trawlers@lists.trawlering.com

TRAWLERS & TRAWLERING LIST

View all threads

TWL: More Environmental Wackiness

AH
Alex Hirsekorn
Tue, Dec 3, 2002 5:45 AM

HiHo Running Dog Capitalist/Imperialist Mercenaries,

Just Kidding!!!

So far a few people have said that they liked my post, one questioned my conclusions, a
couple of folks just wish we'd all shut the h*ll up and two people want to know where the
Feiro Marine Life Center is. Pretty diverse response. In deference to those who want this
topic to go away I'll try to keep this short. [In fact, I wouldn't post this at all except
that through a missed snipping opportunity Kurt got to have his say twice.]

First, the Feiro Marine Life Center is a sort of miniature aquarium similar to the one in
Poulsbo that's adjacent to the Trawler Fest area. Feiro is in Port Angeles on what is now
called the "City Pier"; if you're coming by land it's located at the foot of Lincoln
Street (the main North-South arterial in town); if you're coming by sea City Pier is the
easternmost pier in the harbor if you don't count the Rayonier facility which is
undergoing remediation as a superfund site. During the summer there is a couple hundred
feet of guest moorage available but the Port of Port Angeles has shown a rather cavalier
attitude toward when they put the floats in place and when they remove them - If you're
coming by sea drop me a line and I'll let you know if there's anyplace to tie up. BTW:
Feiro is closed for the season right now but will reopen in early May.

FWIW: I'm intending to write up a review of sorts for this moorage one of these days - The
dockage is fairly primitive but oh boy are there some terrific restaurants within an easy
walk! If and when I get around to that project I'll try to include lat/long figures for
it.

Just as Kurt isn't a total Capitalist lackey neither am I a traditional tree hugger. Last
year I was almost thrown out of a book signing for saying that I thought Port Angeles
could have had an environmentally safe oil transshipment facility rather than what they
got, which was nothing. Compromise just isn't a very popular stance when you're dealing
with "True Believers" of any stripe.

On to the environmental stuff. Kurt asks if I think that copper is really the problem and
goes on to cite several other sources of schmutz that can cause problems.

My answer is that copper bottom paint is A problem but not the only problem by any means.
All of the things Kurt mentioned (Sewage, detergents, oil/fuel, fertilizer/pesticide
runoff, etc.), the stray current that Arild mentioned, the shadows cast by the floats
(affects the movement of baby fish), and probably some things that haven't even been
noticed yet are all problems worthy of consideration. In fact, in our area the number one
cause for concern among environmental professionals is failing septic systems. It was,
however, bottom paint that started this thread so that's what I elected to discuss. As
Kurt points out the Hard bottom paints are significantly better for the environment.
Ablative copper bottom paints on the other hand are going to be hard on benthic
invertebrates by design: You've got a coating that's impregnated with copper and is
designed to slough off as time goes on in order to continually expose fresh copper. As the
coating ablates copper is sinking to the bottom and it's the bottom that, under normal
conditions, harbors the most life in terms of both biomass and diversity. Copper bottom
paints are not the only pollution problem and they probably aren't even in the top ten of
the worst problems but, just as we're advised against letting the best be the enemy of the
good, neither should we allow the worst to be the enemy of the bad. At the beginning of
this discussion it was suggested that we "be very afraid" that a new safer bottom paint
was being tested that doesn't last as long as existing paints. I disagree; rather than
fearing such a development why not contact the principles and say "Congratulations!
Exciting idea! You need to make the product last longer or we can't afford to use it."

I have said it here before: If we, as boaters, don't take a pro-active stance on these
matters we will lose any chance to affect our own destiny.

