I do not claim be a expert legal or otherwise about environmental regulations or the laws governing such regulations. I have done my research and stated my opinion to the best of my ability. I do know about the dyes used by consumers and applicators for lakes and ponds. I have done extensive testing on the various products available on the market. They all use or are based on Color Index Name Acid Blue 9, Color Index number 42090, CAS # 3844-45-9. The color index is a catalog published by the Society of Dyers and Colorists in conjunction with the American Association of Textile Colorists and Chemists. It catalogs the various dyes and pigments.
http://www.colour-index.org/ Acid Blue 9, which by the way is not an acid, but referred to this way because of the method by which it is applied to textiles, is the generic name of FD&C Blue #1. FD&C Blue # 1 is the same chemical as Acid Blue 9, but FD&C Blue # 1 has gone through a certification process by the manufacturer to allow to be used in Foods, Drugs and Cosmetics. Acid Yellow 23 is the Colour Index name of FD&C Yellow #5. I do not know what this process entails, nor do I know what the regulations are governing the use levels in foods, drugs or cosmetics. I assume that the reason that the dyes were chosen for use in lakes and ponds in the first place because of their approved status for use in foods, drugs and cosmetics. I believe that the EPA no longer offers registration of these dyes for lakes and ponds. The products mentioned in previous posts were registered when it was offered, but I could be wrong and have written the EPA a letter requesting clarification on this issue. It is my opinion that the various dyes on the market are the "generic" form of these products. They vary in strength, but they are the same chemical. There is nothing special about the dyes used in the registered products. As opposed to the generic brands, the registered products are the "Brand" names of lake and pond dyes. I use the analogy of generic versus brand name pharmaceuticals. The generics are usually cheaper. When I subscribed to the Pond Boss magazine this week I was told that it was discouraged to promote ones products on this forum, yet I saw that happening on various posts, so I felt it my responsibility to "as a public service" to state my views on the subject as one who has been in the dye business my entire professional career of 29 years. I could go on about the difference between dyes and pigments, why a formula cost is not significantly effected by a ingredient that is only 1 to 2% of the formula: For instance if a ingredient costs $10 and you double the content from 1 to 2% the cost of the product goes up $0.10. I�ve tested products where the fancy packaging is worth more than the contents. The dye industry has always been a little secretive to protect ones own interests. It seems to me that nothing has changed in that respect.
