Our good friends at Boat/US have asked the Salty Southeast Cruisers’ Net to help get the word out that they have just released an updated statement of Florida Anchoring Right, which are specifically designed for the use of cruisers, while they are underway. Boat/US has rendered the Cruising Community a GREAT service by formulating this document. May we humbly suggest that one and all make as much use of it as possible!
First of all, let’s locate the anchorage where the series of events described below is centered. Edgewater Lake is accessed via a canal which cuts off the northern shores of upper Charlotte Harbor/lower Peace River, just across the way from the Punta Gorda waterfront. These waters are indeed recommended as an anchorage in both my “Cruising Guide to Western Florida” and here on the Cruisers’ Net.
Secondly, if we believe Captain Ritchie’s assertion below that they “sail and/or maintain multiple times per week” their vessel, clearly this craft is NOT a derelict or a “live aboard hulk.”
So, this is pretty clearly a case where the adjacent land owners simply do not want to see anchored vessels when they go out into their back yards. IN MY OPINION, THIS IS PRECISELY THE SORT OF INSTANCE THE 2009 FLORIDA STATE ANCHORING LAW WAS MEANT TO ADDRESS. According to this law, as most of you already know, LOCAL MUNICIPAL AND COUNTY AUTHORITIES HAVE NO RIGHT TO DENY ANCHORAGE ON THESE OR ANY OTHER WATERS TO ANY CRAFT (unless it is abandoned or a “live aboard hulk,” which, to be repetitive, this vessel is not).
It’s just this sort of instance which paints all of Florida in a bad light, and why when I talk to cruising groups in the Carolinas, Georgia or the non-Floridian Gulf coast, generally the second or third query in my question and answer sessions goes something like, “Should we take our boats to Florida?”
But, all of Florida is NOT like this. Places like Fort Myers Beach could not be more welcoming to the cruising community, and really this positive attitude towards cruisers is the rule, not the exception. However, let an incident like the Volusia County Sheriff’s office boardings of last fall happen, or what is described below, and mariners begin to have very real, very legitimate questions about whether they should avoid Floridian waters entirely.
Well, that’s today’s unsolicited editorial. Read on and discover what prompted this stream of consciousness.
On Tuesday, May 10, 2011, I wrote this letter to a Florida attorney who is interested in violations of Florida’s anchoring laws by local municipalities, in this case, Charlotte County.
May 10, 2011
Ahoy! My name is Rick Ritchie. I am a Michigan Resident staying at my mother’s house in Port Charlotte, Florida. My family and I have a 37 Irwin sailboat (registered in FL) which we sail and/or maintain multiple times per week. We anchor in Edgewater Lake, a small cove just off of North Charlotte Harbor, which is listed as an anchorage in Claiborne Young’s Cruisers’ Guide and on Cruisers.net (an online cruising guide), also designated as an anchorage on Florida’s FWC nautical chart (the one that is published for FWC for boaters). It is designated anchorage number 7 on FWC chart SGEB-61. Even the two unhappy local lake-shore landowners concede that it is an anchorage. Of course, as you know, even if it were not designated, as such, anchoring there would still be legal because it is a navigable part of Charlotte Harbor, Florida. The “anchorage” designation by FWC is just a redundancy.
We (my family and I) have been “talked to” by the Charlotte County sheriff’s office, twice, and told to move our boat. They have told us that this navigable lake is not an anchorage. In both instances I was able to demonstrate to the officer that my boat was (and is) legally anchored. I did this by showing them the aforementioned FWC nautical chart and the reference in the cruiser’s guide. The last deputy sheriff’s parting words were that he is NOT telling us we have to move it (even though that is exactly what he told us to do at the beginning of the dialog), but that there is a time limit on the anchoring of boats in Charlotte county. My wife asked him. “what is the time limit?” and he said that he didn’t know. Then he left.
Also, we were asked to attend a meeting of the neighborhood association (actually, just two homeowner couples showed up) to discuss my boat. The short version of the meeting is that they don’t like to look at boats anchored in “their water.” It was, actually, a gripe session where my wife and I politely listened and responded to their questions and managed to avoid rising to their baited and barbed comments and insults. One of them even offhandedly threatened us. Of course his wife said that he was not serious. (our anchor line has been cut twice while anchored there, quite probably by someone who lives nearby. We now have all chain.)
Before you jump to the wrong conclusion, we have friendly relationships with many of the homeowners around the lake, even getting invited to use a homeowners dock for our dinghy, and another homeowner is smitten with our children and invites us into their home for beverages. So only two homeowners, it seems, are calling the sheriff and complaining. Unfortunately, the Sheriff’s office seems to dance to their tune.
One more thing (promise): According to one of our several friends who lives on that anchorage’s shore, the sheriff’s boat has been visiting our boat on a regular basis (lately, almost daily). Today, it seems, they even tied onto it. I don’t know if they boarded it, or not. We were at my mother’s house a few miles away, at the time. That’s where we usually are if we aren’t on the water.
This is all for your information. If you have any advise or questions please feel free to email me.
Sincerely,
Rick Ritchie
More on this Charlotte Harbor Anchoring Hassle:
May 15, 2011
First, let me emphasize this: Deputy Katsarelas was polite during the entire phone conversation– even when I told him that he was wrong about the anchoring law. If he was unhappy about it, I couldn’t tell. He continued to be polite and professional.
Second, I understand that this letter may find its way to the Sheriff’s office. For that reason I have been careful to be accurate in this testimony and faithful in my recreation of the events and
quotations. Other than my speculations, which I have identified as such, this is as accurate as I can make it.
Read on:
My boat was just tagged as an “At-Risk of becoming derelict” vessel by Deputy Sheriff Katsarelas of the Charlotte County Sheriff Department. When I spoke with him on the phone, today, he said that the citation was based on another complaint by an Edgewater Lake homeowner. He also stated that he (Katsarelas) has never seen anybody aboard my vessel. I explained that I have been on-board my boat weekly, usually more than once per week. I also informed him that some friendly homeowners on the lake could verify this.
[Maybe he hasn’t seen me aboard my boat because, until last week, he only patrols Edgewater Lake for a few minutes out of every month… just a guess]
Specifically, the tag that he left on my boat states that my vessel has been identified as being “at risk of becoming a derelict vessel.” The reason stated on the tag is that my vessel is “neglected, improperly maintained, or is not able to be used for navigation.”
This is untrue. As I stated in the letter to ATTY Dickerson, which you posted on Cruisersnet, my wife and I visit my boat multiple times per week to maintain and/or sail her.
We don’t always get to sail her, but we ALWAYS are able to get out there and take care of her, start the engine, air it out, install a redundant bilge-pump, add another battery, replace
hoses, replace anchor line with chain, etc..
Deputy Katsarelas suggested that I moor my boat at my house instead of anchoring on the lake.
After I explained to the Deputy that I was within my rights to anchor there, and cited the Florida statute, he informed me that the County has more strict anchoring regulations.
And I quote from Deputy Katsarelas of the Charlotte County Sheriff’s Department: during today’s phone conversation:
“The County has more binding regulations than the State.”
“The county has the right to add to the State regulations.”
“[County regulations] …are in-addition to State regulations”
When I informed him that he was in error, I gave him the specific statute (327.60) which specifically states that local municipalities are prohibited from enacting , continuing in effect, or enforcing any ordinance or regulation regulating the anchoring of vessels other than live-aboards. Deputy Katsarelas then stated that he was not current on the new anchoring laws.
Again, a quote from Deputy Katsarelas:
“I’m not up on the new anchoring laws.”
So I offered to give him a copy of the new regulations and a copy of Boat US’s summary of the new law. He said that I could do that if I wanted to.
So now my boat is listed in the new State-wide database of Derilict vessels. I wonder if this might be a prelude to an accusation of vessel abandonment? Swell!!!
I guess I will send him a copy of the statute and a copy of Boat U.S.’s summary of the anchoring laws. I suspect that it won’t help, though. Maybe it’s just because a few of them make numerous complaints, but the unhappy Edgewater Lake homeowners seem to have some sort of special influence over the sheriff’s office. I speculate that I will now be hounded by the sheriff’s office.
It would be cool if a more official type person would send the statute and a legal opinion of it to Deputy Katsarelas and the Sheriff’s Department of Charlotte County — perhaps a member of
the BAR.
I wonder what the sheriff dept. has in store for me? Boardings? Safety Inspections? Home visitations? Towing my vessel?
