I don't know if this part of the discussion has any impact or interest
for the original poster...


The Lectra-San kills all the bacteria.

Peggie Hall wrote:
Not necessarily...it does reduce the count to 10/100 ml (the law
requires only a reduction to 1000/100 ml)


Picky picky... OK it doesn't kill *all* the bacteria, just so many of
them that it's actually safer than many people's drinking water.


It does not reduce or break
down the material effluent, which contains nutrients and changes the
local ecological balance.


Again, not quite true...The L/S does reduce BOD by 35%. The discharge
has the equivilant nutrient "load" of 4 oak leaves.

Didn't know that... that's very good. Probably better than many
municipal treatment outlets.


... In fact, just ONE
illegally dumped tank has more negative impact on the surrounding waters
within at least a mile than 1,000 boats, all equipped with L/S in the
same area for 24 hours.

Now there I'll agree. Most boaters... especially the ones advocating a
bucket -n- chuck it strategy... would not believe the impact of a single
untreated flush.


You'll find the results of a study he
http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/...port-jun02.pdf

Runoff from the shore and the rivers that feed coastal waters are the
problem, not boats.


The overwhelming part of the problem, yes. Absolutely. But because the
waters are already loaded with land source effluent, that magnifies the
effect of point-source effluent dump.

Most birds know better than to foul their own nests, why can't mankind
be that smart?

Regards
Doug King