Anti Fouling Paint Manufacturers Taking Aim At California Hull Cleaners

[foggysail]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

Frankly, I really can't see any difference between what the shipyard did by discharging boat wash runoff into the bay.... and what divers do when they scrape off the same growth and paint layers as they dive and "clean" the underside of a boat. Basically, the local EPA authorities penalized the "Rich businessman" who owns the boatyard for doing what the bottom scrubber divers do everyday.

To the marine environment... there's no difference.

It would make so much more sense to simply use a bottom paint product that can be left alone to do it's job, which is to repel marine growth; then just simply hose off any residual growth once a year during the annual haul out.... But we can't do that without being fined by the EPA. Total absurd nonsense.

I also see little difference between wash water and water conditions after bottom wash. I have attached the URL for interest where the described waste water contains the very things bottom washing produces.

07/02/2012: Fairhaven Shipyard Companies, Inc. to Pay $175,000 to Resolve Violations of the Clean Water Act

So now the shipyard discharges the stuff into the town's sewage system and when the town gets backed up, IT DISCHARGES DIRECTLY INTO THE HARBOR! CRAZY

[nimblemotors]

The problem with California is it has too many people here, too many boats.
Pollution, toxic chemicals, smog, leaded gasoline, etc, etc, are no big deal until you have 38 million people. It was OK in 1940, when we had 7 million, or maybe even 1960 15 million.

So could 30 million of you please go somewhere else?

Baja Sur is nice, they only have 600,000 people. Fishing is good.
When Cabo has 6 million, they might need some government regulation.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by Dsanduril

However, the written definition of those practices is so poor (and this tends to be deliberate) that another diver doing all the things you consider "wrong" could easily defend his/her activity using the same BMPs ("a brown pad was the softest 'practical' pad for the job" - where "practical" means "it's what I had in my truck").

The CPDA is not a police organization, it is an educational one. All we can do is provide the diver with the information. Whether he chooses to use it or not is up to him. A diver like the one you describe is going to probably provide his customers with poor service no matter what information he has at hand, regardless of how the BMPs are written. BTW- our certification course is 6 hours long and must be renewed every 2 years. There is nothing else comparable to it in this country.

Originally Posted by Dsanduril

I don't even espouse additional regulation as the solution, I just don't care for trotting out BMPs as something to hide behind. They were created by, and are used by the very organizations/factions that you started this thread to complain about.

I'm complaining about the paint manufacturers and their lobbyists, and to a lesser extent, the DPR. None of whom had anything to do with creating a requirement for in-water hull cleaning BMPs.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by foggysail

I'll share what happened last year where I docked. The local shipyard was fined by the EPA $175K for allowing boat wash runoff to enter the bay. The cry from the environmentalists was "WHY WAS THE FINE SOOO SMALL???" As if THEY had to pony up any money. The EPA responded that a larger fine would be beyond the shipyard's ability to pay.

RESULTS!!!! The shipyard raised their rates for the 2013 season, some by footage rate increases and others by increasing the minimum rate for the docks. YEAH!!!! So now they will have enough money to pay their employees????

NO!!!! As I type this, that yard has lost over 40 slip contracts (I think the actual number is 48) for the upcoming season. The total number of slips at the yard is 146 so the yard has 1/3 of its slips now VACANT and last fall they had a waiting list!!! I have no privy to the yard's financial position. If they fail, a great marina risks becoming another condo complex.

Bring it on DO GOODERS, WE REALLY DON'T NEED SMALL BUSINESSES AS LONG AS THERE ARE FOOD STAMPS AVAILABLE!!!!

After reading the EPA press release, it seems as if Fairhaven Shipyards were flagrantly violating the law for years, law that every other boatyard in the country is required to comply with. I'd say they made their own bed and got what they deserved.

[Dsanduril]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

I'm complaining about the paint manufacturers and their lobbyists, and to a lesser extent, the DPR. None of whom had anything to do with creating a requirement for in-water hull cleaning BMPs.

