A year ago, I wrote with a sense of optimism about a forward-thinking onsite system inspection program started in a recreational lakes region north of Toronto. Homeowners in the municipality of Dysart et al, seemed uncharacteristically supportive of a program to comprehensively inventory and inspect their systems to protect the local environment.

Many retirees and summer cottagers enjoyed the pristine quality of the waterways that have not seen the issue of blue-green algae prevalent in some parts of the U.S., for example. Heading into the second year of these required inspections, Mike Rahme of HomePro Inspections was proud of the level of concern folks were showing about their onsite systems.

“There’s a big emphasis on the educational component, and that’s the angle I come at it from. If someone understands why the rule is what it is, they are more willing to move toward compliance,” Rahme said at the time.

“You see a lightbulb come on and it’s refreshing. You’ve made somebody aware, and that carries a whole lot more weight than a penalty the municipality has to enforce. Taking the time and providing an understanding is paramount in my mind to trying to get people thinking the right way and not just complying.”

THAT WAS THEN

The story is looking a little different in 2020.

As it turns out, enough homeowners are refusing to comply with the inspections that local government officials appear to be giving up on an important requirement. According to a story in the Haliburton Echo, Dysart municipal councilors voted almost unanimously to drop preinspection pumpouts from the Level 4 inspection program. Why? Because 112 of the first 964 property owners in the program failed to complete the pumpouts or refused to submit a required third-party inspection report.

“Although this represents only 12% of properties, beyond issuing 112 orders to comply, dealing with even a quarter of these infractions is not possible with our current staffing,” Karl Korpela, chief building officer, told the council. So Korpela asked the council to drop the pumpout provision, and the officials went along with him.

So let me get this straight:

The council had approved inspections with pumpouts in 2017 because they believed emptying the tank provided the best way to check on the functionality of septic systems. Homeowners complied with the program at first, but soon many decided to ignore the rules. Regulators complained about having to do their job by enforcing the rules. Rather than follow through with the inspection program they approved, councilors gave up on the inspections.

Got it. Just so I understand, a handful of people who thumb their noses at important environmental safety laws are now in control of what goes on in Dysart. That’s right. Don’t listen to the onsite professionals who make a compelling argument that an inspection isn’t complete without emptying the tank to check on its condition. Rather, listen to people who aren’t experts in the field.

FOR WHAT IT’S WORTH

For one, the newspaper reported that Korpela said, “based on his research, environmentally, ‘There’s no benefit to a mandatory pumpout.” He told the council that pumpouts could still be required when deemed necessary by an inspector. But how is an inspector going to know a pumpout is necessary when he can’t see the condition of the tank?

Apart from the pumping issue. Korpela also intimated that because homeowners were to choose a qualified inspector from an approved list, the inspectors “may therefore feel they have an obligation of helping the owner pass an inspection.” Is he saying these licensed professional inspectors would forge their reports to help the homeowners? That’s insulting to the onsite profession and a topic for another column.

Then there’s Deputy Mayor Pat Kennedy, who exhibited his ignorance about wastewater when he questioned land application methods and said sludge is better left in the septic tank. “We’re pumping out septage that’s being looked after by a perfectly good septic system,” he said, according to the newspaper.

So Kennedy is among the uneducated who don’t realize septic tanks require periodic pumping to work properly? He is part of the same government that approved the Level 4 inspections in the first place and had to have been told about the importance of onsite system maintenance.

ROBUST PROCESS NEEDED

A year ago, Rahme told me it is critically important to check the wear and tear on many older concrete tanks in the lakes region.

“It’s important when doing these inspections to be as robust as possible with our process, and the best way to do that is with a pumpout. It’s the only way to check the integrity of the tank,” he said at the time. “We have a very aged population on our lakes, a lot of retirees, and these people are taking a lot of medications and passing them through the septic tanks. They are corrosive to the tanks, and we’re seeing a lot of deterioration, end walls being eaten out.”

One homeowner who was on board with the inspection program a year ago is John Smith, a member of the Kennisis Lake association who was consequently elected as a councilor representing Dysart. At the time he was hopeful. “Most people want to do the right thing. Lots of people care deeply about the lake and want to do their part,” he told me.

Smith was the only councilor who wanted to maintain the required inspections at this meeting. He argued it isn’t fair to change the rules after many homeowners willingly paid for the pumpouts and a small percentage balked at the cost. “Four thousand dollars, people on an island paid for a barge, because Dysart said it was necessary,” Smith said.

Rahme may have been forecasting a little trouble ahead with these inspections when he threw out a caution a year ago, but he then said he would counter misinformation through consumer education.

“Unfortunately money outweighs common sense in a lot of cases. Fast and cheap is the way of the world these days, and that’s not always going to give you the best result,” he said. “My personal endeavor is to show people if you spend more money now, you’re going to get paid back in spades because it’s not just your pocketbook you have to worry about. If we have one blue-green algae breakout in our lakes, your property value is going to drop by 30%. That hits home.”

TAKE ANOTHER LOOK

Although the council voted for changes to the law, including ending the preinspection pumpout, the revisions must go before the Environment and Climate Change Committee for review and then return to the council for confirmation at a later date, the newspaper reported.

I hope Dysart officials ultimately summon the political courage to reaffirm the need for inspection pumpouts and find the capital to support proper enforcement. It’s troubling to me to hear about states, provinces, counties or towns that require neither time-of-sale inspections nor mandatory periodic pumping and inspection.

To me, these are the foundation for proper septic system care and the flourishing of the onsite wastewater industry. Failure to convince local governments and septic system users about the need for regular maintenance risks the many recent advances made in the acceptance of decentralized wastewater as a suitable alternative to municipal sewers. 

Drop Us a Line

Have a comment about an article you’ve seen in Onsite Installer? An experience from a job that you’d like to share? Onsite Installer would love to hear from you. Email comments and photos to editor@onsiteinstaller.com