World Wide Pump Out?

[JPA Cate]

Ya know, 44'cruising cat, for all there may be truth in the joke, I haven't heard reported here in Oz the skin staph infections that used to occur to swimmers in Kaneohe Bay, HI. Our whole family was infected, and the docs were all well aware of the problem. I'm thnking the dilution is more effective at Bondi.

Ann

[Uncle Bob]

Originally Posted by JPA Cate

Ya know, 44'cruising cat, for all there may be truth in the joke, I haven't heard reported here in Oz the skin staph infections that used to occur to swimmers in Kaneohe Bay, HI. Our whole family was infected, and the docs were all well aware of the problem. I'm thnking the dilution is more effective at Bondi.

Ann

I guess we can pay homage to the east australian current, good for more than just going south.

[South Bound]

Originally Posted by michaelratinter

I believe the entire Baltic Sea is a no discharge zone.

In most countries around the Baltic Sea the no discharge zone is 12 miles. And there are still areas where discharge is not very much regulated or at least not controlled in any way. In Finland there are about 250 pump out stations along the Baltic coast and Åland islands, so with a decent size tank it shouldn't be a problem to get from one station to the next.

Cruise ships and ferries will not be allowed to discharge anywhere in the Baltic Sea as of 2019 plus a transition period for older ships. About time, as sadly it's not a very clean sea. Most of the local ships already comply with the future regulations, however, which is a good thing.

[44'cruisingcat]

I thought the situation at Bondi was much improved. The outfall is further out to sea, and I had the impression that the release of untreated sewage was pretty rare these days.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by peghall

To get back to the original question...Turkey is the only nation I know of that rigidly enforces their NDZ regs...they do it from the air, looking for cloudy water around a vessel that indicates a dumped tank, and the fines if you get caught are huge. Never mind that there isn't a single pumpout anywhere in Turkey...making necessary to up anchor and leave Turkey's territorial waters the only way to empty a tank.

Minor correction --

It's not at all true that "there isn't a single pumpout anywhere in Turkey".

Maybe there are not enough of them, but there are quite a few. Pretty much all commercial marinas on the Aegean coast have pumpout stations (but few of the municipal harbors and marinas do), and in places like Gocek and Bodrum, there are free municipal facilities, and in some places there is even a pumpout boat which will come to you where you are anchored.

Where the pumpout facilities are inadequate, the marinas will stamp your Blue Card as if you had pumped out, and you discretely dump at sea. Away from the beaches, please.

Black water is really not a big deal in Turkey; I would say less of a hassle than in the U.S. where very aggressive enforcement takes place including even dye put down toilets. In Turkey, enforcement consists only of checking Blue Cards and possibly observing for visible discharges during daylight. In my opinion a much bigger problem is gray water in the limited areas where the prohibition on gray water discharge is enforced.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by South Bound

In most countries around the Baltic Sea the no discharge zone is 12 miles. And there are still areas where discharge is not very much regulated or at least not controlled in any way. In Finland there are about 250 pump out stations along the Baltic coast and Åland islands, so with a decent size tank it shouldn't be a problem to get from one station to the next.

Cruise ships and ferries will not be allowed to discharge anywhere in the Baltic Sea as of 2019 plus a transition period for older ships. About time, as sadly it's not a very clean sea. Most of the local ships already comply with the future regulations, however, which is a good thing.

The approach to black water discharge in the Baltic is a very enlightened one.

As far as I know, there is no aggressive enforcement anywhere -- it's more of an honor system.

Instead of aggressive enforcement, efforts to encourage sailors to pump out rather than discharge in the sea are concentrated on gentle persuasion, education, and provision of excellent pump out facilities. Most boats don't have holding tanks, and tolerance is shown towards their owners, but the good sense of Nordic good citizenship means that many sailors are voluntarily retrofitting their boats.

Finland has the best pumpout facilities I have ever seen -- available everywhere, even in tiny harbors like Hamina, which can only take 10 boats or so. Always modern and in good order. In Finland, there are even FLOATING pumpout stations in popular anchorages.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Kokanee

Why do you say it isn't because of fellow cruisers? It happens because of the sum total of crap that flows into the ocean. Cruisers may only contribute a small percentage, but they are still part of the problem.