I wonder what the unhappy homeowners have in store for me: More anchor rode cuttings (I now have chain so it’ll have to be with bolt cutters, this time)?
Anyway, Edgewater Lake, designated as an anchorage in the cruisers guides and FWC charts (not that it needs to be), is a little less than friendly.
P.S. In the interest of fairness and completeness, the tag that was left on my boat also stated thatthe registration numbers are not in contrast with the hull color. To that, I have to admit that Deputy
Katsarelas may have a point. I informed him that I will the numbers from black to white and he said that would be acceptable.
Again, this is for your information. I hope that someone out there can make good use of it.
Rick Ritchie
This situation is truly unfortunate and also an opportunity. Although, I’™m not a lawyer I believe it is illegal for even the police to board your boat without your invitation. I would speak to your shore side friends about setting up a video surveillance(VS). Post the boat with a sign, and file charges after the violation. At the very least, you might make it known that there is VS on your boat. Harassment of this type is unacceptable and the police should be investigating who cut you rode.
Marc Sexton
Now, here is a well-thought note that demands some serious consideration. Read Captain Kewley’s comments first, and then peruse my editorial remarks afterward:
Mr Ritchie,
I would like to offer some thought to clarify a couple of points that you make in your post.I believe that the sea floor in Edgewater Lake is owned by Charlotte County since the lake like the waterways are not natural bodies of water, indicating why the County Sheriff would be involved in policing anchored boats there. This also brings into question whether the rules on anchoring in Florida State waters apply.
I think the crux of the issue lies with the point at which an untended boat becomes a hazard or derelict. I do not believe that the residents around Edgewater Lake object to overnight or short-term anchoring since I visit the location fairly frequently. However you use the anchorage as a long-term storage facility for your Irwin while staying with relatives miles away and apparently have done so periodically for a couple of years. Barnacles growing up your anchor rode in the past have indicated infrequent movement of your boat.
As the 2011 Hurricane season approaches and I wonder if the residents surrounding Edgewater Lake should feel reassured that your liability coverage will be adequate to compensate them should your boat’™s chain anchor rode not withstand storm conditions.I think that it is a matter of reasonable consideration for others, and storing your boat for free, anchored near someone’™s backyard for months at a time certainly is inconsiderate at best.
Clifford Kewley
Captain Kewley raises at least three interesting questions in his note above. First, there is matter of whether Florida anchoring law applies to bottomland that is the result of man-made action, e. g. dredging. I have heard some say yes and some say no. However, I do clearly recall in my political science classes, that “Federal law supercedes state law, and state law supercedes local and county statutes.” Given that truism, one must conclude that there is at least a distinct possibility that the 2009 Florida state anchoring law applies even to bottom lands that are the result of dredging. For a more definitive answer, we must defer to the lawyers among us. If anyone practicing the legal profession would like to weigh in, and please do so, then click the “Comment on This Posting/Marina/Anchorage/Bridge” link below, and share your information.
Secondly, there is the matter of how long should a well maintained, non-abandoned vessel that is in compliance with all safely and MSD regulations, be allowed to anchor in one place. In my 2010 editorial entitled, “Whence Come the Anchorage Regulations,” (/florida-anchoring-editorial-1-whence-come-the-anchorage-regulations), I wondered out loud:
“Finally, that leaves the case of what I will call `responsible liveaboards,’ boat owners who religiously come to the dock (or use a `honey boat’) to have their holding tanks pumped, don’™t throw trash overboard, don’™t make loud noise, don’™t’™ trespass, and keep their vessels attractive and well secured. How long should a mariner of this ilk be allowed to anchor his or her vessel in the same spot?”
I don’t have an answer for this instance to this day. Anyone else????
And, finally, there is the question of damage caused by anchored vessels during a violent storm or a hurricane. A legitimate concern to be sure, but in the case of Captain Ritchie, since he is clearly in close contact with his vessel, there should be ample time for him to move his craft before a hurricane hits. Thus, I tend to think this question is a non-issue!
Some may question whether or not someone `should’ anchor a boat for long term storage like this, but it is crystal clear that it is perfectly legal to do so according to Florida and Federal statute. The issues about a potential for hurricane damage and being `untended’ are bogus’“if this was the standard throughout Florida nobody could anchor or tie up anyplace for more than a few days. The sheriff is just hunting for something, anything to allow him to make this boater move along.
John Kettlewell
Dear Captain Young
Thanks for stimulating a very interesting discussion and spotlighting the issue of anchoring rights. Kinda brings to mind the Paul Simon lyric in discussing apartment living,”one man’s ceiling is another man’s floor”.
Your essay/editorial “whence come the Anchorage Regulations” and your message discusses responsible live-aboards. In the case of Mr Ritchie, substitute the term responsible long-term storage behind someone else’s home.
I do not know the legalities of whether ownership of the sea floor determines the applicable regulation of anchoring and, hopefully some “sea lawyers will opine on the issue.
Clif Kewley
Dear Clifford Kewley,
With all due respect, you seem to be confusing my boat with another one that was, in fact, abandoned on the lake and was finally removed a few months ago (by whom, I have no idea). It was a boat called the `Wild Hare’ and it did, indeed, have a barnacle-ball the size of a basketball on the anchor rode. It also had a missing companionway hatch so it was completely exposed to the elements. Its hull had a barnacle-covering that made it resemple an oyster farm. The `Wild Hare’ was there when I first discovered Edgewater Lake a year ago. My friends on the lake have told me that `Wild Hare’ had been there for 2 years. This, however, is NOT my boat. My anchor rode has NEVER had a barnacle ball. Secondly, I have owned my boat for only 12 months, four of which I kept her at a dock on the Ackerman waterway (e.g. from November 2010 to February 2011), and several other weeks I kept her on the harbor, next to another anchored cruiser (Jim). So your assertion that I have been storing it on Edgewater Lake for `years’ is mistaken. I maintain my boat, regularly, including the achor rigging, which I have had to replace’¦ thrice’¦ in the last year. More importantly, I SAIL MY BOAT! True, it is on the lake much more often than it is under sail, still I get to sail her reasonably often.
So, I am now keeping a log of my visits to my boat. I don’™t suppose it will make any difference to the disgruntled landowners, but I am recording what I do during each visit. And thanks to the local police, I will now have their official verification that I was on my boat to find the tag that they left, and was there on another occasion to replace the reg. numbers with more contrasting colored ones. So between the police and the friendly landowners I should easily be able to substantiate my claim of twice per week.
So, my question to you is (this is a serious question, I have no ill-will loaded up here because I believe it was an honest mistake): How long should I stay away from Edgewater lake between anchorings; And, how long should I be able to anchor my boat there, each time?
Please accept my apology for anything in this letter that seems less than polite. I find that the brevity of email sometimes impersonates rudeness. I do not mean to sound harsh or rude, especially to a fellow sailor.
Yours sincerely,
Rick Ritchie
Mr. Ritchie,
I am not sure of your legal right to anchor/wet store your vessel in Edgewater Lake for long periods of time. So to move the discussion along and avoid the on-line `huffing and puffing’ about anchoring rights in Florida, lets change the scenario.
Lets say that you worked long hours for many years and sacrificed to save money to enable you and your family to enjoy your favorite locale and lifestyle. A beautiful mountain community where you paid extra for a building lot to build your home with an unimpeeded view of the mountains. Nice!
Now lets assume that a local mountain view lover from the next town decided to situate and store his motorhome on the right of way just left of your center view of the mountains, obstructing, oh maybe 10% of your view, and he WAS legally able to do so.
Now my thought on this is that the lot owner, you, would probably not mind or be too upset if the visitor stayed for a weekend, or maybe a week but’¦.
If it is only about what is legal then we are in big trouble as a society.