The manufacturers and lobbyists are the ones who got BMPs written into regulations, so that industries could create their own rules rather than having regulators do that for them. Even your CPDA recognizes exactly that - if CPDA can get 75% "voluntary" adoption of their BMPs they can avoid regulatory intervention. You don't even have to read between the lines (because it is plainly stated) to see that the CPDA BMPs were created with the hope that divers could avoid possibly more draconian regulatory requirements. The CPDA is using the BMPs, and the process behind them, in an attempt to avoid regulatory intervention, just the same as all of the rest of the lobbyists and special interests, and just the same as the paint companies are using those tools to try and push the divers under the bus.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by Dsanduril

The manufacturers and lobbyists are the ones who got BMPs written into regulations, so that industries could create their own rules rather than having regulators do that for them. Even your CPDA recognizes exactly that - if CPDA can get 75% "voluntary" adoption of their BMPs they can avoid regulatory intervention. You don't even have to read between the lines (because it is plainly stated) to see that the CPDA BMPs were created with the hope that divers could avoid possibly more draconian regulatory requirements. The CPDA is using the BMPs, and the process behind them, in an attempt to avoid regulatory intervention, just the same as all of the rest of the lobbyists and special interests, and just the same as the paint companies are using those tools to try and push the divers under the bus.

While I don't know if lobbyists were involved in the writing of the NPS program (long before my involvement in the issue), it is true that BMPs are in place to hopefully stave off stricter measures. Unfortunately, the state has never enforced the BMP requirement (despite our best attempts to get them to do so) and most of the participation in them (about 25% of California hull cleaners) has been voluntary. We may soon feel the effects of that indifference.

[sageofsalem]

I read in rapt amazement to the "back and forth" going on here and am simply thankful I moved my Morgan out of the U.S. six years ago. In Guatemala, it costs me $40 to have my 39 foot waterline scrubbed clean at my guy's place out in the boonies,($50 if they have to motor up 40 min. in their lancha to do the cleaning in the dirty water around Fronteras).

Listening to you folks tussle about the government brings back bad memories. I feel sorry you all have to suffer instead of sail and sincerely wish you "better days."

[foggysail]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

After reading the EPA press release, it seems as if Fairhaven Shipyards were flagrantly violating the law for years, law that every other boatyard in the country is required to comply with. I'd say they made their own bed and got what they deserved.

Yeah, Fast, they did the same things you currently do, allow bottom wash to enter the harbor/bay....until your environmental extremist friends put a stop to your actions. You see, it is easy to accuse others until others start accusing you of essentially doing the same misdeeds. As I stated earlier, it is easy to scream for environmentalism until it comes to your goat being gored!

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by foggysail

Yeah, Fast, they did the same things you currently do, allow bottom wash to enter the harbor/bay...

Here's the difference- I'm not breaking the law.

[foggysail]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

Here's the difference- I'm not breaking the law.

The end result is the same. I thought that you environmentalists only cared about the end result. If there were no laws prohibiting an unpopular action, you would lobby, protest, organize, display civil disobedience until "proper" laws were enacted. OH... but that is what might happen now in California... a new law that will prohibit bottom washing!

[S/V Illusion]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

Here's the difference- I'm not breaking the law.

Only because what you do is not considered a point source discharge. Otherwise, it is exactly the same with equivalent effects. The only distinction is how you rationalize it being your only source of income trumping environmental concerns which is the reason such rules are being considered.

It's often difficult to look past one's perceptions when those perceptions are based on and colored with money. Evidence the original post...

[SVNeko]

Is it possible to unsubscribe from a thread?

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by SVNeko

Is it possible to unsubscribe from a thread?

Yes. Click on "Quick Links" and scroll down to "Subscribed Threads." Click on that, select the thread you want and at the bottom of the page you are presented with the option to unsubscribe from it.

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

Here's the difference- I'm not breaking the law.

But soon you will. Laws change to plug the leaks.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

But soon you will.

You're a bitter, bitter man, aren't you?