Just blaming the problem on a bigger source doesn't cut it.

Yes, but there should be some proportionality.

It's considered OK for municipalities to dump billions of liters of raw sewage, because it would cost X per liter to prevent such discharges by retrofitting the sewage treatment plants.

Yet we are asked to spend Y per liter -- probably 1,000,000 times more -- to prevent our very small discharges. And if we fail, we are fined Q per liter -- probably 1,000,000 times more than the fines paid by municipalities, if they are fined at all.

It's not at all proportional, and it's right to point it out.


A very small amount of discharge from yachts, made a reasonable distance from the shore, maybe one mile, or certainly no more than 3 miles, has absolutely no effect on water quality whatsoever, and should not be prohibited at all. The rules in many countries, especially the U.S. are not reasonable and not proportional at all.

Ships are allowed to discharge huge quantities of sewage, unlimited quantities, a certain distance offshore. This is no burden as that distance offshore is within their normal operating area. The same distance, which will be far outside the normal operating range of most yachts, should not be applied to us, who are discharging tiny quantities.

The rules on black water discharge are designed to be not burdensome, for municipalities, as well as for ships. The same consideration is not shown to us, and this is not right. If we were allowed to collect black water in holding tanks and dump it a mile offshore, whenever pumping out is not convenient, and to discharge directly whenever we are a mile or more offshore, this would solve all water quality issues, while relieving us of a major burden.

In the UK, there are no restrictions at all on discharging black water other than in harbors according to local regulations, or near beaches. There is no requirement to have a holding tank. This enlightened policy is the result of a huge study on pleasure boat discharges and water quality done by the RYA for Parliament, which proved that our discharges do not cause any significant problem with water quality. Caveat here is that UK waters are strongly tidal, with strong tidal flushing action, so the results of this study cannot be directly translated to all other countries, and especially not places like Med and Baltic without any tidal flushing at all.

[Catapault]

Originally Posted by peghall

To get back to the original question...Turkey is the only nation I know of that rigidly enforces their NDZ regs...they do it from the air, looking for cloudy water around a vessel that indicates a dumped tank, and the fines if you get caught are huge. Never mind that there isn't a single pumpout anywhere in Turkey...making necessary to up anchor and leave Turkey's territorial waters the only way to empty a tank.

There are MANY pump out places in Turkey, especially on the South coast.

The blue card system is in use, and they record how much you pump out on it. Coastguard can and do check them.

It is, like many things, 'variably enforced'....

[Sandibar]

Originally Posted by South Bound

In most countries around the Baltic Sea the no discharge zone is 12 miles. And there are still areas where discharge is not very much regulated or at least not controlled in any way. In Finland there are about 250 pump out stations along the Baltic coast and Åland islands, so with a decent size tank it shouldn't be a problem to get from one station to the next.

Cruise ships and ferries will not be allowed to discharge anywhere in the Baltic Sea as of 2019 plus a transition period for older ships. About time, as sadly it's not a very clean sea. Most of the local ships already comply with the future regulations, however, which is a good thing.

As an answer to the original question: In Finland, AFAIK if you have a toilet on your boat, then a holding tank is mandatory as well. Not sure any authority actually enforces this.

By the way South Bound, is your boat wintering at the MST dock in Turku? Because a Bluebird 25 (I think) was put in water right after our boat two weeks ago there .

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by michaelratinter

I believe the entire Baltic Sea is a no discharge zone.

Certainly not in the sense we use the term "no discharge".

HELCOM is gradually banning the discharge of sewage from IMO registered passenger ships.

But pleasure vessels in the Baltic continue to operate under MARPOL 73/78 Annex IV, as revised, so are allowed to discharge treated waste 3 miles offshore and untreated waste 12 miles offshore, subject to any contrary regulation of littoral states applying to their territorial waters.

There are no general restrictions on the discharge of gray water, as we have in our "no discharge zones".

[ramblinrod]

Originally Posted by Delancey

Just curious as to what nations beside the US require boats to have holding tanks? There must be others, we can't be the only ones to legislate poop.