Clif Kewley
Click Here To Open A Chart View Window, Zoomed To the Location of Edgewater Lake
So whatever became of Captain Ritchie's Irwin 37 on Edgewater Lake? We were never forced to leave Edgewater Lake, although we had to defend our rights many times while we remained. My family got tired of the hassles, vandalism, police visits, and neighborhood meetings, so we sold our boat. Making a point, is one thing, but sticking around to "count coup" is quite another, and decidedly impolite. Since the draft of our Irwin 37 was 4 feet, she was too deep for the canal behind our house. So we parted ways with her…. and got smaller. Sure, we had to sacrifice the second head and second shower. But who really needs two showers, two heads and two sinks on a sailboat? We purchased an Irwin 10/4, which has the interior of a 30 footer, but is only 26 feet with a swing-keel draft of 2.75 feet. She has just the one head/shower, but still has two sinks. More importantly, we no-longer hear from those two constant complainers on Edgewater Lake. Our boat is right behind our house at our own dock. So, stay on Edgewater Lake in a storm, but there is no shore access and a couple of the locals will soon tire of your existence. [Please note: As I have mentioned before, most of the local homeowners around the lake were very friendly, and even helpful. A few of them should be given an award for their generous courtesy .]
There is a simple solution, just look for a canal front home without a boat at their dock and see if they will rent you the dock! Or look on craigslist, I believe there are several available right now
That is a good point, and only slightly misses the mark. You see, Edgewater Lake has been an anchorage… a Florida FWC designated anchorage, for a long. long time. So in light of this, here is a slightly better analogy. Suppose you spent your hard-earned retirement savings on a Florida home right next to a beautiful campground. One with an unpolluted, peaceful and rustic scenery that would inspire an artist to weep. Then suddenly, in April, some campers and motor homes start parking within your cherished and serene view. Some, of course, only park for a night or two. But others stay for the season. A few even leave their caravans behind and only visit on weekends. Of course this is all within the State legal limits of the camper owner, and the campground. Here is the question: Does the offended home-owner who lost his peaceful view have a legitimate and valid case against the camper owner?
This is a interesting article but with no conclusion. I just lost my docking spot on the next street over to edge water lake. So I thought it was a good time to plan on taking the 38 ft Irwin out of the water to paint the bottom but need to wait a week or two. Thought I might leave it anchored at edge water lake until then. Question is can I without being harassed? I am planning on purchasing a home in this area in the next two months but waiting for the sale of my currant home in Port Charlotte. Also what other options are there?
Our sincere thanks to Captain Mary Dixon for forwarding the link below. We have read the document in question, and it IS LENGTHY and very wordy, BUT it is perhaps the last word on virtually ALL the issues surrounding the complex and emotionally charged Florida anchoring issue.
Cruising News:
New publication on Florida anchoring
http://www.flseagrant.org/joomla/images/PDFs/anchoring%20away_03_09_11_full_web3.pdf
Mary Dixon
It’s no surprise that we have had a storm of reaction to our Anchoring Rights Editoridal of 3/1/11 concerning the Florida Pilot Mooring Field Program, and any corresponding no-anchor buffer zones. Many of the notes below are well reasoned, and make for very interesting reading!
Bravo to all the people that have taken time and put the effort into protecting boaters in the USA who love to travel on our waterways!
THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU DO!
Sam Warr
Just a short `thank you’ for your timely notification to cruisers. I’m sure that Judy and I can speak for many other cruiser/liveaboards in telling you how much we appreciate your ongoing efforts to keep us informed, and more important, where to express any opinions `for the record’ Thank you!
Judy and Dick from `St. Jude’
For All Concerned With Florida Anchoring Rights: I noticed that the great majority of the responses have been with negative complaint and much not relavent. It is out of order for all those to compare anchoring in the northern states with the opportunities in Florida. Florida is burdened with the opportunity for people to use boats as low income housing, unlike New England or even the Chesapeake. It is impossible to discount the concerns of derelict vessels adrift and abandoned in Florida waters. As a Florida liveaboard who has been frequently anchoring in Florida waters since 1972, the problem is of great concern to me, but not without an acceptance of the problem that faces the state authorities and my own dissappointment with high risk debris on the water and on the shores.
My first concern with solutions would be to encourage the FWC or any other authorities to enforce the existing regulations that would limit the number of high risk vessels at anchor. This would include the inspection of safety requirements such as anchor light presence and quality, including placement, timing and intensity as well as satisfactory marine sanitation devices.
I would also consider other pressures upon anchoring rights as negotiable, such as the requirement of recorded pump out compliance or, the most fair solution, a requirement that anchoring in Florida be accompanied by liability insurance that would cover the removal or abandoned derelict vessels. It is not acceptable that the `solution’ would be to eliminate the possibility of anchoring in arbitrary areas within a distance of a mooring field or including entire counties. Stewart and Nancie Force onboard Aythya since 1972
Stewart Force
As usual politics just makes a simple solution complex and confusing. Why don’t they simply pass a law placing a time limit on anchoring. Say thirty days and you have to move. Boats not adhering to the rules could be subject to whatever is deemed necessary. Fines, impoundment, salvage or whatever. I would think a thirty day limit, with a warning after 30 days, giving the owner 48 hours or so to move would be a reasonable and common sense approach. While this approach would work, and would eventually get rid of the derelicts, it would not generate any income for the cities/state. My biggest fear is this idea will continue to grow, and of course we all know that the mooring fields will be in the best possible anchorages. Making all who do not want to contribute to the local economy seek anchorages farther away and possibly in poor holding areas. As always, it’s just follow the money.
Phil Prater
I am leaving Florida and will never return.
Ed Hart
Our last Florida experience was in 2005. Never again will I take a boat into Florida waters. We have used Florida only to get to the Bahamas, but we now go offshore from Georgia so that we do not have to experience the state.
M Don Surratt
USCG Masters License
Someone start up a support group for our anchoring rights, I will contribute!
Capt. Sterling
Hello Claiborne,
I am now sans boat. The new owner of At Last when asked if he would be cruising Florida, said `No Thanks’ The boat is now in the Pacific Northwest. They are allowed to anchor up there.
Capt. Dave
Towns all over New England have mooring fields, but in most of them you can anchor just outside the moorings as long as your swinging circle won’t interfere with the moored boats. In some very busy harbors, like Newport, there is a designated anchoring area in the middle of the harbor surrounded by moorings. It isn’t much room, but the town recognizes the need to still maintain some space for those who want to anchor.
I have been disappointed in the mooring fields in Marathon and Ft. Myers Beach because they both essentially eliminate the entire anchoring area. It is particularly frustrating when you are there and many of the moorings are unoccupied, just taking up harbor room, and you would like to visit.
John Kettlewell
Hello Claiborne,
Really appreciate your valuable contribution to the cruising community with the Cruiser’s Net. We’ve just returned to British Columbia, Canada after 8 years sailing the east coast aboard our vessel, `Meriah’.
I know how important it is to fight the battle for Florida anchoring rights in this struggle over municipal control of the waterways. I’ve been there and had to negotiate the sometimes inconsistent local regulations.
There is obviously a lack of appreciation for the social and economic benefits as a quickly expanding new generation of more affluent cruisers make their way into warmer waters. This is no longer the hippie migration of the 60’s and since Florida has always been a haven for retirement communities, you would think that Florida municipalities would embrace this new community of cruisers.
The point that I would like to make has to do with education. Most Florida residents and municipalities have no idea of who the cruisers are these days and how the average cruiser conducts his or her life. There is little or no understanding of the challenges or requirements for the cruising community. So what about developing a significant and informative media presentation as an educational tool to go along with ongoing negotiations. A program such as this should go a long way in changing some of the inward looking attitudes and anxieties of local residents and their municipalities.
Keep up the good work,
Captain Larry Peck
Every time this issue comes up, I ask myself, `Why do I even bother going to Florida?’ I have no objection to reasonable restrictions, but when I’m made to feel unwelcome, I look for other places to spend money or visit.
To me this seems to have become a situation like we have here in Maryland where `city expats’ move to the country and complain about the farmer next door, or move to a small fishing town and complain about the smell of waterman next door.
There has to be a way of impressing the municipal authorities of how much we do spend in their communities. I know this has become impractical today, but just prior to WW II, my father had a similar problem with his CCC Camp. He paid his troops in silver dollars and the next day the city fathers had a sudden change of heart, welcomed his presence and begged him to not do it again.
Jim Davis
Please do not let them put laws like those mentioned in place.We are losing our Freedom piece by piece.I will never use mooring fields and will never spend my money in their vicinity.
Claus Gnaedig
Thanks for the update. I live in TN and cruse the rivers but hope to travel to FL soon. I won’t be at the local meetings but will email anyone identified with my support to preserve mooring opportunities for boaters.
It seams the real issue are the hulks and non-complient MSD. Why isn’t the FL FDEP and FWC solving this problem and leave crusers alone.