Wackily yours,

Alex

HiHo Running Dog Capitalist/Imperialist Mercenaries, Just Kidding!!! So far a few people have said that they liked my post, one questioned my conclusions, a couple of folks just wish we'd all shut the h*ll up and two people want to know where the Feiro Marine Life Center is. Pretty diverse response. In deference to those who want this topic to go away I'll try to keep this short. [In fact, I wouldn't post this at all except that through a missed snipping opportunity Kurt got to have his say twice.] First, the Feiro Marine Life Center is a sort of miniature aquarium similar to the one in Poulsbo that's adjacent to the Trawler Fest area. Feiro is in Port Angeles on what is now called the "City Pier"; if you're coming by land it's located at the foot of Lincoln Street (the main North-South arterial in town); if you're coming by sea City Pier is the easternmost pier in the harbor if you don't count the Rayonier facility which is undergoing remediation as a superfund site. During the summer there is a couple hundred feet of guest moorage available but the Port of Port Angeles has shown a rather cavalier attitude toward when they put the floats in place and when they remove them - If you're coming by sea drop me a line and I'll let you know if there's anyplace to tie up. BTW: Feiro is closed for the season right now but will reopen in early May. FWIW: I'm intending to write up a review of sorts for this moorage one of these days - The dockage is fairly primitive but oh boy are there some terrific restaurants within an easy walk! If and when I get around to that project I'll try to include lat/long figures for it. Just as Kurt isn't a total Capitalist lackey neither am I a traditional tree hugger. Last year I was almost thrown out of a book signing for saying that I thought Port Angeles could have had an environmentally safe oil transshipment facility rather than what they got, which was nothing. Compromise just isn't a very popular stance when you're dealing with "True Believers" of any stripe. On to the environmental stuff. Kurt asks if I think that copper is really the problem and goes on to cite several other sources of schmutz that can cause problems. My answer is that copper bottom paint is A problem but not the only problem by any means. All of the things Kurt mentioned (Sewage, detergents, oil/fuel, fertilizer/pesticide runoff, etc.), the stray current that Arild mentioned, the shadows cast by the floats (affects the movement of baby fish), and probably some things that haven't even been noticed yet are all problems worthy of consideration. In fact, in our area the number one cause for concern among environmental professionals is failing septic systems. It was, however, bottom paint that started this thread so that's what I elected to discuss. As Kurt points out the Hard bottom paints are significantly better for the environment. Ablative copper bottom paints on the other hand are going to be hard on benthic invertebrates by design: You've got a coating that's impregnated with copper and is designed to slough off as time goes on in order to continually expose fresh copper. As the coating ablates copper is sinking to the bottom and it's the bottom that, under normal conditions, harbors the most life in terms of both biomass and diversity. Copper bottom paints are not the only pollution problem and they probably aren't even in the top ten of the worst problems but, just as we're advised against letting the best be the enemy of the good, neither should we allow the worst to be the enemy of the bad. At the beginning of this discussion it was suggested that we "be very afraid" that a new safer bottom paint was being tested that doesn't last as long as existing paints. I disagree; rather than fearing such a development why not contact the principles and say "Congratulations! Exciting idea! You need to make the product last longer or we can't afford to use it." I have said it here before: If we, as boaters, don't take a pro-active stance on these matters we will lose any chance to affect our own destiny. Wackily yours, Alex
TM
Todd Mains
Tue, Dec 3, 2002 6:33 PM

I find it interesting that members are averse to discussing environmental
issues, as they relate to trawlers.  No complaints about discussing some
reverse thread metric wing nut on an engine you've never heard of, but
environmental issues take up too much space?  We all have different boats,
but we all share the same water and air.

I believe that if reasonable people don't discuss these issues and
understand the various points of view, we leave it to the extremists to make
policy.  Pretty soon Robin's whiz into the ocean is literally a federal case
and we are all wondering why.

Todd Mains
Portland, OR

I find it interesting that members are averse to discussing environmental issues, as they relate to trawlers. No complaints about discussing some reverse thread metric wing nut on an engine you've never heard of, but environmental issues take up too much space? We all have different boats, but we all share the same water and air. I believe that if reasonable people don't discuss these issues and understand the various points of view, we leave it to the extremists to make policy. Pretty soon Robin's whiz into the ocean is literally a federal case and we are all wondering why. Todd Mains Portland, OR
CA
Captain Al Pilvinis
Tue, Dec 3, 2002 10:56 PM

At 10:33 AM 12/3/02 -0800, you wrote:

I find it interesting that members are averse to discussing environmental
issues, as they relate to trawlers.  No complaints about discussing some
reverse thread metric wing nut on an engine you've never heard of, but
environmental issues take up too much space?  We all have different boats,
but we all share the same water and air.

---============================
Todd........You can discuss it all you want but if it is of no interest to
others as it isn't to me, take your interested group off the list and
discuss it all you want but why cram it down the throat of those that want
no part of it...............

