Fight "blended pollution"

[hoz]

http://www.americanwhitewater.org/archive/article/1044/

pls send the letter :D

[George Roberts]

Before anyone sends a letter we need some discussion.

Most places I paddle, I have seen paddlers relieve themselves within "writing" distance of the water.

It seems a bit much to argue that the visitors (paddlers) have more right to blend than the residents (sewage plant users).

[Meerkat]

IMO this really belongs in the Bilge.

What percentage of a town or city do paddlers make?

[Ian McColgin]

A Sioux friend of mine says, "Never trust the water downstream of a white man."

And there's a lovely little book - Title won't get past this board's filtre but it's something like "How to #*%^ in the Woods."

That's really the issue. Guardia and other feces spread problems are major issues in the overcrowded parts of our 'wilderness' and all stream users should be conscious.

I don't think taking a whizz while swimming will hurt the stream and one of the great pleasures of being a man . . .

Like the old joke about God giving out the gifts and powers to Adam and Eve.

God: Well folks, I have just two things left. The first is which of you wants to be able to take a whizz over running water or off high places?"

Adam: (Leaping around and waving hands) Me. ME! I want that one. Oh please . . .

God: OK. You got it. SO Eve, guess you're stuck with the multiple orgasms.

Anyway. No debate here. Even if a few paddlers and beer laden rafters and hikers take their ease too close to the stream, it's nothing compared to returning to the dirty days of yore. The very idea is a complete disgrace.

[Bruce Hooke]

Originally posted by George Roberts:
Before anyone sends a letter we need some discussion.

Most places I paddle, I have seen paddlers relieve themselves within "writing" distance of the water.

It seems a bit much to argue that the visitors (paddlers) have more right to blend than the residents (sewage plant users).Ummm....there's a SLIGHT volume difference between a few paddlers relieving themselves too close to a river and a sewage treatment plant that serves an entire city! And volume is critical in this matter -- most rivers can easily get rid of the results of a few paddlers relieving themselves, but cannot do anything but send downstream the outflow of a sewage treatment plant. Using the river gauge on my local river I can see a daily fluctuation in the water level between night and day. I'm fairly certain that this is the result of an upstream sewage treatment plant's discharges into the river. It would take a LOT of paddlers relieving themselves into the river to produce visible river level changes!

[NormMessinger]

Interesting. When I was looking in to canoeing part of the Green River in Wyoming last year I found their rules (NPS, BLM & USFS) to say, pee in the river and pack everything else out. Of course, there the river is already discolored.

[George Roberts]

Bruce Hooke ---

My issue is not with volume. It is with fairness.

Is it fair for you to relieve yourself in my front yard and then complain that because I relieve myself there you may get sick?

NO!

Is it fair to require vast expenses by a city so that a few padders can play in the water one extra day each year?

NO!

[Meerkat]

Is it fair to require vast expenses by a city so that anybody can play in the water any day each year?

YES!

[Bruce Hooke]

George,

You make a not unreasonably point if the only impact was on whitewater paddlers, but I think you are misinterpreting the potential impacts based on the source of the information. For dedicted whitewater paddlers the impact discussed on the America Whitewater web site is clearly important, so that is what an organization dedicated to that sport is going to focus on. However, the potential impacts of this are MUCH broader than just causing problems for a few paddlers. For example:

1. Children often like to play near and in rivers and streams. I know I did as a child. Days when there had just been a heavy rainfall were particularly exciting because the water level was higher. I am very familiar with this issue because there is a river near my house that is often impacted by sewage issues during heavy rainfall. This river flows right past a number of urban city parks popular with children so it is a constant struggle to try to keep them from playing in the river. Note that the contamination levels stay high for a number of days after a heavy rain so where are not talking about kids playing in the rain here, just in the day or two after the rain. Also, this river is small so it is not otherwise that dangerous for kids to play near it.

