BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

(Gould 0738) wrote in
:

the terrorist (w)inged,
(m)alevolent (d)efecator from "V" dock, I'd hope to see the staff down
there a bit more regularly to keep fresh diapers on Hussein. After
all, what's good for the Gould is good for the gander.

Why stop w/ the waterfowl?

I wish I could find the article... but I read several years ago about a
river back east that they banned boaters and fishermen from using. It
seems that the fecal count was too high, so they assumed humans were the
problem. When it was retested later, the problem was even worse. After
a little investigating as to the source, (Imagine THAT concept!) it was
determined FISH were the cause! Apparently the fish concentration was
too high due to a lack of predators. So the all knowing
environmentalists eliminating the only remaining predator- fishermen.

It is now illegal to use a Type I or Type II marine sanitation device
within the limits of the marina.
.
.
.
The environmentalist over-regulators are apparently unaware that a
gallon waste treated in a Type I or Type II treatment system has a
lower fecal coliform and bacterial count than the same quantity of
waste treated at a shoreside facility.

It appears the ignorance / political correctness / madness is spreading.
NDZ's have there place, but Rhode Island and the Puget Sound are not
among them.

Perhaps it makes sense under the same logic that, "Liveaboards are not a
water-dependant use of shore-side space." I know a few of the people
that had to move out of Washington because the liveaboards were kicked
out citing a new law that only water-dependant activities were allowed!
After all, if a boat isn't "water-dependant," then we can clean up the
environment by making more pollution right...