Boatyards have cleaned up act, study finds
Feb 17 2010 in Environment by Deborah Bach
Puget Sound boatyards have cut the amount of harmful copper pollution flowing into the region’s waterways by more than 50 percent during the past few years, according to a new study.
Conducted for the Northwest Marine Trade Association by engineering consulting firm Arcadis U.S., Inc. the study found that boatyards represented by the NMTA have reduced their average dissolved copper output by 52 percent since January 2006.
The findings of the study suggest that steps taken by boatyards to prevent the release of copper, zinc and other metals that threaten marine life have made a difference, from tarping off work areas and vacuum sanding old bottom paint to the installation of water treatment systems.
The study comes in the wake of an environmental watchdog group’s threat to sue five Seattle area boatyards for pollution. Puget Soundkeeper Alliance (PSA) is targeting the yards for alleged violations of the federal Clean Water Act, contending that they have not done enough to prevent copper and other pollutants harmful to marine life from flowing into Puget Sound.
The threat comes at a particularly difficult time for boatyards, as many struggle to survive one of the worst economic downtowns in memory. The NMTA and others say the possibility of lawsuits and the costs of meeting environmental regulations could prompt some boatyards to shut down entirely.
Last September, PSA sent warning letters to boatyards around the state, advising that if they failed to reduce their copper output or file discharge reports with the state Department of Ecology as required, the organization may sue. PSA made good on the threat in December, sending letters of intent to sue to the five boatyards.
The five boatyards that received letters include CSR Marine’s two boatyards on Lake Union and the Ballard ship canal, Dunato’s Marine Service and Yachfish Marine in Seattle and Yarrow Bay Marina in Kirkland.
PSA plans to file lawsuits against the boatyards following a 60-day period after the letters were sent, and is in talks with the boatyard owners about reaching out-of-court settlements. The settlements are expected to involve payments from the boatyards, rumored to be in the $50,000 range, to help fund environmental projects undertaken by third-party organizations.
The Clean Water Act allows the PSA to bring citizen lawsuits, levy penalties of up to $37,500 a day and negotiate out-of-court settlements. Some have referred to the settlements as “legal extortion.” But PSA Executive Director Bob Beckman said the organization’s priority is on reducing pollution in stormwater and cleaning up Puget Sound.
“When we see (water standards) not being forced by Ecology, we take an activist position and say, ‘If they won’t, we will,’” he said recently. “I don’t think it’s legal extortion at all. I think it’s enforcement.”
In the recent study, Arcadis analyzed the same boatyard data PSA used to identify the five yards. The study concluded that boatyards in general contribute just 0.3 percent of copper entering Puget Sound through stormwater runoff, while automobile brake pads account for an estimated 40 percent.
Since 2007, close to a dozen Washington boatyards have installed water treatment systems to reduce their pollution levels. Others say they can’t afford to install a treatment system, which can cost upward of $100,000, and are awaiting new state water regulations expected to take effect next year.
George Harris, president of the Northwest Marine Trade Association, said the improvement in boatyards’ pollution levels shows the industry is headed in the right direction. He points out that CSR Marine, among the boatyards being targeted by PSA, voluntarily participated in a pilot project undertaken by NMTA and PSA in 2007 to test three different water treatment systems.
“I really think boatyards, NMTA boatyards in particular, have become significantly cleaner in the last four years,” Harris said. “And I give Puget Soundkeeper Alliance and the NMTA a lot of combined credit for working on this together.”
PSA has said it identified the boatyards by reviewing pollution discharge reports and zeroing in on the five worst offenders. But Harris said the Arcadis study shows that the yards being targeted are not the highest emitters of copper, considered particularly harmful to salmon.
“If these five yards that received the intent to sue letters were truly the biggest offenders, then we as an association probably don’t want to advocate for them, because in some respect, maybe they got what they deserved,” Harris said.
“But when I look at the data, I don’t see that these are the worst offenders. To me, it looks like (PSA) is being selective.”
Harris said he plans to discuss the criteria during a meeting Friday between the NMTA and PSA. The private meeting will include a mediator from the William D. Ruckelshaus Center at Washington State University, which provides assistance with dispute resolution.
The five boatyards that received letters are all located on freshwater and have much stricter benchmark limits for copper than boatyards situated on saltwater.