2. Because we have to post all sorts of signs saying don't go in the water, don't eat fish from this river, etc. the general impression created is that the river is a dump. This seems to encourage people to feel like they can add their own trash to the river. The end result is a dirty, ugly, smelly, dangerous river that is an economic liability to the neighborhoods that it passes through.

3. Adding sewage to rivers greatly increases the nutrient levels in the river thus encouraging algea blooms, fish kills and so on. Too much sewage in a river will make it pretty near uninhabitable for many fish and other aquatic life and can have a very negative impact on downstream water bodies including salt water bays and estuaries.

So, for a variety of public health and environmental reasons this plan sounds like a bad idea to me.

[Bruce Hooke]

For those who are interested here is the official notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) and the request for comments:

http://www.epa.gov/npdes/regulations/blending_fr_notice.pdf

It starts in the third column of the first page and carries on for the next 11 pages. If I can find the time I will probably be trying to read this and make sense of it this weekend.

[casem]

I'll send the letter. I do a lot of wade fishing and the last thing I want to see while out fishing (in addition to the plethora of cans/bottles/tires/tennis balls etc) is a bunch of human turds floating by.

[Bruce Hooke]

Originally posted by casem:
I'll send the letter. I do a lot of wade fishing and the last thing I want to see while out fishing (in addition to the plethora of cans/bottles/tires/tennis balls etc) is a bunch of human turds floating by.Just to keep the record straight -- I'd be very surprised if this legislation allows the discharge of "solids" so I doubt you would see the "evidence" floating by. That said, fishing in sewage still does not sound like a nice idea!

n.b. I expect you were speaking metaphorically regarding what you might see floating by, but I figured I would make sure that others were not misled.

[casem]

Yes I really need to use those little faces when I'm not entirely serious so people don't miss my subtle wit :rolleyes: . Of course if I were to really send the letter I'd study the issue more carefully with special regard to the points the above posts have mentioned.

However I do enjoy wade fishing. And I used to fish a small river that I eventually found out had a sewer treatment plant on it. Their discharge was I think limited to a small stream maybe three feet across that was crystal clear, but had a distinct bleach smell to it.

[Paul Scheuer]

It's worth pointing out that heavy rains put all streams and watersheds in flush mode, regardless of any partially treated extra from treatment plants. All of the industrial stuff from roads, etc., the natural and unnatural nutrients from the yards and other flora, not to mention the bear's and other fauna's contributions. The message has always been, don't drink the water. If you cut yourself, treat it as an infected wound. Even the pristine waters up north are only a few hours away, as the ducks fly, from the rust belt.

[Art Read]

LOL! Ain't any of you all taken a look at say, the city of Victoria, B.C.'s idea of "sewage treatment" lately? :rolleyes:

[Jack Heinlen]

Hmm. As an ol' ex-inspector of turd turners, (sewage treatment plants for the uninitiated)I've always been much more concerned about what industrial/military sites are putting in the stream. Old fashioned shite really is fairly innocuous(bees do it, whales do it, even educated environmentalists do it), especially if diluted by lots of water. But heavy metals, PCBS, radiation and the like are another matter. I've got some good horror stories, but will save them.

And, of course, there is a crossover, with some effluents from city plants laden with the nasties.

It's an interesting matter, so to speak, but don't panic. The water is cleaner than it was when I first became interested in such things. The town I grew up in routinely dumped human sewage that had only been though the most cursory treatment, into the river that flowed through town. I remember watching toilet paper, condoms and tampons cascade out of a big pipe and flow away. I've got pictures somewhere.

[ 12-05-2003, 10:03 PM: Message edited by: Jack Heinlen ]

[George Roberts]

Bruce Hooke, Meerkat ---

I am certainly in favor of clean water everyday for everyone.

But that is not always a reasonable goal. Where it is a reasnable goal, a single mandate may not be the best solution for every problem.

I am in favor of local solutions.

