View Single Post
  #3   Report Post  
Old 21-08-2003, 02:44 AM
Phyllis and Jim Hurley
Posts: n/a
Default Pond Guard vs roofing liner - Firestone's answer!

Thanks for the homework, Greg! We are in your debt.

It is interesting to hear that there is a difference in the processing. I
am also interested to see that there was no statement that the roofing
material would hurt the fish...altho he did say it would take several years
for the leaching process to be a problem. We will watch with interest!

I note that our roofing lines does not seem to inhibit growth of algae! or
other pond plants. There is also no visible effect on the fish. I am glad
if pondguard is cured for potable situation standards. I still have
significant questions about whether roff guard may not be equally effective
for fish ponds.

Fot the price diffefrence and no visible effect difference difference, I am
still satisfied with the roof guard. Phyllis and I will have to monitor
what happens as our roofguard ages further.


Check out Jog-A-Thon fundraiser (clears $140+ per jogger) at:
See our pond at:
"Gregory Young" wrote in message
Hi all:
To settle the discussion (I can't locate the original thread) as to

or not there are differences between roofing liner (Firestone Rubbergard
line), and pond liner (Firestone PondGard), I called Firestone today in my
"official capacity" with the state to get the straight answer.
I talked first to TH, who could not answer my "detailed" questions, who
referred me to BJ, one of their engineers.
Firestone called me back, to confirm I was who I stated I was, before they
would go into specifics. I was told the specifics, but can share only
generalities with you in this forum. You make your own decisions..
The bottom line, according to Firestone, there is a "decided difference"
between the 2 liners:
1) I questioned why the MSD sheets (Material Safety Data sheets) another

reader had shared with us comparing the 2 products seemed so similar.
Their answer: Manufacturers are required only to list potential hazards of
their products along with the general type of material, physical,

etc properties, etc.
They are not required to list individual components as long as any

properties of them are included in the above for their product. Their
processes and product lines are patent protected.
The MSD sheets may look similar, according to Firestone, but they are not.
In fact he said to be sure to notice that under the product identification
section, the chemical name descriptor, PondGard is listed as "cured rubber
material", with no similar reference in their roofing line MSD sheet. Why?
.. read on.
2) Their roofing liner has "additional processing", which "adds certain
chemicals useful to extend the life of the material". He would not

the specific agents added, except to agree with me that "some" companies

plant inhibiting compounds to their roofing liner.
3) More importantly, the 2 are "cured differently". PondGard meets rigid
specs. for potable water to "insure Koifish kept in peoples' ponds are not
affected". In fact this liner could be used to hold potable water based on
its curing process, although he was very clear that Firestone does NOT
warrant this liner for that purpose! Their roofing liner (made at the same
plant, and using the same overall equipment) is NOT cured in this fashion.
There are no provisions in the processing of the roofing liner to inhibit
chemicals from leaching out of the material, although he projected this
would take at least 3 or 4 years to become an issue.
4) There is nothing to "wash off" of their products, for either use. As

chemicals are incorporated into the material, "they can not be washed

5) The difference in the price they charge to dealers is based on the

process of the PondGard, which ensures "there will be no leaching of
chemicals, until its warranted lifespan has been exceeded". He stated they
do NOT spend the $$ on this curing process, and label some material coming
off their line as PondGard, and other as Rubbergard. It would be a waste

Dealers clearly have a healthy mark-up on PondGard, from what was shared.
6) The bottom line, I asked if it were him, and this was to be used in a
potable situation (for fish again, not for drinking water for people),

would he do. He stated he would "certainly pay more and get the right
Now you have the facts direct from Firestone, who make PondGard. That is

product from one company, so you can not automatically generalize the

statements to other companies.
Happy ponding,