Dan Coyle
Buffer zones should be no larger than 1/2 mile from the edge of the mooring field depending on the shape of the waterway in question.
Rick Cass
Anyone who has anchored in Marathon FL. before the mooring field, knows what can happen to one of the best anchorages in the Florida Keys.
Marvin R. Heide
And with the narrow width of the Waterway in many Florida communities it doesn’t take much of a restriction on anchoring to essentially outlaw all anchoring. For example, I’ve seen the suggestion that no anchoring within 500 feet of a mooring field be the norm, but where would that allow you to anchor in a town like Daytona Beach? The entire width of the water that is deep enough for mooring or anchoring is probably less than 500 feet.
John Kettlewell
I was involved in the last attempt in Sarasota. It is a political nightmare. We will be happy to help build a collective voice on our site too.
Sailmonster.com
After 40 years of cruising,I conclude that removing natural anchorages and replacing them with expensive mooring fields goes against everything the cruiser is all about. We dont need balls and we rarely need marinas. Most of all we dont need ugly,boring Florida period. It is merely a stopping off point on the way to the Caribbean Islands’¦ A straight run from Norfolk,Beaufort or Charleston makes far more sense to serious cruisers. Florida has destroyed itself from inside. Why waste good cruising dollars on inferior destinations. When all our tourist dollars vanish, the locals can fight over the remaining stopping off point.
Its all about excessive greed and very stupid politicians who dont understand economics.
Captain Dave Johnson
I am against ANY no anchoring zones in Florida. Any rules can be circumvented. Played properly, anti-anchorage politicians can beat their drum to citizens in the majority’¦’¦low ond medium income’¦’¦..that it is unfair for their tax dollars to pay for facilities used by `rich men’; showers, docks, etcetera, and effectively gut any funding for the mooring fields. In effect, you’ll end up with no mooring field, AND a no mooring buffer zone.
I believe any cruising boater should be able to moor ANYWHERE that does not restrict navigation. `Boat squaters’ living aboard hulks can be evicted by using current Federal sewage laws, when they can be proven to be breaking them. Otherwise, rich autocrats have ZERO business deciding if another mans boat is a `proper’ boat.
Unless live aboards are breaking the law by dumping raw sewage into our waters, no one should have the power to dictate to them that they cannot anchor ANYWHERE they chose to do so.
Compromising with the devil is still a compromise. I suggest boaters of all social strata have an `anchor up’, and cover the water in boats, as a protest against any infringement on anchoring rights.
ARMED and ANCHORED; get used to it.
Jim
We cruise Florida and the east coast extensively. Thank you for keeping the cruising community informed about t the developments surrounding this issue.
I understand both sides of the concern. For example, we cruise the St. Johns River often. There is a great anchorage behind Turkey Island, but the best spot in that anchorage is occupied by an abandoned house boat that has been there for three years. I have also seen the trash hulks in Key west and St. Augustine that I have to believe are dangerous to the occupants. On the other hand, most of the people living on these boats have low paying jobs and they have to live somewhere. We don’t support forcing people out of their homes just because their house looks like a wreck.
I would suggest there needs to be a reasonable compromise on buffer zones around mooring fields, perhaps just enough to make it somewhat difficult for anyone to commute to shore on a regular basis. Two miles might be a good number. Having said that, I’m curious about how these buffer zones would be communicated to cruisers anmd how they would be enforced. Also, what happens if the mooring field is full and a boat arrives in the area needing a place to stop for the night?
I completed the great loop last year, and I can tell you there is a real need for a way to clean up all the derelict boats that are strewn along our waterways. At the same time, safety of mariners shoukld trump public outrage at unsightly derelict boats. A reasonable compromise must be reached.
I would be happy to attend any meetings in the central florida (Tampa to Daytona) area, and thanks again for your work an behalf of all cruisers.
Cpt. Bill Root
Thanks for the update!
Please let us know when & where the meetings are scheduled!
Bureaucracy at it’s finest oh how they try to justify their jobs & numbers to protect us from ourselves!
Thanks,
Mike & Barbara Harbin
M/V Elan
Why do states/municipalities wish to discourage visiting boats? People on these boats, for the most part abide by pertinent rules / laws, etc. for sanitation and safety.
These people often purchase real estate in areas visited thus supporting that market. They also support many businesses in the areas they frequent.
States and municipalities should have reasonable laws to prevent harm to the environment or unsafe conditions. Otherwise welcome this as an opportunity and not consider this a problem that needs to be dealt with harshly.
Philip Conner
So if ALL of the Keys are to be a pilot mooring field, and the buffer zone is around the mooring fields, so there is to be no anchoring anywhere in the Keys?
Michael D’Haem
`All of Monroe County’? That’s almost 3,000 sq mi of water! Wow. big grab!
Tom Murphy
I assume by the `grassroots organization, since disbanded’ you mean the Southwest Florida Regional Harbor Board, which grew out of the Boaters Action and Information League (BAIL) organized by Walter Stilley. The SWFRHB was a five-year test program that included the state DEP, The Southwest Florida Regional Planning Commission, the West Coast Inland Navigation District, and Sea Grant College at the University of Florida, so it was more than a grassroots organization ‘” it had the full backing of the state. We were able to convince all the waterfront jurisdictions from Collier County through Manatee County (EXCEPT the city of Sarasota) to withhold enforcement of their various anchoring time-limit regulations, and to submit any anchoring problems to the SWFRHB for arbitration. During the five-year period, NOT ONE problem arose over anchored vessels! (I was chairman of the SWFRHB for most of those five years.)
Will White
To answer Captain Will’s question, “no,” the organization that I was speaking of which disbanded was the Florida Open Water Society, or some name close to that.
Claiborne
Hey there Claiborne….Bobbie Blowers here, aka “voice from the past”. We are currently living aboard our motorhome while our beloved Namaste is on the hard for a prolonged seige of much needed old boat repairs.
We are, however, currently IN Fl and would like some idea of where and when these buffer zone hearings will be. We plan to return to the Chesapeake April/May to finish our boat repairs but if timing is such that we can attend one or more of these hearings before leaving the Sunshine State, we definately will. We are not at all happy with the state of affairs for boaters in FL so anything we can do to help……..
Bobbie
Claiborne:
Even in such highly organized and wealthy communities such as Balboa beach, ca and L.A. and especially at Catalina island they have restricted anchoring areas; however, they are NOT closed off by large buffer zones, they are compact and anchoring is allowed, point this out to our glorious local cities!
respectfully
Gene Koblick
Dear Claiborne:
Thanks for the 3-1-11 up date. I was not knowledgeable of the details of the hard fought battle to get the Florida Anchoring rights for those in navigation. I do keep a copy handy and available at the helm Station but so far have not had to hand it to any boarding parties. The longest time at anchor anywhere has not been more than a week. We will be looking to anchor more on the eastern seaboard after reviewing our 2010 Marina Expenses. Will be making use of Vero Beach, Fernandina Beach, St Augustine mooring fields as we trek back North from Marathon. Looking forward to receiving future updates and participating were and when we can. 20 Mile Buffer zones is an outrageous thought and having Pilot programs Exempt from Federal Law not a good idea. Sincerely appreciate your efforts on the part of the cruising boating community and us retired cruisers. All the Best
Capt Bob
Lying Marathon Marina
M/Y ALLEZ!
Please note that Captain Ken DeLacy, author of the note below, has been one of the instrumental players in trying to bring sense to the Sarasota, Florida bayfront anchoring scene!
Claiborne,
A job well done blowing the horn on this and alerting the masses! May I post to our local group? Also may I print and distribute as some local boaters here don’t have email?
Ken DeLacy
Hello Claiborne.
Again this year I attempted to cruise Florida mainly for the supposedly warmer weather – which appears to be a thing of the past. I was promptly boarded by both Coastguard and Customs & Immigration boats in Jacksonville and for two days was in effect arrested because yet another agency – Wildlife & Fisheries – had reported they saw about 20 young Latinos getting off my boat at Jacksonville Landing! I was Number One suspect people smuggler! Turned out in the end that they were simply teenagers walking past my boat on the dock to visit the Electronics Show downtown. Funny in a way – yet not so funny in other ways. I hear many stories of boats being boarded in Florida for no valid reason – and undoubtedly with the prime intent of giving an expensive ticket to boost agency budgets. My advice to cruisers – the last sane port of call in Florida is Fernandina Beach – and even there a DNR officer with a gun surreptitiously checks out boats at the marina.
