Wyoming welder faces $75,000 a day in EPA fines for building pond on his property

[backintheday]

The obvious problem is that government has grown beyond the founders wildest nightmares. The questions is, what do we as pissed off Americans do about it?

 

[slowzuki]

You do understand the old anti-fouling paints are extremely toxic? Thats why they worked so well to kill stuff that tries to attach to it.

I am reading a book about living on boats. I just finished a section about pulling a boat out of the water and getting repairs down in a boat yard. One of the tid bits of information that was in the book is that the EPA no longer allows owners to CLEAN or PAINT the bottom of their boats. I quote the book,


Later,
Dan

 

[charlz]

This happens now and again out West here. Just because there is water on your property does not mean you own it or have any rights to it or can even keep other people out of it. For instance Montana and Idaho have stream access laws which allows the public to use a stream across your property as long as they access it at a public access point and then stay below the high water mark while on your property. Read up on Mitchell Slough and Huey Lewis (of Huey Lewis and The News) to see an example where people have bought land and then thought they had exclusive rights to the water on their land.

If this guys case goes to court he will simply go broke trying to fight the EPA.

 

[dmccarty]

You do understand the old anti-fouling paints are extremely toxic? Thats why they worked so well to kill stuff that tries to attach to it.

Are these "old anti-fouling paints are extremely toxic" paints still on the market? There are many new paints on the market that are not toxic so a blanket ban is warranted?

Later,
Dan

 

[slowzuki]

When almost all existing anti-fouling paints are toxic, its hard to police if you add an exception.

 

[Loren49]

I am reading a book about living on boats. I just finished a section about pulling a boat out of the water and getting repairs down in a boat yard. One of the tid bits of information that was in the book is that the EPA no longer allows owners to CLEAN or PAINT the bottom of their boats. I quote the book,


Later,
Dan

I know of many owners who clean and repaint boat bottoms. There are standards for collecting dust from sanding and debris from scraping.

Loren

 

[powerpace]

Infuriating, isn't it? Even if he had NOT complied with local protocols & permits, and he freaking DID, that project does absolutely nothing but improve conditions of the stream he dammed by creating flood control, fire protection, wildlife watering and habitat and enhancing ground water.

Gawd, I hate small-minded, power-hungry bureaucrats.

And the people downstream that would benefit from having a free flowing stream? Now that it is blocked and changing the environment of the stream for flora and fauna.

 

[powerpace]

I am reading a book about living on boats. I just finished a section about pulling a boat out of the water and getting repairs down in a boat yard. One of the tid bits of information that was in the book is that the EPA no longer allows owners to CLEAN or PAINT the bottom of their boats. I quote the book,


Later,
Dan

The reason for that is because the hull paint is poisonous to fish and plants. Copper based antifouling coatings are dangerous to people swimming in the water also. Scraping and/or sandblasting the waste from the boat may disperse the toxins into the air and groundwater. Not to mention the "ppe" personal protection equipment required in removing the product. Plus you need a certified disposal location for the waste. Dumping the waste on the ground or into the water kills the living matter near it.

 

[powerpace]

Just another case of the current administration and excessive Government overreach that hurts any and all Working Americans. As my check out girl at Home Depot mentioned to me last week. Best we can do is Vote and pray. Good advice
IMO

The currant administration has little to do with it. Except for lax enforcement of the water use and quality laws.

If any administration would enforce the water quality and usage laws there would not have been the problem in West Virginia and other areas that have unregulated draining of chemicals a runoff from agricultural processes.

In reality water rights were the first consideration in settling the new world. Many incidences of water wars were and still are fought legally and physically in the west. The majority of laws referring to water rights in the western states including Wyoming are 'first come first serve". In most of Oregon the rule is a landowner is allowed a certain amount of water use according to the original purchase date of the land and subsequent filing for water rights. Also if the rights "usage" are not used the rights are forfeited. In other words you go to the back of the line in usage rights.

http://www.oregon.gov/owrd/pages/pubs/aquabook_laws.aspx

http://wwdc.state.wy.us/history/Wyoming_Water_Law_History.html

 

[Loren49]

The reason for that is because the hull paint is poisonous to fish and plants. Copper based antifouling coatings are dangerous to people swimming in the water also. Scraping and/or sandblasting the waste from the boat may disperse the toxins into the air and groundwater. Not to mention the "ppe" personal protection equipment required in removing the product. Plus you need a certified disposal location for the waste. Dumping the waste on the ground or into the water kills the living matter near it.

The copper and other toxins in bottom paint leach into the water to do the job. With ablative paints the entire coatings will leach into the water over time. The use of a drop cloth when scraping bottom paint and a vacuum on a sander along with a mask will minimize unwanted results. Many do very light sanding before applying a new coat. Considering the fact that if left in the water a high percentage of the material leaches into the water, it seems that there may be a bit of over regulation in some areas.

The good news is that there are some new bottom paints that are not considered toxic by the EPA etc. The problem is they may not be very effective in high fouling waters.

Is Copper Bottom Paint Sinking - BoatUS Magazine

When it comes to painting the bottom of a recreational vessel's hull to discourage marine growth, boaters currently have a wide array of products from which to choose. And while the choices can be a bit bewildering, beginning January 1, 2020, boaters in the state of Washington can scratch off their lists any paints that contain more than 0.5 percent copper. That's because last year, in response to concerns about contamination in Washington waters, the state legislature outlawed copper-based antifouling paints. (Paints on the market today contain 20- to 70-percent copper.)

Photo of copper-bottom of a boat
This ban applies only to private recreational boats 65-feet and under. That leaves commercial, government, research, and for-hire passenger vessels not to mention large ocean-going ships that frequent Washington waters free to discourage marine growth with paint that recreational boaters can't use. And the fine, if they do, is a maximum $10,000 per day


This article was talking about Washington State and California.

Seems less than fair to go after the small private only.

Loren