Asked to clarify the criteria used in targeting the five boatyards, Beckman declined to be specific. In an email, Beckman said he can’t discuss the criteria in detail, “but exceedances in one metal (copper) is but one criteria among many data points that guides our case selection process.”
Harris said both sides have agreed not to discuss the legal action against the five boatyards at Friday’s meeting. His objective for the meeting, he said, is to reach an agreement with PSA about an acceptable pace of improvement for boatyards to reduce pollution levels and a way to move forward without further threats of lawsuits.
“My hope is that we can get an acknowledgment from Soundkeepers that recreational boating, and boatyards in particular, are part of the solution and not part of the problem,” Harris said.




I am personally acquainted with one of the employees and the manager of one of the larger boatyards. I know that they have tried to comply with the new regulations over the last year – they haven’t even been able to get the permits from the City of Seattle to remove their underground fuel tanks for one thing among others, and I believe it’s similar or the same with the other boatyards, the fact that no boat yard has been ABLE to comply, NOT that they are unwilling to comply – says something if people would bother looking at the bigger picture.
I know one boat yard invited the PSA on to their yard last year asking them for advice for what they could better do to clean things up and protect the environment, instead of giving them advice the PSA went and used the information they gained from having access to the yard and immediately sued them. Obviously the money through settlements (which is usually what they get as none of the businesses around the lake have the money to fight them and their sleazy lawyers in court endlessly) – the money trumps their supposed purpose and interests of helping the boat yards and cleaning up the water. The case I just mentioned illustrates that beautifully.
The PSA is holding everyone responsible for all the polluted water which runs through their property into the lake – there is a quote from one of the heads of the PSA herself sometime back, before this started, talking about how the majority of water pollution comes from the City of Seattle’s streets and then washes into the lakes and bays etc. This is poignant in the fact that one of the boat yards being sued does not even personally emit any of the pollutants they are being held accountable for.
The boatyard manager and owner I am personally acquainted with are environmentalists themselves and this is a huge slap in the face, it’s corrupt, the timing so that they were served right before Christmas when they’d have the least ability to prepare themselves for the lawsuit illustrates the corruption of the lawsuit and thus I say “sleazy” lawyers they’ve got working for them and knowing they have the money to carry on indefinitely while the businesses do not have the same resources.
Again the PSA isn’t interested in helping anyone clean up their facilities so much as getting money through settlements. It is also a slap in the face because these particular people have not only been trying to comply, but have out of their own interests and environmentalist activities done other things at their own expense in other environmental areas over the past years and recently as well, donating their own time, money, an employee’s family member’s master gardener talents to help build a small park on the lake, as one example. This has nothing to do with the PSA or any such demands it was done out of their own interest and similar to things they’ve been doing for years.
So along with the fact that they served the lawsuits against the boatyards right at the time they did and the advantage that would gain them, the boatyard owners and managers then had to then tell their employees about the lawsuit and their yards may end up not being able to fight this in court, to service the settlement money demands, and go out of business, and right at Christmas as if it wouldn’t have been bad enough news at any time. So now we have hundreds of families on the verge of losing their livelihoods, over this corrupt lawsuit as well. Even if things somehow come out okay for the boatyards and even more importantly the hundreds of men, women and their children who’s livelihoods are now at stake, someday, they have to now live with THIS over their head for who knows how long – and at this time when the economic crisis is where it is and the jobless rate so high?!
So we are going to clean up the lake here and put hundreds of workers out of jobs and local families potentially on welfare or worse. This is going to be great for the lake and the local economy isn’t it.
Any time I’ve ever heard controversy regarding an environmentalist group suing someone, I’ve always in my head just sided with the environmentalists, without ever bothering to check out the whole story. I have learned that corruption exists everywhere, and this is a good wake up.
I have only scratched the surface above as to how corrupt this entire thing is – it goes much further when you look at the bigger picture, from one thing to another, and not least when you get into the politics involved with who the PSA has on their board of directors etc.
Like I said, I’ve only scratched the surface. I really hope this all comes out for the most part and the PSA be the ones with lawsuits directed at them – however the sad and frankly extremely scary part is – it really does all come down to money, in more ways than one. It’s all about who has the money to keep their lawyers fighting, that’s who will win. And with that wake up call, frankly this is indeed scary on any number of levels.