So I promptly returned to Georgia. Nobody bothers you at St Marys – and a very nice crowd of liveaboards help each other out. The City Dock at Savannah is effectively FREE – with free power and water. The Safe Harbour Marina just south of Thunderbolt is both inexpensive and delightful – both the showers and laundry have been renovated and nice friendly people there! The police boat at Isle of Palms simply waves a greeting and an overnight stay at Thunderbolt Marina will get you a free car to get groceries or visit Savannah.
For those en route to or from the Bahamas – bypass Florida if possible and go outside. There’s a free dock at Daufuskie Island at a bankrupt marina – no power and water – and Bluffton too on the May River is a nice safe place to moor, visit and stock up on supplies. Diesel everywhere is steadily going up – and we might well see $5 a gallon this Spring. I’m waiting for warmer weather to start soon up to Chesapeake.
Hope you’re keeping well
Best wishes
Arnold
Claiborne,
I’m a Florida resident and serious cruiser (4-5000 miles a year). I absolutely support the need to rid our anchorages of ‘liveaboard’ derelicts. We need legislation directed to that goal, not broad brush
prohibitions. That said, buffer zones around mooring fields (which I heartily support) need to provide only for safety and security on both sides of the field. Fifty feet is far too small, 500 feet might be OK if
the anchored boats are well anchored and have drag alarms set. I’ve seen too many incidences of boats dropping a small hook on a short scope and falling asleep only to endanger their neighbors. It seems to happen to me every other year on my cruises.
Chateau de Mer
Without anchoring freedom, few sailboaters will invest the time necessary to visit many of Florida’s more distant islands. If a sailor cannot anchor and spend a few nights at the island destination, then why spend the several days just to get there? Motorboats, on the other hand, can still zip out and zip back without too much effort and spent time. Just think’¦ pristine island beauty’¦. no sailboats’¦. just motorboats. Makes you feel warm all over, doesn’t it.
I agree with Chateau de Mer that the mooring fields must be able to offer some safety to their moored boats. Anchors can drag and anchor line can break. It seems reasonable that a mooring field should have a small safety buffer zone around it to prevent these slipped anchors from causing damage to moored boats. 500 ft seems pretty reasonable, depending on the geography, and maybe even as high as 750 ft, if necessary. What really matters is that the state does not allow a few boataphobic municipalities to diminish most of Florida’s bountiful and beautiful waterways by extending these buffer zones beyond the necessary distance to reasonably protect the moored boats. If a buffer zone extends out more than a few hundred feet, then it seems likely that its purpose goes beyond the safety of the moored boats and has more to do with usurping the rights of the boating community, and the state.
Rick from Port Charlotte
Dear Mr. Young,
Leave it to Guberment hacks to once again have their employees study, plan, and develope a program to do something they are already doing in another area!
The FL. Fish and Game already have a management plan that works for derelict Crab Traps! They should use the same for Derelict boats and Live-aboard hulks. Just plan on a one or two week period a year for each county to have all boats removed. Any vessel in that area during the posted time frame will be declaired abandoned and removed. Problem solved! And it didn’t take two years to plan, countless meetings and countless dollers wasted on the process of law making. Not to mention taking area away from boaters that want to drop anchor.
What do you thing?
Mike Laskowski
Folks, you are seeing what happens when the `carpetbaggers’ show up and want things their way. Florida just elected a new Governor’¦ Rick Scott. Its time to climb on his back about all the wasted money being spent on foolish projects’¦ He’s a big tea party guy, and is busy slashing funds for lots of things’¦.maybe he can slash some more wasted funds from the budgets to stop some of these silly projects.
Rob Homan
FLORIDA, THE OUT OF TOUCH STATE. SPEND MONEY WHERE THERE THERE IS NO PROBLEM, BUT, LAY OFF TEACHERS, BECAUSE YOU CANT PAY THEM. THE STATES WATERWAYS ARE THE MOST PATROLLED WATERS IN THE UNIVERSE, GUESS THAT IS WHERE ALL THE CRIME IS NOW. LAW ENFORCEMENT HAS CURED ALL THE CRIME ON LAND, AND HAS NOW MOVE ON THE WATER TO SEEK OUT THE NEW CRIMINAL’“THE SELF SUPPORTING RETIRED BOATER, SEEKING PEACE AND QUITE. ASK CITY OFFICIAL ON FLORIDA’S WATERWAYS, IF THEY ARE AWARE OF A CRUISING BOATER CAUSING A PROBLEM PASSING THROUGH. FLORIDA NEEDS TO GET REAL, NO WONDER THE STATE IS BROKE. HOW MANY BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IS THE STATE LOSING BY THEIR STUPIDITY, TRYING TO ENFORCE VICTIMLESS CRIMES, THEY HAVE CREATED. CRUISING BOATERS ARE SOME OF THE MOST RESPONSIBLE CITIZENS IN OUR COUNTRY. FLORIDA IS CUTTING ITS OWN THROAT, CRUISING BOATERS ARE BY- PASSING THE STATE. AS I SIT ON MY BOAT, AND WATCH THE PARADE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT PASS BY. COAST GUARD, SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT, DEP, FWC, CUSTOMS AND THEIR HIGH SPEED CIGARETTE BOAT, CITY POLICE BOATS, DNR. SOMETHING REAL BAD MUST BE HAPPENING ON THE WATER. AM I TARGETED, BECAUSE I AM A LIVE ABOARD CRUISER. AND YES, I EARNED MY RIGHT TO BOAT IN FLORIDA. I ‘˜M RETIRED FROM TWO POLICE DEPARTMENTS IN FLORIDA, A US NAVY VETERAN, AND A FLORIDA ARMY NATIONAL GUARD INFANTRY VETERAN . THIS CRAZINESS HAS TO STOP. FIGHT CRIMINALS, NOT BOATERS.
BOB BARTHOLOW
We agree with Bob Bartholow regarding the number of law enforcement agencies on the waters in Florida. We have just started cruising this year and we are appalled at the amount of money that these agencies spend on patrol boats. Their `boat budgets’ must be astronomical, it seems like only the fastest and most expensive will do.
We want to experience all that we can while cruising and although mooring fields are a great addition to your choices, anchoring cannot be beat for peace and beauty. The problem we see within our limited experience is, if a mooring field is filled, and there is a `buffer zone’ what do you do besides move on?
With the traffic we have seen in the mooring fields in this short time, moving on will mean cruising outside of Florida
Jann & Gary Merrill
We have to get used to the fact that Florida legislators pay no attention to opinions of those who do not vote in Florida. They do pay attention to rich waterfront land owners who make large donations.
Now if we could get 100 boaters to donate $10,000 each to a legal fund, we could challenge the idea in Federal Court under US maritime laws and perhaps win. IMO, states have no authority to regulate any aspect of boating. It is analogous to airspace, where the FAA has exclusive authority to regulate, and states have zero authority. (for me personally $10K would be 50% of my income, so I can’t afford to contribute.)
Florida Anchoring Rights Struggle Enters Next Phase
An Editorial
By
Claiborne S. Young
Last Friday, February 25, 2011, stories began to appear in the Florida press heralding the next, evolutionary step in the Florida Anchoring Rights struggle. This development was not at all unexpected, but it does presage a call to arms for the cruising community. We MUST ALL heed this call if the Floridian anchoring rights which have been earned after so much blood, sweat and tears over the last decade are to be maintained.
Let me not keep you in suspense. The story that broke details the naming of the first three “Pilot Mooring Field Program” sites in the state of Florida. They are Sarasota, St. Petersburg and all of Monroe County, which encompasses the Florida Keys. You can read the full story at:
http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2011/feb/24/state-chooses-sites-keys-sarasota-st-pete-anchorin/
Over the weekend, messages appeared on several other nautical mailing lists to the effect that this was a “new” development. NOT so! In fact, the naming of the pilot sites has been expected since 2009.
To explain that statement, we must review the momentous 2009 legislative Anchoring Rights struggle. To detail that entire process would fill a small book, so please allow me to give you an executive summary.
There were a host of pro-cruising forces working hard for the best anchoring law that could be obtained in 2009. Among these were Seven Seas Cruising Association, Boat/US, the Florida Marina Industries Association, the Salty Southeast Cruisers’ Net and a grassroots organization, since disbanded, which came into being as a direct consequence of the Florida anchoring situation.
