|
Don't wash or start your boat without a permit?
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message ups.com... On Feb 27, 3:22?pm, "JimH" wrote: "Don White" wrote in message ... "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... Chuck Gould wrote: According to an item in the Marine Business Journal, a legal decision in a lawsuit pressed by a group called "Northwest Envionmental Advocates" has potential implications for every pleasure boater operating in US waters. In an effort to prohibit the discharge of ballast water from foreign vessels (and reduce the liklihood of introducing foreign plants and animals to local eco-systems) the Environmental Advocates sucessfully argued that any vessel discharging any liquid or material of any type must first obtain a permit from the state in which the discharge is going to take place. (As a condition of granting the permit, most states will demand the right to inspect the vessel, ensure that all available pollution controls are installed and properly maintained, and may even want to monitor the discharge- at the vessel's expense). One small oversight: Unlike previous versions of similar regulations, the legal ruling does not exempt pleasure vessels from the requirement to obtain a discharge permit. As a result, everything from cooling water cycling through an engine to water running off of a deck can be considered a "discharge" and is technically subject to state permit! The NMMA is lobbying congress for a revision of the law. Oh goodie!! Another useless, unenforceable law. Y'all better move on up to Canada while you have a chance. We are hoping our *left coast* breaks away from the US mainland and floats away. ;-)- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - So right you are. And just what would the remaining 45 contiguous states do if they lost the three states that raise the average national IQ nearly 15 points and represent about 20% of the wealth? :-) ================ Gain back common sense, morals and integrity. ;-) |
Don't wash or start your boat without a permit?
PTOOY!
Yes officer, here's my permit for that (elevates middle finger....) JR Chuck Gould wrote: According to an item in the Marine Business Journal, a legal decision in a lawsuit pressed by a group called "Northwest Envionmental Advocates" has potential implications for every pleasure boater operating in US waters. In an effort to prohibit the discharge of ballast water from foreign vessels (and reduce the liklihood of introducing foreign plants and animals to local eco-systems) the Environmental Advocates sucessfully argued that any vessel discharging any liquid or material of any type must first obtain a permit from the state in which the discharge is going to take place. (As a condition of granting the permit, most states will demand the right to inspect the vessel, ensure that all available pollution controls are installed and properly maintained, and may even want to monitor the discharge- at the vessel's expense). One small oversight: Unlike previous versions of similar regulations, the legal ruling does not exempt pleasure vessels from the requirement to obtain a discharge permit. As a result, everything from cooling water cycling through an engine to water running off of a deck can be considered a "discharge" and is technically subject to state permit! The NMMA is lobbying congress for a revision of the law. -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Home Page: http://www.seanet.com/~jasonrnorth |
Don't wash or start your boat without a permit?
"JimH" wrote in message ... "Chuck Gould" wrote in message ups.com... On Feb 27, 3:22?pm, "JimH" wrote: "Don White" wrote in message ... "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... Chuck Gould wrote: According to an item in the Marine Business Journal, a legal decision in a lawsuit pressed by a group called "Northwest Envionmental Advocates" has potential implications for every pleasure boater operating in US waters. In an effort to prohibit the discharge of ballast water from foreign vessels (and reduce the liklihood of introducing foreign plants and animals to local eco-systems) the Environmental Advocates sucessfully argued that any vessel discharging any liquid or material of any type must first obtain a permit from the state in which the discharge is going to take place. (As a condition of granting the permit, most states will demand the right to inspect the vessel, ensure that all available pollution controls are installed and properly maintained, and may even want to monitor the discharge- at the vessel's expense). One small oversight: Unlike previous versions of similar regulations, the legal ruling does not exempt pleasure vessels from the requirement to obtain a discharge permit. As a result, everything from cooling water cycling through an engine to water running off of a deck can be considered a "discharge" and is technically subject to state permit! The NMMA is lobbying congress for a revision of the law. Oh goodie!! Another useless, unenforceable law. Y'all better move on up to Canada while you have a chance. We are hoping our *left coast* breaks away from the US mainland and floats away. ;-)- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - So right you are. And just what would the remaining 45 contiguous states do if they lost the three states that raise the average national IQ nearly 15 points and represent about 20% of the wealth? :-) ================ Gain back common sense, morals and integrity. ;-) How would an OSU guy know about these things? |
Don't wash or start your boat without a permit?
