The definition with which I am familiar in insurance policies equates environmental “damage” to the cost of cleanup and any applicable restoration. This is what environmental liability insurance covers.
It may seem like a small distinction, however, the environmental damage assessment to which I referred is used to quantity damages in monetary terms includes such things as habitat loss and the economic impact of lost fisheries, the multi-year loss to shellfish, the potential for mutations in subsequent generations of stuff harvested from the sea, etc…. These are rigorous and expensive studies essential to quantify impact and without which no one can demonstrate environmental impact. This isn’t something done after a small boat accident nor is it generally worth it.
Its comparatively easy to put a price on cleanup cost and that is the liability at issue here. I merely (and perhaps I eloquently) point out the difference.
I recognize experience and perceptions vary - mine is that a dock hookup like anything else on a boat requires periodic inspection and maintenance but doesn’t seem (to me) to be any greater risk than the pressure water supply feeding all of our homes which many people ignore.