[Bruce Hooke]

While local control sounds nice I see a number of problems with it:

1. If the first city on a river decides to dump sewage into the river then every city and town downstream from there gets the results. These other cities and towns may well be in a different state and thus have little political power to force action by the upstream city without the leverage of the Federal government.

2. Each city is likely to argue, we can't afford to do that because X nearby city isn't and if we raise our tax rates to build a better sewage system then the businesses here will leave town. The end result is a race to the bottom...which town and state can put the least restrictions on business.

3. Local control on a matter like this can easily mean that people with political clout decide that it doesn't matter what happens to the river in the poor, inner-city neighborhood. As long as the nice river in their pretty suburban town is fine who cares what's happening in the city.

That said, the ideal in my mind would be a system that allowed for intelligent flexibility without such flexibility becoming, as it usually does, simply a license to polute all the time. But I'm not sure how to achieve that end.

[Bruce Hooke]

Jack,

You've hit on an important point there. While sewage makes my local river unsafe for human contact a lot of the time, the river won't really be clean until we deal with the dioxin contamination and with other heavy metals in the sediment. That said, cutting back on the sewage will make a big difference and a project is underway to do just that.

We have made a lot of progress from the days when the river used to turn different colors depending on what color fabric the nearest mill was dying that day.

If anyone wants to know why I care some much about this -- I am a member of the Watershed Council that is working to clean up my local river. This is our website: Woonasquatucket River Watershed Council (http://www.woonasquatucket.org).

[Jack Heinlen]

It's been quite awhile since I jumped in the middle of this, but I suspect things haven't changed much in twenty five years.

In most venues, by far the biggest threats are military(not well regulated, and in some cases not at all) and industrial(able to buy their way out, one way and another). They are the worst polluters. Shite disolves to shite; mercury, PCBs etc have a way of hanging around.

[ 12-06-2003, 12:24 AM: Message edited by: Jack Heinlen ]

[jwaldin]

Yup the city of Victoria pumps it's sewage right out into the Staits. It's a great idea. There is no pathogens etc. (the things that live in turds that give us hepititus A/B) that can live in salt water. The whole myth of recycling, sewage treatment is just that. For example, the glass etc. that people put into their blue boxes on Vancouver Island is simply put on barges and those barges are 'tipped' out in the Straits. It's way too expensive to truck the stuff to a land fill in Landner.
The 'solids' removed in sewage treatment is 'recycled' not incinerated. It's 'treated' with chemicals. Imagine how strong they have to be and what happens to them in the process?

[jwaldin]

Oh ya. This is basically a spam from a special interest group. This is no different than a retailer who wants to sell something. This is not the forum for that. Whoever posted this should have done it on the non related forum. So my opinion regarding who 'miterates' when and where is PISS OFF!

[Bruce Hooke]

jwaldin,

While the pathogens may not be able to survive in salt water the nutrients do just fine and under the right conditions these nutrients can case algea blooms that in turn cause major fish kills. Something along those lines happened this past summer in Narragansett Bay. At the least the nutrients can cause the nearby waterfront mud flats to smell so bad that nobody wants to go anywhere near them. Also, the excessive sewage input into upper Narragansett Bay has closed the shellfish beds in the upper bay for many years now so there are clearly some pathogens that make it into the salt water and into the shelfish.

That said, the Straits out there may be flushed well enough so that the ecosystem can handle the sewage input without creating major problems. This is where some intelligent flexibility is called for.

[Bruce Hooke]

Originally posted by jwaldin:
Oh ya. This is basically a spam from a special interest group. This is no different than a retailer who wants to sell something. This is not the forum for that. Whoever posted this should have done it on the non related forum. So my opinion regarding who 'miterates' when and where is PISS OFF!I'm not sure what you mean by your last sentance (what does 'miterates' mean?), but you do raise a valid point. This thread does belong in the miscellaneous non-boat related area. I believe if the person who started this thread dropped a note to Scot it could be moved there.

[Jack Heinlen]

Um, hmm. I don't know, but give me a pond eutrophic, over one that is a settling pond for Dow Chemical, anyday.