Hi Bradley,
Thanks for your comment. I am going to repost this today’s story.
Yay Bob!
Lets form a 501c3 to protect all polluters and our God-given right to kill salmon! Where do I donate?
hmmm….Can we do that?
I nominate Lola for communications officer
Here is what Lola calls “Facts”
“My Thoughts exactly…
“Maybe…
“Apparently…
“They seem….
“Rumor has it…
“I think….
“I suppose…
“I’m guessing…
Happy Boating!
Re: Puget Soundkeeper Alliance
I live at Warm Beach. I own and operate boats. I fish, crab, swim. For years my wife and I cruised in a 26′ Haida sloop.
I am also a former elected official.
Griping about PSA “hiding” behind the Clean Water Act is a monumental waste of time – and money. If PSA can show violations of the Clean Water Act, the ONLY solution is to comply with the law.
The technology not only exists, it is relatively low-tech. Is it inconvenient? Does it cost money? Yes! Will compliance benefit ALL users, fish included? Yes. Complaining that someone else is a bigger polluter is an argument that will never work. Nuff Said.
Ross Kane
Warm Beach
Lola:
I’ve already set my lawyer exploring the possibility of establishing a 501c3. It will be our intention to protect our haul out yards, marinas and boating recreation in general. I am particularly interested in counter suing PSA for every suit they file and raise their legal costs. I don’t think it would take to much to raise substantial funds at the many yacht club meetings int the Northwest once everyone understands the threat they pose. Most everyone I have talked to is disgusted with PSA’s hostility toward us boaters.
Feel free to raise the issue on your docks and club meeting. I will post something to this article as soon as I have a name for the organization along with more definitive legal details and plans.
They go too far.
Well said Bob. My thoughts exactly.
Maybe all the companies that PSA has put out of business already because of their threats to sue and “settlement donations” as they call them, should get together and file a class action lawsuit against PSA and sue for liable. Apparently, PSA is not the type of organization that tries to get their facts straight before going to media outlets and spouting off inaccurate and slanderous information/comments about certain boatyards without first knowing what attempts these boatyards have already put in place to stay in compliance with environmental laws and witness firsthand what these businesses are already doing to be proactive in keeping pollution to a minimum.
They seem to be hiding behind the Clean Water Act as a way to pursue extortion attempts on small businesses. Rumor has it, there will be more exposure in the near future (and not of the positive kind) exposing PSA’s true agenda (which has nothing to do with cleaning up the Puget Sound). I suppose in this economy they are trying to make a paycheck too, including the smarmy lawyers who are the ones who are truly behind these lawsuits.
I think the news media needs to be contacted. I know PSA is trying to do damage control right now judging by the letters they have written to Three Sheets, but hey, the facts are the facts Mr. Beckman. You should have thought about what you said before it came out of your mouth and ended up in quotes in print. You can’t take it back after you realized you exposed/admitted the true nature of your attempts at extortion-like lawsuits. I’m guessing your lawyers wrote the letter asking Three Sheets to take back certain quotes and facts and rewrite some positive bullshit PR on your behalf.
I will say this again. If it looks like a rat, smells like a rat, its a freakin’ rat.
Oh, and, Janice (previous comment poster), put the above “facts” in your pipe and smoke it.
Happy boating everyone!
Hi all,
Thanks for your comments and feedback. This story is certainly generating a lot of attention.
Lola, to your point about contacting the news media, I should mention that the first story about PSA’s action was linked on The Seattle Times’ website. Three Sheets Northwest is an official content partner with the Times. Marty (Three Sheets’ co-founder) and I are both former longtime newspaper reporters. So I would say we are part of the news media.
Thanks all, for taking the time to write.
Best,
Deborah
Wonderful news! Now that the source of less than 1% of the copper run-off has been reduced through good management, I wonder if the PSA blackmailers will look elsewhere for their extortion schemes and fund raisers.
Surely riding around in their plastic kayaks and looking for trouble is less a rather hollow pastime. Maybe if they used that energy to go after the real culprits like the City of Seattle and Boeing and other big polluters we could make some real progress. But we all know that the big polluters have big lawyers and are not the easy marks that PSA goes after now.
Somehow they will see this report and data as bad news.