This coalition of pro-cruiser forces was squared off against the Florida League of Counties and Municipalities. As you might imagine, this group wanted to retain as much local control over anchoring as possible.
What emerged from this battle was a serious concession from the League of Counties and Municipalities that broadened the definition of what it is for a vessel to be “used for navigation.” This was the loop hole that many municipalities had used in the past, as Florida state law, even before 2009, banned local anchorage regulations for vessels “used for navigation.”
Now, anyone who has ever been involved in the good, old US of A legislative process knows that when you get a major concession from the “other side,” you’ve got to give something. And, what the pro-cruiser forces gave was a plan for a series of pilot mooring fields. The law further charged the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission (FWC), in consultation with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, (FDEP), with naming the site of the pilot programs, and stated that these selections must be made by July of 2011.
So, to anyone who has been following the Florida Anchoring Right struggle, it’s certainly no surprise, much less a shock, that the FWC has complied with the 2009 law and made its first three selections. Two more sites will be named along the Eastern Florida coastline sometime between now and this coming July.
Well, if all this was expected, as indeed it was, by now you may be wondering, so what’s the big deal Claiborne. Well, I’ll tell you what the “big deal” may be, and to put it succinctly, that “big deal” is “buffer zones.”
During all the debate which raged around the 2009 Florida Anchoring Law, and, in particular, the establishment of the pilot mooring field program, it came be to be generally acknowledged that, to be effective, there was going to have to be some sort of NO-ANCHORING ALLOWED buffer zones established around the pilot mooring fields.
The argument ran that, without such buffer zones, cruisers could simply drop the hook 50 feet outside the mooring field, pay nothing, and dinghy ashore to take advantage of all the services established to support the mooring field, such as showers, dinghy docks, etc.
Now, let me be very quick to point out, there were strong and well reasoned voices in the cruising community which did NOT accept this premise. At the height of the debate, we published an extremely thoughtful article, authored by SSECN contributor, Captain Charmaine Smith Ladd, in which she strongly asserted the notion that the pilot mooring fields in general, and any sort of no-anchor buffer zones in particular, were bad ideas (See /stay-vigilant). A fear that the no-anchor buffer zones might be abused was front and center in Captain Charmain’s arguments.
And, indeed, I worried about this same thing. During a particular FWC meeting, one Florida municipality made what I thought was an outlandish statement that for a mooring field to be successful along their waterfront, waters as far as twenty miles away would need to be included in a no-anchor buffer zone.
However, many of the pro-cruiser forces, including this writer, decided, perhaps uncomfortably so, that we were just going to have to live with the fear of bloated, no-anchor buffer zones if we were going to get the rest of the pro-boating portions of the 2009 bill enacted into law.
And, that’s exactly what happened, and here we are in 2011, with the FWC carrying out its legislatively mandated duty of naming the mooring field pilot program sites. WHAT WE MUST ALL DO NOW IS EXERT OUR MAXIMUM EFFORTS TO MAKE SURE THE NO-ANCHOR BUFFER ZONES ESTABLISHED AROUND THESE PILOT SITES ARE A REASONABLE SIZE, AND THAT THESE BUFFER ZONES ARE NOT USED SIMPLY AS A MEANS TO INSURE THAT NO BOAT ANCHORS ANYWHERE NEAR THE COMMUNITY IN QUESTION!!!!
Fortunately, the 2009 law provides the perfect forum for us to act. This statute specifies that the FWC “MUST” hold a series of public forums BEFORE the rules surrounding any of the mooring fields are decided on and approved! THE CRUISING COMMUNITY MUST BE WELL REPRESENTED AT ALL THESE PUBLIC FORUMS!!!! We must be heard, and we must LISTEN for any attempt to establish unreasonable buffer zones!
The Salty Southeast Cruisers’ Net will do its part. As soon as the dates and sites for the various public forums are announced, we will post these stats on our web site, and send out special e-mail “Alerts.” Those of you who are members of other nautical mailing lists, Seven Seas Cruising Association, MTOA, or the AGLCA, PLEASE repost these blasts on your lists. WE NEED TO GET AS MANY CRUISERS TO THESE MEETINGS AS POSSIBLE. That point cannot be overstressed.
Finally, let me give some advice to all cruisers, and particularly those who eventually speak at the mooring field pilot program public forums. Make no mistake about it, Florida does have a REAL problem with abandoned vessels and, what I term, “live aboard hulks.” These latter “vessels” are little more than hulls that will never move again, and on which some people “live.”
The question is this, though! Is the best way to solve this problem by prohibiting everyone from anchoring, or only anchoring for a short period of time. Any of you who have read my earlier editorials on this subject know my answer is a resounding, “NO!” Rather, WE SHOULD EMPLOY MARINE SALVAGE LAWS AND MSD REGULATIONS TO CLEAN UP DERELICTS AND LIVE-ABOARD HULKS! For more on these suggestions, please see my earlier Anchoring Rights editorial at:
/florida-anchoring-editorial-1-whence-come-the-anchorage-regulations
OK, now you know about the latest when it comes to the issue of Florida Anchoring. PLEASE let us know what you think by e-mailing me at CruisingWriter@CruisersNet.net. And, most importantly, see you at the pilot field public forums!!!!
As of today, March 2, 2011, there has already been a firestorm of responses from the cruising community concerning our editorial linked above. If you have ALREADY read the editorial, click the link below to check out the many messages we have received from fellow cruisers on this subject. If you have NOT read our editorial, please do that FIRST, and then follow the link at the end of that article to check out the response:
PLEASE Click Here To Read the Voluminous Reaction to Our Anchoring Rights Editorial Of 3/1/11
And, here is the official News Release from the FWC which initiated this whole discussion:
News Release from the FWC.
Contact: Katie Purcell, 850-459-6585
At its meeting Wednesday in Apalachicola, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) selected three sites for an anchoring and mooring pilot program. Two more will be chosen in April.
Following staff recommendations, Commissioners voted to select the cities of Sarasota and St. Petersburg and Monroe County as sites for the mooring field pilot program. A mooring field is a controlled area where boaters tie their vessels to a floating buoy, which is secured to the bottom of the waterway.
Under Florida statute, the FWC, in consultation with the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), must establish a pilot program regulating anchoring and mooring outside of marked public mooring fields.
“We hope the project promotes safe public access to Florida’s waters, protects the marine environment and deters improperly stored, abandoned or derelict vessels,” said Maj. Jack Daugherty, leader of the FWC’s Boating and Waterways section.
By July 1, 2011, the FWC must have selected all locations for the pilot project. The requirements include two on the east coast of Florida, two on the west coast and one in Monroe County, so the remaining selections must be on the east coast.
The FWC staff began work on the program in October 2009, when it sent out letters of solicitation. Fourteen counties and municipalities responded with letters of intent to participate.
“Our staff worked with DEP to gather data to determine appropriate sites for the project,” Daugherty said.
They analyzed geographic characteristics of the area, services provided at the mooring field sites, usage fees and the average number of boats inside and outside of the mooring fields.
At its December meeting, the Boating Advisory Council, which makes recommendations to the FWC and the Department of Community Affairs regarding issues affecting the boating public, advised FWC staff to move forward with the site recommendations on the west coast and in Monroe County.
Wednesday, staff presented recommendations to the Commission on those recommended sites on the west coast and in Monroe County. Commissioners approved FWC staff-recommended sites and a request for more time to collect and analyze more data regarding anchoring and mooring on the east coast.
FWC staff will present the data to the Boating Advisory Council in March for recommendations, and then return at the April Commission meeting with suggestions for the two remaining east coast pilot sites. The Commission also directed staff to work with the city of Stuart in an attempt to be added as a third pilot program site.
Please visit MyFWC.com/Boating or call the FWC’s Boating and Waterways Section at 850-488-5600 for more information.
And now, a different point of view from Charmaine Smith Ladd, our Florida Keys correspondent.
March 27, 2009
Remember, the Pilot Programs are EXEMPT from established law. E-X-E-M-P-T. That’s how the Pilot Program was barely noticed to begin with. Who cared…our rights to anchor were intact…what we didn’t know was that the Pilot Program would be exempt from adhering to the laws that protect our right to anchor. Fool me once, shame on you! Fool me twice, shame on me! It is imperative the Pilot Program be removed altogether and I (and others) won’t be looking under every rock as if someone is trying to sneak something in and through while we’re busy celebrating our so-called victories.
