Let's face it, the Feds and states have passed so-called "no discharge " laws which are widely unenforceable. And to boot, no law enforcement organizations desire to enforce them. I have cruised the entire NE coast for over 30 years, including some of the most busy harbors, and I have never seen nor heard of from a wide circle of cruising friends, any visible enforcement of the "no discharge" rules, laws, whatever. Not ever, not once. It is totally and completely an honor system. What has happened though is that many newer boats have no way to discharge except through pump-out as their plumbing is so designed.
Overboard discharge from marine head ...
- Thread starter Scott T-Bird
- Start date
Coming down the Chester River last Sunday, a Coastie boat was headed upstream at speed, following a trail of "stuff". Hours later he came back, but I've no idea if he caught whoever was pumping before getting to town. By the way, there is a push on to make the entire Chester River a no discharge zone.
TS,
Good catch pal......my bad. When you're only running on two brain cells, sometimes they overheat.
Just please, don't let Homeland Security get wind of this, I beg you.
CR
That's interesting ... I was under the impression that enforcement was relatively routine in many areas. Hearing stories about the Volusia County Police & routine Coast Guard boardings, I thought that most sailors comply under a more serious threat. I think the honor system is good enough, btw.
My question is certainly not relevant to the majority of responders who spend enough time on their boat to the extent that fecal matter will be present in their holding tank or Type I MSD. But I'm pretty sure that I'm not the only day-sailor who simply never does contribute anything except urine. For that reason alone, I am curious about the possible distinction for onboard treatment in connection with a Type I MSD.
Scott,
I do believe law measures & enforcement vary depending on the number of boat traffic in a given area. So here is a link of states with numbers on registered boaters. I'm sure one will find, there is a correlation between the number of area boaters verses the amount of enforcement measures used.
http://www.discoverboating.com/resources/article.aspx?id=122
CR
Perhaps like the waters around British Columbia, the British Virgin Islands, or the Sea of Cortez (where many US & Canadian sailors like to visit).
I dock in a no-dischage zone, it IS enforcible, and it is enforced. I guess it just depends on where you are. I could say the same about speeding laws, which never makes speeding correct or mature behavior.
"So-called" is frivolous rhetorical tools, as is any reference to the misbehavior of others.
.
On pollution,
It's not the little guy that is the major factor. It's utility water discharge from storm & wastewater. Add to this the large commercial shipping "DUNNAGE" discharge & the problems this causes with invasive species & then tell me, who are the real culprits here.
Also, agriculture here in Florida like "Big Sugar" have destroyed the water filtration thru the everglades & created a dead zone in Florida Bay.
The Everglades also have an invasive species problem. In fact over the years, the Port Of Miami has introduced these because of species' escapes.
Didn't Cleopatra & others use urine to enhance their skin?
Here in Tampa Bay, the big ships come in & DUMP their DUNNAGE 12 miles out. Not just liquid waste but also solids. Also, there is a large shark population that follow this churned-up Dunnage all the way in for twelve miles to the mouth of Tampa Bay.
Again who are the real culprits? But, I have to leave you now to take a wiz overboard!
CR
It's not the little guy that is the major factor. It's utility water discharge from storm & wastewater. Add to this the large commercial shipping "DUNNAGE" discharge & the problems this causes with invasive species & then tell me, who are the real culprits here.
Also, agriculture here in Florida like "Big Sugar" have destroyed the water filtration thru the everglades & created a dead zone in Florida Bay.
The Everglades also have an invasive species problem. In fact over the years, the Port Of Miami has introduced these because of species' escapes.
Didn't Cleopatra & others use urine to enhance their skin?
Here in Tampa Bay, the big ships come in & DUMP their DUNNAGE 12 miles out. Not just liquid waste but also solids. Also, there is a large shark population that follow this churned-up Dunnage all the way in for twelve miles to the mouth of Tampa Bay.
Again who are the real culprits? But, I have to leave you now to take a wiz overboard!
CR
There is a sailor who posts on this board who has experience on the regulatory end. I won't use his name but he may choose to weigh in. At the EPA level there never was a great deal of interest in going after the "little guys" but the political groups which monitor and badger the agency using threats of or actually bringing lawsuits often force their hand. Up this way there are large municipalities dumping raw or treated sewerage into water bodies under stress conditions. These municipalities are largely unreachable by EPA so the "little guys" receive all the regulatory attention. As an aside, some years back a local university performed a funded wastewater study focusing on pleasure craft in Narragansett Bay. Results showed conclusively that the amount of sewerage introduced into the bay by the entire population of registered boats in Rhode Island was not measureable.
The most concise and logical answer ... I agree wholeheartedly ... while still feeling miffed that I have to discharge the contents of my marine toilet into a holding tank and go thru the inconvenience and expense of disposal when there is absolutely no difference between flushing urine directly into the lake from the toilet and peeing while I go swimming. Urine contains nutrients, for sure, which are no different than the fertilizers that we all apply to our lawns adjacent to the lakes and bays.