"CalifBill" wrote in message ink.net... "JimH" wrote in message ... "Chuck Gould" wrote in message ups.com... On Feb 27, 3:22?pm, "JimH" wrote: "Don White" wrote in message ... "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... Chuck Gould wrote: According to an item in the Marine Business Journal, a legal decision in a lawsuit pressed by a group called "Northwest Envionmental Advocates" has potential implications for every pleasure boater operating in US waters. In an effort to prohibit the discharge of ballast water from foreign vessels (and reduce the liklihood of introducing foreign plants and animals to local eco-systems) the Environmental Advocates sucessfully argued that any vessel discharging any liquid or material of any type must first obtain a permit from the state in which the discharge is going to take place. (As a condition of granting the permit, most states will demand the right to inspect the vessel, ensure that all available pollution controls are installed and properly maintained, and may even want to monitor the discharge- at the vessel's expense). One small oversight: Unlike previous versions of similar regulations, the legal ruling does not exempt pleasure vessels from the requirement to obtain a discharge permit. As a result, everything from cooling water cycling through an engine to water running off of a deck can be considered a "discharge" and is technically subject to state permit! The NMMA is lobbying congress for a revision of the law. Oh goodie!! Another useless, unenforceable law. Y'all better move on up to Canada while you have a chance. We are hoping our *left coast* breaks away from the US mainland and floats away. ;-)- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - So right you are. And just what would the remaining 45 contiguous states do if they lost the three states that raise the average national IQ nearly 15 points and represent about 20% of the wealth? :-) ================ Gain back common sense, morals and integrity. ;-) How would an OSU guy know about these things? Because I live in real America.....not in the lala land of granola, tofu and Nancy Pelosi. ;-) |
Don't wash or start your boat without a permit?
"JimH" wrote in message ... "CalifBill" wrote in message ink.net... "JimH" wrote in message ... "Chuck Gould" wrote in message ups.com... On Feb 27, 3:22?pm, "JimH" wrote: "Don White" wrote in message ... "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... Chuck Gould wrote: According to an item in the Marine Business Journal, a legal decision in a lawsuit pressed by a group called "Northwest Envionmental Advocates" has potential implications for every pleasure boater operating in US waters. In an effort to prohibit the discharge of ballast water from foreign vessels (and reduce the liklihood of introducing foreign plants and animals to local eco-systems) the Environmental Advocates sucessfully argued that any vessel discharging any liquid or material of any type must first obtain a permit from the state in which the discharge is going to take place. (As a condition of granting the permit, most states will demand the right to inspect the vessel, ensure that all available pollution controls are installed and properly maintained, and may even want to monitor the discharge- at the vessel's expense). One small oversight: Unlike previous versions of similar regulations, the legal ruling does not exempt pleasure vessels from the requirement to obtain a discharge permit. As a result, everything from cooling water cycling through an engine to water running off of a deck can be considered a "discharge" and is technically subject to state permit! The NMMA is lobbying congress for a revision of the law. Oh goodie!! Another useless, unenforceable law. Y'all better move on up to Canada while you have a chance. We are hoping our *left coast* breaks away from the US mainland and floats away. ;-)- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - So right you are. And just what would the remaining 45 contiguous states do if they lost the three states that raise the average national IQ nearly 15 points and represent about 20% of the wealth? :-) ================ Gain back common sense, morals and integrity. ;-) How would an OSU guy know about these things? Because I live in real America.....not in the lala land of granola, tofu and Nancy Pelosi. ;-) OSU, penitentiary state U,is real America? |
Don't wash or start your boat without a permit?
|
Don't wash or start your boat without a permit?
|
Don't wash or start your boat without a permit?
On 27 Feb 2007 09:14:25 -0800, "Chuck Gould"
wrote: According to an item in the Marine Business Journal, a legal decision in a lawsuit pressed by a group called "Northwest Envionmental Advocates" has potential implications for every pleasure boater operating in US waters. In an effort to prohibit the discharge of ballast water from foreign vessels (and reduce the liklihood of introducing foreign plants and animals to local eco-systems) the Environmental Advocates sucessfully argued that any vessel discharging any liquid or material of any type must first obtain a permit from the state in which the discharge is going to take place. (As a condition of granting the permit, most states will demand the right to inspect the vessel, ensure that all available pollution controls are installed and properly maintained, and may even want to monitor the discharge- at the vessel's expense). One small oversight: Unlike previous versions of similar regulations, the legal ruling does not exempt pleasure vessels from the requirement to obtain a discharge permit. As a result, everything from cooling water cycling through an engine to water running off of a deck can be considered a "discharge" and is technically subject to state permit! The NMMA is lobbying congress for a revision of the law. If one is so inclined, the order can be found at: http://tinyurl.com/3dm2o8 Interesting reading. -- John H "All decisions are the result of binary thinking." |
Don't wash or start your boat without a permit?
JLH wrote:
If one is so inclined, the order can be found at: http://tinyurl.com/3dm2o8 Interesting reading. http://www.fjc.gov/servlet/tGetInfo?jid=1143 Figures. |
Don't wash or start your boat without a permit?