[TimH]

The cabin I lived in you in the mountains had no water cept for pumping it out of the creak that went through my yard coming down off of Pilchuck. I drank, bathed, cooked, etc in this water for 3 years. never once got sick. And the wildlife used to come in the spring and net/ record the kinds and quantity of fish he would find. nothing like waking up in the morning with a huge snow-capped peak in your front yard!

[jwaldin]

I may not have the spelling correct but 'miterate' is the act of 'voiding' as described in the great movie The Great Lebowski. One of my top ten greatest movies of all time.

[jwaldin]

The Big Lebowski

[jwaldin]

Yes, Juan de Fuca Straight has a very strong tide flow. Ten and twelve foot tides are common and the sewage is moved out into very fast/deep water daily. This is not to suggest that the citys' solution is perfect. What is?

[jwaldin]

I daresay every square inch of the planet has been peed on by animals, just like you and me, for millenia. What's better, to pee on the ground, in the woods or in a river, or to use a couple of gallons of water, containing a cup or two of pee, in the toilet that is flushed eventually into the ground water aquafer?
Where would they have us pee in a perfect world?
I say "Let the people Pee"!

[Bob Smalser]

It's an interesting matter, so to speak, but don't panic. The water is cleaner than it was when I first became interested in such things. The town I grew up in routinely dumped human sewage that had only been though the most cursory treatment, into the river that flowed through town. I remember watching toilet paper, condoms and tampons cascade out of a big pipe and flow away. I've got pictures somewhere.
I'm surprised Jack didn't point out that during stormwater overflow, many municipal systems wind up with sewage contamination in the stormwater...where it all runs into the streams.

Hard to sort out the EPA gobbledygook in the Federal Register...and I'm a biologist, too...but sounds like this initiative is to ameliorate this problem, resulting in a net decrease of contaminants in stream systems.

Many places I've lived to do get raw sewage in stormwater during heavy rains anyway....if this initiative results in a net decrease of that contamination over the course of, say, a year, then what's wrong with it?

I saw a study once that stormproofing this state's municipal systems would cost so many billions that the problem is simply ignored.

Hey, Jack...jump in.

[jwaldin]

I remember trout fishing as a kid in the Bow River just above the Banff Springs Hotel. Each time I reeled my line in I had to pull off the toilet paper.

[Jack Heinlen]

Hey, Jack...jump in. I believe I have.

Any town that isn't doing at least secondary sewage treatment of their human waste is in need of money.

----------------------------------------------

I've told this story before, so the old hands can ignore me. I worked, for a summer, at a place that would set your hair on end.

It was originally a military reserve, about a thousand acres, near Lewistion, NY. Purchased by the Army to develope big bangs, around the time of WWI. It went on to process much of the uranium that went into Fat Man, or was it Little Boy, I don't remember. Which was the uranium and which was the plutonium bomb? I think it was Fat Man.

When I got there is was truly a mess. I was part of a team hired to assess the place.

There were buildings with highly radioactive materials, that had no roofs, and had groundwater flowing through. There were acres with designations like, "New Navy Dump", with no documentation. There were feral dogs, whelping pups in some of the buildings. The contracted site manager was clearly Mafia, and sold the site's pumping station to the highest bidder, to pump whatever you could pay for directly into the Niagra River.

Where's Whitley Strieber when you need him?

I'm sorry to say it was still a mess when I left.

I guess my point is that it isn't very clean, what you are talking about.

[hoz]

Sorry for the trouble jwaldin, I don't consider this spam of any sort, and I am not affilated with any special intrest groups.

I thot it was boat related since I have never had or even seen a boat that did not float in water. All boat owners should be concerned about the quality of our water, be it creeks, rivers or seas.

I don't know how to drop the owner a line, but if he wants to move this post to "the bilge" it's fine with me.

[ 12-06-2003, 05:20 PM: Message edited by: hoz ]