Not Here
A couple of years ago it was front page news in Daytona Beach. They did surprise checks on mostly larger boats at marinas and wrote many citations, and warnings were given by local authorities. Forty years ago I spent the summer on an old 46' rum runner docked at Marina Del Rey in LA, where many live aboard folks dumped continuously. It's nasty! Regardless of the letter of the law, common sense and courtesy should prevail. Considering that Tijuana dumps so much sewage that when the current is right it ends up on the San Diego beaches, a little pee in moving water, away from marinas, is nothing to get excited about, and can be done without drawing attention. But those who dump in marinas should be fined, and heavily. IMHO
The relevant regulation is the Clean Water Act, and the point of regulation is either point-source (a pipe) or non-point source (your lawn or feed-lot). And the regulated substances are not just bacteria, nutrients are also controlled. State agencies determine how they will protect their state water resources and comply with the CWA. So in the case of the Chesapeake we have I believe 3 no-discharge zones, meaning that the border states have determined that the water resources in those defined zones must be protected against a comprehensive list of contaminants, to include the nutrients that these treatment MSD's still discharge. In fact nutrification remains the greatest threat to the Chesapeake estuary and a fishery that extends into New England.
Anyone who believes that boaters do not contribute to badly degraded water has only to spend a few days on the hook in Cane Garden Bay where boats discharge without restriction. If you want to swim at CGB, get your hepatitis shot first.
Anyone who believes that boaters do not contribute to badly degraded water has only to spend a few days on the hook in Cane Garden Bay where boats discharge without restriction. If you want to swim at CGB, get your hepatitis shot first.
Thee is absolutely no law stating you can't poop or pee directly in the water, either when your in he water swimming or when you are hanging over the rail of your boat.... and you can't show me one... it does NOT exist.
you can ask our local law enforcement officer or the coast guard patrol or whatever other entity you choose to... I won't say they don't frown on it, but it ISN'T illegal.....
And as far as that goes, it isn't illegal to defecate in the public pool, but it is against the pool rules... BUT, bring in a small container of sewage and pour it in the pool and now you have a violation of the law.... and I guarantee you will get arrested....
I always enjoy these discussions. I live on the Potomac River just south of DC within sight the mouth of the Anacostia River. DC WASA (DC Water) dumps approximately a half of a billion gallons of untreated sewage into the Potomac & Anacostia each year. I contacted the EPA several years ago asking about the impact this has on the river and to ask should I be concerned about our dog swimming in the river. The kind person explained to me that 500,000,000 gallons of untreated sewage sounds like a lot of sewage but I must understand that the Potomac is very large river that flows into an even larger body of water, the Chesapeake Bay – so there is no need to be concerned.
So I am no longer concerned about any untreated sewage discharge less the 1,369,863 gallons per day.
Do worry - be happy.
So I am no longer concerned about any untreated sewage discharge less the 1,369,863 gallons per day.
Do worry - be happy.
Yeah, that is not true. The DC WWTP hasn't discharged untreated sewage in years. And you really wouldn't want your boat subject to the regulatory scrutiny of a permit holder like Blue Plains.
Actually, laws prohibiting such actions have existed since 1899. The Refuse Act of 1899 to be specific although it applies to "navigable waters", as defined in the statute including all water with a significant nexus to nav. waters. That stuatute was superceded in the 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act and more recently under the Clean Water Act, as amended.
More to your question:
3 U.S.C. §1251 et seq. (1972) The Clean Water Act (CWA) establishes the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United States and regulating quality standards for surface waters.
Google the above statutory citation for your reading enjoyment.
This statute as well as implementing Federal and state regulations written pursuant to the above statute(s) clearly prohibit discharge of waste, pollutants or contaminants. The terms "pollutants" and "contaminants" are further defined to include, but not limited to a veritable laundry list of 'stuff' including sewage.
You might want to read the relevant statutes and implementing regs.
While not the WWTP/Blue Plains.....DC continues to dump, whether weather related or breakage...it still dumps:
http://dcist.com/2014/05/five_million_gallons_of_sewage_spil.php
So, a Type I MSD, such as Lectra San, which reduces bacteria and BOD to an acceptable level does not reduce the nutrient pollution and this is the reason they are not accepted in a zero-discharge zone?
I agree that nutrients are a significant problem. Nobody enjoys blue-green algae or other forms of algae bloom. Excessive weed growth has plagued my prop this summer around my slip as the water level has dropped. Non-point source pollution is regulated to a meager extent when it comes to agricultural run-off. Basically, the State is far more concerned about controlling erosion from building sites than it is about the far greater non-point source pollution from agriculture. Sacred cows exist.
"Yeah, that is not true. The DC WWTP hasn't discharged untreated sewage in years. And you really wouldn't want your boat subject to the regulatory scrutiny of a permit holder like Blue Plains. "
http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...ut-pollution/2011/10/06/gIQAU8SVRL_story.html
Not sure what to say
http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...ut-pollution/2011/10/06/gIQAU8SVRL_story.html
Not sure what to say