.

https://www.tceq.texas.gov/assets/pu...p_10_13-24.pdf

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

btw - y'all know that municipal sewage treatment is different from the "treatment" of type I and II MSDs, right? If your boat's sewage treatment was up to the standards of modern municipal treatment systems, I'd grant you an exception here and now

Sure am aware. I'm a Civil Engineer and took all the classes back in school. Fully aware of the implications and differences.

You do realize treated municipal sewage doesn't qualify per the NDZ rules if it comes out of a boat...and yes, it all goes into the nearest waterway once treated.