Even though I’m not from Missouri, you still have to SHOW-ME if you want me to go along with something.
So…go ahead, SHOW ME!
_______________________________________
Charmaine Smith Ladd, SSECN’s Regional Correspondent of the Florida Keys, bringing you “The Low Down from Down Low.”
Whence Come The Anchorage Regulations
And
What Do We Do About Them, `The 95 ‘“ 5 Rule’
A Salty Southeast Cruisers’ Net Editorial
By
Claiborne S. Young
Almost everywhere I go, one question keeps popping up time after time; some variation of, `Claiborne, where are all these Florida anchorage regulations coming from?’ Well, I am going to attempt to answer that question within this article/editorial, AND why I think most of these proposed prohibitions are unnecessary and probably harmful.
Let me quickly acknowledge that I most certainly do not know all, when it comes to this complex issue. As always, we strongly encourage Salty Southeast Cruisers’ Net visitors to weigh in with their knowledge and opinions. I have received some of the most eye opening data on Florida anchoring regulations/rights from my fellow cruisers. Please e-mail your comments or opinions to CruisingWriter@CruisersNet.net, or click the `Contribute Cruising News’ link found near the top, center of most Net pages.
So, with that out of the way, here goes. First, let’s dispose of two less than savory reasons why Floridian anchorage regulations have made an appearance, stretching all the way back to the early 1990’s.
1. Local and county governmental officials see anchorage regulations as a way to expand their department’s authority, or, in bureaucrat-ese, `expand their turf.’
2. There are a group of very wealthy Floridians, who, by virtue of their finances, have more than their fair share of political influence. And, they simply do not want to walk out in their backyards, and see anchored boats on the water. I once heard one property owner of this ilk testify that whenever he was on the water, he ALWAYS saw cruising craft dumping untreated sewage and trash overboard. Talk about a bald faced lie if I ever heard one!
Those favoring anchorage regulation for one of the above two reasons are beneath my contempt, and that of the entire cruising community. Haven’t we had enough of self-serving government officials and overreaching, wealthy property owners? Enough said!
Then, there are concerns about `noise pollution’ and trespassing. Who among us has not dropped the hook in some quiet corner of the world, only to have another vessel show up across the way, and proceed to play loud music into the small hours. Not a fun night.
I, myself, have watched, on rare occasions, as less than sanguine cruisers pull their dinghies onto someone’s back yard, and then gaily go off to the grocery store, as if it was their right to land the dink wherever they pleased. No wonder some waterside property owners have erected large `No Trespassing’ signs.
In populated regions, noise pollution and trespassing are real problems. However, I have a very simple solution for these two anchorage concerns.
There are already trespassing and `disturbing the peace’/noise pollution laws on the books of virtually every municipality and county in America. One local water cop enforcing these regulations should solve the problem nicely.
And, that brings us to the issue which I think is front and center in what I will term as the `honest’ attempts to regulate anchorage (as opposed to the `dishonest’ #1 and #2 reasons listed above). Can you guess what this issue might be?
I won’t keep you in suspense. Abandoned vessels and what I will term, live-aboard `hulks,’ are, without any question in my tiny mind, the #1 threat to anchoring rights throughout Florida for the rest of us. We’ve all seen vessels at anchor which have been sitting in the same spot for months on end, without anyone being aboard. And then, most of us have also gazed in wonder at `boats’ which look as if they are going to sink any moment, and then we see someone come on deck. Have you, like me, asked yourself, `Does someone actually live on that thing?’
Abandoned vessels and live-aboard hulks are safety and health risks, not to mention being more than a little bit unsightly. They often break free during bad weather, and impact other vessels or private property. And, as to the untreated waste being dumped overboard from the hulks, best not to think too closely on that topic.
Think this isn’t a serious issue? Consider the two e-mails below which I received shortly after publishing my last `Anchorage Rights/Regulations Analysis:’
Dear Claiborne,
Thanks for the update and more than that, the great service you provide boaters. On the subject of anchoring rights however, I feel you and others in the cruising community need to take a more balanced stand.
I live near Sarasota so see almost on a daily basis the derelict or near-derelict boats moored off the city waterfront. They are ugly, dangerous – occasionally coming adrift in bad weather – and in many cases unoccupied. For those that live aboard I suspect the concept of a pump out is totally alien. Then try anchoring overnight in the Boca Grande basin. My wife and I were there a couple of months ago and, contrary to your 2006 article it seemed virtually all occupied by “long term” cruisers ( I use the term charitably), many in dilapidated condition. Again, I wonder about frequency of pump out for some of these boats.
Most of us are responsible cruisers, for whom a limitation of several days, perhaps a week, in one location is not a large imposition. I feel we would be better served by meeting local communities half way and working towards a compromise that retains the ability of the cruising majority to cruise, while dealing with the minority that give all of us a bad name.
Peter Morris
Or, this one:
Hi Claiborne,
I am an advocate for anchoring rights. But I have to point out that many places in California have had severe restrictions on anchoring for some time. Long Beach Harbor used to allow overnight anchoring behind some oil platforms but that “right” was taken away a number of years ago. Marina Del Rey, Redando Beach, and San Pedro have no anchoring. Newport Beach has a small restricted area, but you are not allowed to leave the boat unattended. Dana Point also has this restriction. San Diego has restricted anchorages, and most require a permit to use. Even Catalina Island has defacto lack of anchorages, by the massive mooring fields and harbor masters who will not allow anchoring in many parts of the harbors–so that at the Isthmus and Avalon, you have to anchor in more than 100 feet, and often in areas of poor holding and subject to weather.
I did discuss the anchoring situation with our local marine resource officer in Pensacola, and there is no plan for restriction, as long as the vessel is outside of the navigable channel. I asked about the mooring field, and was told that the stipulations put on this were so great by the state that they would not be practical economically–I tend to agree. I do believe it is more for control, than to provide a service or help the mariner.
Regards,
Bob Austin
And, speaking from my own experience, I will never forget the first day we came steaming into Marathon’s Boot Key Harbor back in the late 1990’s, to begin research for my and Morgan Stinemetz’s `Cruising the Florida Keys.’ The numbers of sunken and semi-sunken boats were astounding! And, so much raw sewage was being dumped overboard, only those completely out of their minds would have stuck their big toe in the water.
Of course, today, things are very, very different in Boot Key Harbor. It has been cleaned up, a large mooring field has been established, and the city of Marathon has put excellent shoreside facilities in place. BUT, that gets into the issue of mooring fields, which is the subject of my next anchoring editorial, not this one.
Let’s pause here for a moment to recall a bit of relevant history. Back in the early 1990’s anchoring rights and regulations were already a problem in Florida, particularly in the city of Stuart. A group sprang into being known alternately as the `Coalition of Concerned Boaters’ and the `National Water Rights Association.’ I was intimately involved with this organization for several years.
During one of the group’s conferences, we were presented with what may still be the only well-done, truly scientific survey of cruisers in the Florida Keys. After exhaustive research, Dr. Gus Antoinelly (spelling?), of the University of Miami, concluded, among other things, that only 7% of the boat owners in the Florida Keys were, to use his terminology, `Mavericks.’ You may freely think of `Mavericks’ as those who attempt to `live off the land,’ and are subject to anchoring in one spot for long, long periods of time, probably without too much reference to MSD regulations.
Now, I would argue that the laissez-faire lifestyle in the Florida Keys, which, by the way, accounts for much of the charm while cruising these fascinating waters, tends to encourage `Mavericks.’ Thus, I would contend that in other parts of Florida, `Mavericks’ probably make up 5% (or less) of the cruising population. That’s an important number to remember as we move into what I see as the solutions for abandoned vessels and live-aboard hulks!
Unfortunately, encouraged by nefarious reasons #1 and #2 (see above), many communities in Florida have chosen to confront the problem of abandoned boats and live-aboard hulks by establishing anchoring limits of 24, 48 or 72 hours FOR EVERYONE. Put another way, towns and cities of this genre are penalizing 95% of the cruising community to try and rid themselves of the 5% they don’t want.