.
Captain Al Pilvinis

"M/V Driftwood"--Prairie 47
2630 N.E. 41st Street
Lighthouse Point, Fl 33064-8064
Voice 954-941-2556 Fax 954 788-2666
Email  yourcaptain@earthlink.net
Website http://home.earthlink.net/~yourcaptain

At 10:33 AM 12/3/02 -0800, you wrote: >I find it interesting that members are averse to discussing environmental >issues, as they relate to trawlers. No complaints about discussing some >reverse thread metric wing nut on an engine you've never heard of, but >environmental issues take up too much space? We all have different boats, >but we all share the same water and air. ============================================================= Todd........You can discuss it all you want but if it is of no interest to others as it isn't to me, take your interested group off the list and discuss it all you want but why cram it down the throat of those that want no part of it............... . Captain Al Pilvinis "M/V Driftwood"--Prairie 47 2630 N.E. 41st Street Lighthouse Point, Fl 33064-8064 Voice 954-941-2556 Fax 954 788-2666 Email yourcaptain@earthlink.net Website http://home.earthlink.net/~yourcaptain
G
Gail
Wed, Dec 4, 2002 1:02 AM

Todd,
I have to agree with your statement.  Many times the volume of rhetoric and
emotion leads politicians to making laws that are based on only one side of
the story.  My Mom recently bought waterfront property in Florida with a
150' dock.  Good thing she got it with the dock already built as they are
now no longer allowing people to build them for environmental reasons.
Boats are perceived as being polluting, it seems.  Truthfully, I would have
to agree after seeing my canal the last nice weekend we had.  There was so
much oil in the water from people winterizing......it was awful.  And the
people on the shore feeding the swans and watching them swim in that oily
water sure weren't commenting favorably.  In my county you cannot bottom
paint your own boat unless it is on your own property.  If it's at a yard or
storage facility you must have a licensed person do it.  I believe that the
more proactive boaters are regarding environmental issues the better chance
we have of avoiding restrictive, knee-jerk laws.

Gail

----- Original Message -----
From: "Todd Mains"

I believe that if reasonable people don't discuss these issues and
understand the various points of view, we leave it to the extremists to

make

policy.  Pretty soon Robin's whiz into the ocean is literally a federal

case

and we are all wondering why.

Todd Mains
Portland, OR


http://lists.samurai.com/mailman/listinfo/trawler-world-list

Todd, I have to agree with your statement. Many times the volume of rhetoric and emotion leads politicians to making laws that are based on only one side of the story. My Mom recently bought waterfront property in Florida with a 150' dock. Good thing she got it with the dock already built as they are now no longer allowing people to build them for environmental reasons. Boats are perceived as being polluting, it seems. Truthfully, I would have to agree after seeing my canal the last nice weekend we had. There was so much oil in the water from people winterizing......it was awful. And the people on the shore feeding the swans and watching them swim in that oily water sure weren't commenting favorably. In my county you cannot bottom paint your own boat unless it is on your own property. If it's at a yard or storage facility you must have a licensed person do it. I believe that the more proactive boaters are regarding environmental issues the better chance we have of avoiding restrictive, knee-jerk laws. Gail ----- Original Message ----- From: "Todd Mains" > I believe that if reasonable people don't discuss these issues and > understand the various points of view, we leave it to the extremists to make > policy. Pretty soon Robin's whiz into the ocean is literally a federal case > and we are all wondering why. > > Todd Mains > Portland, OR > _______________________________________________ > http://lists.samurai.com/mailman/listinfo/trawler-world-list >
RD
Robert Deering
Wed, Dec 4, 2002 1:12 AM

< Todd........You can discuss it all you want but if it is of no
interest to others as it isn't to me, take your interested group off the
list and discuss it all you want but why cram it down the throat of
those that want no part of it...............

Captain Al Pilvinis  >

Gee Al,

I could say the same thing about dozens of "trawler" topics that are
brought up on this list, but you don't hear me demanding that you stop
discussing them, even if in my opinion they aren't relevant to the list.
That's the role of the list moderators, and last time I checked, you
weren't one of them.  And if you don't agree with the moderators,
well... that's what your DELETE key is for.

The original discussion thread was about hull paint, certainly a
relevant topic.  And the impacts that we trawler owners and our boats
have on the marine environment around us (note the name of the list -
TrawlerWORLD - emphasis added) is germane to the list as well.
Personally, one of the main reasons I boat is to get out in the marine
environment, so my impacts on that environment are of interest to me.
So please don't try to censor info that's of interest to me, even if it
isn't to you.