Europe? Australia? New Zealand? The rest of the world probably not would be my guess.

These discussions never cease to amaze me.

We sail in the Great Lakes and have sailed in the Chesapeake, Pamlico Sound, Florida Keys and Panhandle.

In our homewaters we are required to use shore side pump out facilities. When we have travelled these other areas we have never had trouble finding pump out facilities as needed (5 gallon holding tank).

Now before others light up that there are no working facilities in other areas, what is the problem? Attempting to keep water clean is a good thing. Fix the problem.

Some people seem so narcissistic about their
God given right to poop in the water others wish to swim in.

I certainly understand the frustration of citizens who must control their boat poop discharge when municipalities discharge (at least under fault conditons). The solution is to stop this, not add to it. Take your local politicians to task.
Start a campaign - Make a video of small children playing in the water at a beach with turds and used condoms and tampons floating by, or draped over their head when the surface from a dive.

Shame the politician in office. You know the contender will jump on it.

I know this won't happen, cause JOHN Q. who doesn't swim where he anchors wishes to preserve the right to crap wherever and on whoever they please.

[Tkeeth]

Looks like with the current progression, I'll have to take a bathroom out of the boat to put a holding tank big enough to hold the black and grey water.......

[hzcruiser]

Originally Posted by guyrj33

Can you make a small slit in the top of the bladder and insert a hose to pump out the bladder?

Sounds like a splendid idea! Please keep the camera rolling while doing that and SHARE!

[peghall]

There are no general restrictions on the discharge of gray water, as we have in our "no discharge zones".

"No discharge" only applies to sewage (toilet waste aka "black water"). Gray water (galley, bath and shower water) may legally be discharged in all US inland and coastal waters except for less than half a dozen inland lakes and some small exceptionally sensitive areas of the FL Keys National Marine Sanctuary that are clearly indicated on charts where not even bilge water can go overboard, only cooling water">engine cooling water.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by ramblinrod

These discussions never cease to amaze me.

We sail in the Great Lakes and have sailed in the Chesapeake, Pamlico Sound, Florida Keys and Panhandle.

In our homewaters we are required to use shore side pump out facilities. When we have travelled these other areas we have never had trouble finding pump out facilities as needed (5 gallon holding tank).

Now before others light up that there are no working facilities in other areas, what is the problem? Attempting to keep water clean is a good thing. Fix the problem.

Some people seem so narcissistic about their
God given right to poop in the water others wish to swim in.

I certainly understand the frustration of citizens who must control their boat poop discharge when municipalities discharge (at least under fault conditons). The solution is to stop this, not add to it. Take your local politicians to task.
Start a campaign - Make a video of small children playing in the water at a beach with turds and used condoms and tampons floating by, or draped over their head when the surface from a dive.

Shame the politician in office. You know the contender will jump on it.

I know this won't happen, cause JOHN Q. who doesn't swim where he anchors wishes to preserve the right to crap wherever and on whoever they please.

A rational view of this question requires some idea of proportionality.

Otherwise we might pass a law requiring every person to purchase and use an apparatus to capture their farts, rather than releasing them into the atmosphere, with huge fines or jail sentences for those who pollute the air with their farts contrary to law.

Why is there no such law? Because the farts of even 6 billion people are easily dissipated into the huge mass of our atmosphere, and do no harm (cow farts might be a different subject).

Same thing with the liquid and solid waste of a few thousand seafarers in the ocean. It is an extremely tiny volume of organic material which is easily dissipated into the huge volume of the ocean. In fact, it's a much smaller problem than farts in the atmosphere.

A rational community might make exceptions in parts of the sea which are very close to where people are swimming, where notwithstanding the huge volume of the sea, some harm might result from our discharges.

But any such regulation should be rational and should be based on an objective, scientific view of the harm or potential harm caused, seen in view of the costs of mitigating the potential harm, JUST LIKE it's done with regard to municipal waste systems, which is why this is not irrelevant.

Not indeed on the basis of emotion and disgust, without regard for the objective facts of the situation, like here.