On Feb 28, 4:48 am, JLH wrote:
On 27 Feb 2007 09:14:25 -0800, "Chuck Gould" wrote: According to an item in the Marine Business Journal, a legal decision in a lawsuit pressed by a group called "Northwest Envionmental Advocates" has potential implications for every pleasure boater operating in US waters. In an effort to prohibit the discharge of ballast water from foreign vessels (and reduce the liklihood of introducing foreign plants and animals to local eco-systems) the Environmental Advocates sucessfully argued that any vessel discharging any liquid or material of any type must first obtain a permit from the state in which the discharge is going to take place. (As a condition of granting the permit, most states will demand the right to inspect the vessel, ensure that all available pollution controls are installed and properly maintained, and may even want to monitor the discharge- at the vessel's expense). One small oversight: Unlike previous versions of similar regulations, the legal ruling does not exempt pleasure vessels from the requirement to obtain a discharge permit. As a result, everything from cooling water cycling through an engine to water running off of a deck can be considered a "discharge" and is technically subject to state permit! The NMMA is lobbying congress for a revision of the law. If one is so inclined, the order can be found at: http://tinyurl.com/3dm2o8 Interesting reading. -- John H "All decisions are the result of binary thinking."- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - The rough draft of my comments in next month's issue of the magazine follows. Fair warning to anyone considering wading in, it makes a long post so if yo don't have a couple of minutes you might want to skip it.... Don't Pump the Baby Out with the Bilge Water Maybe we should send up a collective flare and hope that somebody will notice. Once again it appears that well-intentioned Great and Powerful Wizards (please pay no mind to that man behind the curtain) have entirely overlooked the interests of pleasure boaters while seeking to protect the environment. A recent court decision in a lawsuit filed against the US Environmental Protection Agency by a Portland, Oregon group known as the Northwest Environmental Advocates could potentially require all pleasure boaters to purchase "discharge permits" from state governments. The newly regulated discharges in question have nothing to do with untreated human waste, engine oil, trash and garbage, or other nasty stuff that any responsible boater will voluntarily contain and dispose of appropriately ashore. Anything passing from a boat into the surrounding waters will be considered a discharge. Want to wash your boat? You will need a permit for the wash and rinse water to "discharge" through your scuppers and into the sound. Too much water in the bilge? Too bad. You may not be able to switch on that bilge pump without a state permit. So fed up that you're ready to start your engine and motor off to some country with more reasonable regulations? Not so fast, that cooling water cycling through the raw water side of your system becomes a "discharge". (We won't even be allowed to escape without a permit!) Despite the draconian potential effects of the legal ruling, there wasn't actually a conspiracy against pleasure boaters. The Northwest Environmental Advocates sued to address a worthy issue: the discharge of ballast water from foreign vessels in US ports. Ships entering American waters from overseas ports often travel with enormous amounts of water in the bilge to serve as ballast. Unfortunately, when a ship takes on ballast water huge numbers of marine plants and animals are scooped up in the process and will be released whenever and wherever the vessel pumps its bilges. Most of the foreign organisms die in the new environment, but certain species discover that they have been introduced to an area where they have no natural predators. With natural balance disrupted, many of these immigrant life forms (such as the zebra mussel) tend to compete too efficiently for food and habitat and can ultimately eliminate native species that have long served as integral links in important eco-system relationships. A new species supplanting a native species may no longer be considered edible by predators higher on the food chain. Organisms at the top of the food chain (such as humans), have a vested interest in sustaining a healthy eco-system with co-dependent plants and animals that thrive in the local environment. The Northwest Environmental Advocates demanded that states issue permits to any vessel planning to discharge into waters of the state. Presumably, the states aren't going to issue permits to all applicants without some level of prior inspection, and perhaps even requiring that a state inspector be on hand when the material in question is being discharged. When the court ruled in favor of the Northwest Environmental Advocates, it omitted any specification that the ruling applied only to commercial shipping. Similar previous regulations have always specifically exempted recreational boaters, but no such exemption is included in the regulations mandated by the court decision. The court specifically ordered the EPA to rescind its previous exemption from permit and regulation those discharges "incidental to the normal operation of a vessel". States typically lack the will, and most certainly lack the manpower, to enforce a regulation that would require pleasure boaters to apply for permits prior to starting an engine, pumping a bilge, taking a shower, or washing the highway and industrial soot from the house and decks. Washington State alone would need thousands, if not tens of thousands, of inspectors and permit processors to monitor every single discharge of any material from all vessels of any description. The law would be routinely ignored, but perhaps not entirely. The potential risk is that some zealous environmental extremist could seize upon the court's oversight. In the ultimate fantasies of some fanatics, the waters of the Pacific NW would be unsullied by any human activity afloat. Leaping salmon, cavorting porpoises, and spouting whales wouldn't be obliged to dodge around any boats or ships, (with a possible exception for limited numbers of extensively regulated and duly licensed kayaks, of course). It would never rain, the sun would never set, beribboned unicorns and Technicolor rainbows would be seen everywhere, and the gentle breezes would always be warm. With a glaring defect in the newly refined law, the opportunity remains for such an extremist to seek a court injunction or other legal avenue to disrupt pleasure boating. Most boaters make conscientious environmental choices. The few that persist in dumping holding tanks in inland waters or pumping the bilge after an oil change "accident", deserve to be ostracized by the responsible majority. Our recreational enjoyment depends upon maintaining acceptably clean waterways and a healthy fishery. Environmental activists on the radical fringes of that movement would do well to recognize that the average pleasure boater isn't a serious threat to the eco-system. We can indeed send up a flare by contacting our congressional representatives and urging them to exempt pleasure vessels from the court ruling mandating that all vessels apply for discharge permits. Let's not pump the baby out with the bilge water. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:39 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com