Bob Deering
Juneau Alaska

< Todd........You can discuss it all you want but if it is of no interest to others as it isn't to me, take your interested group off the list and discuss it all you want but why cram it down the throat of those that want no part of it............... Captain Al Pilvinis > Gee Al, I could say the same thing about dozens of "trawler" topics that are brought up on this list, but you don't hear me demanding that you stop discussing them, even if in my opinion they aren't relevant to the list. That's the role of the list moderators, and last time I checked, you weren't one of them. And if you don't agree with the moderators, well... that's what your DELETE key is for. The original discussion thread was about hull paint, certainly a relevant topic. And the impacts that we trawler owners and our boats have on the marine environment around us (note the name of the list - TrawlerWORLD - emphasis added) is germane to the list as well. Personally, one of the main reasons I boat is to get out in the marine environment, so my impacts on that environment are of interest to me. So please don't try to censor info that's of interest to me, even if it isn't to you. Bob Deering Juneau Alaska
ME
Michael Eedy
Wed, Dec 4, 2002 3:44 AM

Hi Gail,

I have to ask and I'm making an assumption that you're also in Florida

<<There was so much oil in the water from people winterizing......it was awful. >>

Why do you have to winterize a boat in Florida?

Here I understand the need - the lakes are frozen and it's really cold.
But in Florida?

TIA

CHeers

Mike Eedy
M/V Excalibur (under the tarp and snow)
North Bay ON

Hi Gail, I have to ask and I'm making an assumption that you're also in Florida <<There was so much oil in the water from people winterizing......it was awful. >> Why do you have to winterize a boat in Florida? Here I understand the need - the lakes are frozen and it's really cold. But in Florida? TIA CHeers Mike Eedy M/V Excalibur (under the tarp and snow) North Bay ON
G
Gail
Wed, Dec 4, 2002 4:22 AM

Hi Michael....
Mom is in the process of moving to Florida from Atlanta.  I live on the
south shore of Long Island, NY.  It's 22 with a windchill of 10 right now.
:-(  I think we're in for a hard winter (tho nothing like yours!).  Guess
I'll have to visit Mom more often.

Gail

PS: There is a guy on another message board I frequent who is living aboard
his shrinkwrapped 32' Amerosport in Ontario....he posted pics today of his
boat surrounded by ice except for where the bubbler clears it.  He is my
hero. :-)

----- Original Message -----

Why do you have to winterize a boat in Florida?

Here I understand the need - the lakes are frozen and it's really cold.
But in Florida?

Hi Michael.... Mom is in the process of moving to Florida from Atlanta. I live on the south shore of Long Island, NY. It's 22 with a windchill of 10 right now. :-( I think we're in for a hard winter (tho nothing like yours!). Guess I'll have to visit Mom more often. Gail PS: There is a guy on another message board I frequent who is living aboard his shrinkwrapped 32' Amerosport in Ontario....he posted pics today of his boat surrounded by ice except for where the bubbler clears it. He is my hero. :-) ----- Original Message ----- > Why do you have to winterize a boat in Florida? > > Here I understand the need - the lakes are frozen and it's really cold. > But in Florida? >
JA
Jim Alexander
Wed, Dec 4, 2002 6:14 PM

My Mom recently bought waterfront property in Florida with a

150' dock.  Good thing she got it with the dock already built as they are
now no longer allowing people to build them for environmental reasons.
Boats are perceived as being polluting, it seems.

Gail,
This statement is not exactly correct and it has nothing to do with
pollution.  The issue is the Manatee.
As a proposed solution attempting to satisfy a lawsuit brought by the Save
The Manatee Club the US Fish and Wildlife Service has proposed what they
state will be a 37% reduction in the number of new permits issued over the
next five years for boat docks and boat launching ramps in SW Florida.  The
area affected is roughly from Tampa to Naples.
The proposal is simply playing a numbers game, assuming that by refusing
to issue permits the number of boats able to access the affected waters will
be diminished with a resultant decrease in the number of Manatees being
killed by boats.  This of course is typical of government hair-brain logic
and is likely to have the same effect that refusing to issue building
permits for garages in an attempt to reduce the number of cars on and
therefore reduce the number of accidents on I-75 would have.
Anyone who lives in SW Florida knows that boating is what SW Florida is
all about.  The financial impact of this plan has been estimated by the FWS
to be 43 million dollars a year. That's over 200 million dollars over the
five year period and sort of makes the 35 million tax dollars spent in
California to save a few Condors seem like pocket change.  All this proposed
in an attempt to satisfy a Fanatical Group of Idiots many of which do not
live in or pay taxes in Florida.
Perhaps the only good thing about this proposal is that finally the
Government has proposed something stupid enough to really get the residents
fired up. Now I personally don't have anything against Manatees,  they seem
a harmless little group of critters, but I do have something against these
radical environmental groups that try to cram their ideas down everyone
else's throats.  However, this time it's not just boaters who will become
effected, this will impact in one way or another all of the waterfront
property in SW Florida and all of their associated industries from Real
Estate to bait shops.  Perhaps this time the Save The Manatee group have
bitten off more than they will be able to chew?

