|
I have a conscience about using a sea toilet in places like Studland where there would be swimmers, but I didn’t think twice about it at Newtown, where the nutrient would add to the summer build up of foods supply for the winter birds. I should say straight away that this analysis is probably facile, but you can see the point.
I well recall, when ABP Research (now ABP MER), of which I was a director, were producing a guide for the management of ports in or near environmentally sensitive areas, the subject of sea toilets came up. The first draft suggested that if holding tanks were fitted they must be discharged ashore. “Really?” said I. “Try standing on Hamble Point on a summer Sunday evening, when boats are coming in 4 abreast, nose to tail from 3 o’clock until 8 o’clock. Imagine that lot queuing for pump out facilities!”. The next draft suggested that, if shore pumpout was not convenient, then tanks should be pumped out at least 3 miles offshore. I suggested that before such a recommendation was published, the Coastguard should be consulted because there were many boats that had never been 3 miles offshore, and they would not like them to be forced to do so. The final report recommended use of shore pump out, but suggested that if this was not convenient, then tanks should be emptied where there was a strong tide or current. To me this seemed a sensible, pragmatic outcome.
But there is a more hilarious (and potentially serious) problem. At one place in the West Country, the water authority has refused to accept pump out into the sewage plant because the high salinity will kill the bacteria that drive sewage treatment. I know they are right. It will be interesting to see how this is solved. We will pay.
Frankly, apart from sensitive areas such as bathing beaches, I find it hard to believe that the effluent from yachts, a small percentage of which are used two days a week, with the crew spending Saturday evening ashore, contributes significantly to pollution load. What about all those seagulls and fish doing much the same thing?! Worse, for every 24 hours the wastes sit in a holding tank, the number of bacteria double, so after 2 days there are 4 times the number; after 3 days, 8 times, and so on. When this is pumped to sea, it represents an unpleasant concentration of material; and may not be better than not using a tank at all. But that is an unwinnable argument. Lets accept that, on inland waterways and in marinas, we should use tanks and shore pumpout, and otherwise pumpout at sea where the tides are strong. Reluctantly, I am facing up to using the holding tank. Are you? If you have an old boat, where will you put it? What will you do if major mooring areas refuse to accept boats not fitted with one? Do not assume it won’t happen!
|