Jim Alexander

My Mom recently bought waterfront property in Florida with a > 150' dock. Good thing she got it with the dock already built as they are > now no longer allowing people to build them for environmental reasons. > Boats are perceived as being polluting, it seems. Gail, This statement is not exactly correct and it has nothing to do with pollution. The issue is the Manatee. As a proposed solution attempting to satisfy a lawsuit brought by the Save The Manatee Club the US Fish and Wildlife Service has proposed what they state will be a 37% reduction in the number of new permits issued over the next five years for boat docks and boat launching ramps in SW Florida. The area affected is roughly from Tampa to Naples. The proposal is simply playing a numbers game, assuming that by refusing to issue permits the number of boats able to access the affected waters will be diminished with a resultant decrease in the number of Manatees being killed by boats. This of course is typical of government hair-brain logic and is likely to have the same effect that refusing to issue building permits for garages in an attempt to reduce the number of cars on and therefore reduce the number of accidents on I-75 would have. Anyone who lives in SW Florida knows that boating is what SW Florida is all about. The financial impact of this plan has been estimated by the FWS to be 43 million dollars a year. That's over 200 million dollars over the five year period and sort of makes the 35 million tax dollars spent in California to save a few Condors seem like pocket change. All this proposed in an attempt to satisfy a Fanatical Group of Idiots many of which do not live in or pay taxes in Florida. Perhaps the only good thing about this proposal is that finally the Government has proposed something stupid enough to really get the residents fired up. Now I personally don't have anything against Manatees, they seem a harmless little group of critters, but I do have something against these radical environmental groups that try to cram their ideas down everyone else's throats. However, this time it's not just boaters who will become effected, this will impact in one way or another all of the waterfront property in SW Florida and all of their associated industries from Real Estate to bait shops. Perhaps this time the Save The Manatee group have bitten off more than they will be able to chew? Jim Alexander
PJ
Philip J. Rosch
Fri, Dec 6, 2002 2:03 AM

(SNIP) Perhaps this time the Save The Manatee group have
bitten off more than they will be able to chew?
Jim Alexander

It wasn't very long ago that the State of Florida used to provide
recipes for Manatee. Have you ever noticed that no one ever creates a
bumper sticker to "Save the Malaria mosquito?"

                             Regards....

Phil Rosch
M/V "Curmudgeon" Marine Trader 44 TC
Currently Moored in St. Augustine

"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you
didn't
do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away
from
the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream.
Discover." - Mark Twain

(SNIP) Perhaps this time the Save The Manatee group have bitten off more than they will be able to chew? Jim Alexander It wasn't very long ago that the State of Florida used to provide recipes for Manatee. Have you ever noticed that no one ever creates a bumper sticker to "Save the Malaria mosquito?" Regards.... Phil Rosch M/V "Curmudgeon" Marine Trader 44 TC Currently Moored in St. Augustine "Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover." - Mark Twain
JA
Jim Alexander
Fri, Dec 6, 2002 4:02 AM

It wasn't very long ago that the State of Florida used to provide
recipes for Manatee. Have you ever noticed that no one ever creates a
bumper sticker to "Save the Malaria mosquito?"

                              Regards....

Phil Rosch

Phil,
What you really meant to say was not yet?

Jim

> It wasn't very long ago that the State of Florida used to provide > recipes for Manatee. Have you ever noticed that no one ever creates a > bumper sticker to "Save the Malaria mosquito?" > > Regards.... > > Phil Rosch > Phil, What you really meant to say was not yet? Jim