Particularly in the case of Florida, THAT’S PLAYING WITH FIRE! Everyone please remember that in the Sunshine State, the marine industry is second in importance only to tourism. Cruisers, even those who almost never anchor, HATE anchorage regulations. And, that leads to e-mails like this:
Claiborne:
I have been coming to Florida since 1959. I have vacationed here for years. For 13 years I was in charge of a company outing. For 13 years we came to Florida spending lots of money. We were always treated very well. This year my wife and I retired and fulfilled a long dream of taking our sail boat to Florida to get away from Buffalo winters. It was strange that all the way down fellow cruisers would comment that they were not going to cruise in Florida because the “rich people do not want you to use their waters”. They were going to go over to the Bahamas where they were welcomed. Well I have cruised for over 2400 hundred miles on our trip and was not bothered by anybody until I crossed the Florida boarder. We have been stopped 3 times, boarded and inspected once, and just routine stops on the other two occasions. A fellow cruiser, that I received an e-mail from, said that he was on shore and when he returned to his boat, the police were there and left a note telling him to leave the area. We have spent thousand of dollars in Florida, I know that the economy is not the best, but if I had a marina or had a business along the the ICW I would be a little upset on how the state of Florida is treating their guests and vacationers. I see the harbors littered with derelict boats and see why this is a concern. But if you are in a, in most cases, an expensive boat I would think that you would not be considered a nuisance but more a good business venture. We were in the Vero Beach area. We were just passing through and ended up spending 2 weeks. This area goes out of the way to promote business with the cruising community. I would like to stay in the Florida area, but wonder if it’s worth it. Hope things can turn around and it’s not to late.
So, `what’s the answer, Claiborne,’ you may be asking about now! Believe, it or else, I’ve got one.
First, in regards to abandoned vessels, has no city or county governmental official in Florida heard of `salvage laws.’ Let’s again be very clear that I am NOT a lawyer, much less a maritime lawyer, but it is my understanding that if a vessel is left abandoned for thirty days or so, it can be declared as salvage and sold at public auction. A few actions like that, and I have a deep suspicion that all the abandoned vessels which still have owners would be removed in short order.
Too vague for you? Then Florida should do what South Carolina has just done, namely, pass a specific law which mandates that after giving generous notice, vessels abandoned for more than thirty days will be impounded and sold. What a good idea, and notice, this does NOT impact anchoring rights for any boat owners except those who leave their vessels unoccupied for longer than 30 days. And, how many responsible mariners are going to leave their boat uninspected at anchor for a month or longer. (more on the new South Carolina law SOON)
So, what about liveaboard hulks? I can solve that problem as well. Federal and state MSD (Marine Sanitation Device) regulations are the answer.
Again, as a NON-LAWYER, it is my understanding of Federal MSD regulations, that if the USCG has even reasonable suspicion untreated sewage is being dumped overboard, a $10,000.00 fine can be imposed. And, the state of Florida ALREADY has even tougher MSD regulations than the Federal government. So, the FWC in the guise of the Florida Marine Patrol, can inspect hulks for MSD violations as well. Clearly, if a vessel has been sitting in the same spot for months on end, it has either long ago filled its holding tank to capacity, or exhausted its batteries, should there be a Lectra-San type device aboard. That seems like more that reasonable suspicion to me to impose stiff MSD fines!
Just let a few $10,000.00 fines be issued, and see how long it takes the live-aboard hulks to be moved, or permanently abandoned. If this latter action comes about, refer to my solution above for derelicts.
The beauty of both these solutions is that they can go forward under existing Florida state and Federal laws, with no additional legislation necessary, and with no other anchoring prohibitions! Put that one in your pipe and smoke it a bit.
Finally, that leaves the case of what I will call `responsible liveaboards,’ boat owners who religiously come to the dock (or use a `honey boat’) to have their holding tanks pumped, don’t throw trash overboard, don’t make loud noise, don’t’ trespass, and keep their vessels attractive and well secured. How long should a mariner of this ilk be allowed to anchor his or her vessel in the same spot?
I must admit that I don’t have an answer. Perhaps some of you could weigh in on this issue.
Of course, one part of this equation that I have not discussed, is increasing population, both on land and on the water. While in the current economic climate, you may look askance at me when I discuss `increasing water population,’ over the long haul, the numbers of boats on Florida’s coastal waters have increased. Coupled with declining public dockage, a case can be made, and well made, for some other sort of readily available means to store privately owned vessels, in a safe and secure environment. Thus, we enter the whole issue of mooring fields. However, and your eyes will be glad to hear it, that is the subject of my next anchoring editorial, not this one.
Issues are getting confused here. A `liveaboard’ boat in the State of Florida can be regulated outside of mooring fields. This has been this way since 2006. A `liveaboard’ is a boat that does not move, is used strictly as a residence or place of business and does not navigate waters. The law already has given local communities the power to handle these vessels. They are NOT the issue.
What we’re talking about are CRUISERS. Cruisers (called `non-liveaboards’ even though cruisers may indeed live aboard full time or part time) cannot by regulated with regard to anchoring, according to FL Statute 327(60). The People of Florida demanded that Statute stay intact. But the Pilot Program goes around that and is exempt from adhering to the Statute. As FWC posted on their site `Due to pressures from homeowners and some others’¦.’ [they added the Pilot Program and submitted it along with what the PUBLIC agreed would be revisions to the Statutes]. This was done without Public input or knowledge’¦a back door loophole for those who have political pull to continue to try to override the majority. THIS is what is so scandalous about the Pilot Program.
Five sites were to be named yet Sarasota immediately jumped the gun and put up a 72-hour anchoring limit. It was challenged and they dropped it, but everyone who knew anything knew that Sarasota would definitely be one of the five sites to participate in the Pilot Program. It is a self-serving program for a few to get what they want despite what the people have used due process to show as their choice: NO ORDINANCES ON ANCHORING for Florida cruisers! Another thing: When they named the five sites, it was incredulous that one site is ALL OF MONROE COUNTY! This is what happens when people are confused and don’t know what is going on. The Pilot Program is nothing more than a way to quell the whining of a few powerful people, take away the freedom of boats in navigation, and use our tax dollars to do it.
The FWC will be holding more workshops on this issue. There is one at the Government Center in Marathon, FL on June 8th at 6 pm. If you cannot attend, let your voice be heard by writing. We cannot let this happen. Public trust is being manipulated and we can help our local authorities fight back against those misusing them with our voices saying we won’t stand for our rights and wants being ignored.
One ordinance outside of mooring fields will lead to another ordinance outside of beaches, etc. There is no end to anchoring ordinances for cruisers if we allow them to BEGIN.
I have enjoyed cruising the Florida coast and think it would be a great setback for everyone if anchoring in front of private property was restricted.
Captain Charmaine Smith Ladd
Consider the vast quantity of land owned and operated by major concerns (hotels, restaurants, and property developers) that could quickly eliminate large swaths of available anchorage for boaters.
I am not so worried about abandoned boats, as that is truly a separate question.
The live aboard hulk should be easy to resolve’¦
Jack Simmons
I like the idea mentioned above in reference to enforcing the current laws on the books. I would also propose, and this one will probably be met with controversy, a cruising permit fee of say $150 annually. The money raised by this fee (tax) could be used for enforcement. I would bet that derelict boat owners and irresponsible livaboards (the 5%) would not pay the permit fee and could be easily identified and dealt with within the current regulations.
John Schwab
I agree that enforcement of existing regulations concerning polution control would eliminate virtually all of the derelict live-aboards. As I understand it, there are already laws/rules/regulations granting the state the right to inspect/fine/etc. I believe local authorities have the ability to enforce state and federal regulations, do they not? Consistent local enforcement will drive away `Mavericks’. The inconvenience of multiple inspections, ticketing, fines, and jail time would discourage squatting. These regulations can also be the springboard for dealing with many of the abandoned boats, particularly those sinking and contributing polution that way.
As for removal of abandoned boats, unfortunately one of the requirements is funding. It costs way more to retrieve the abandoned boat and dispose of it than can be taken in by auctioning or salvaging the boat. Consqently local authorities cannot afford to do it even if they want to.
Therefor, a private `foundation’ needs to be created to raise funds to be used for dealing with the costs of removing abandoned boats. Interested cruisers, marine businesses (local, national, international), `wealthy’ local residents tired of looking at the derelicts, and any other interested parties could contribute to this foundation. It should be tax exempt to help encourage contributions. It could provide grants or matching funds to local communities, appropriate groups and organizations for use in abating the cost of dealing with this problem. If desired, the foundation coud handle `earmarking’ funds i.e. funds raised in Stuart could be allocated to dealing with problems in that county only if the contributors requested that restriction, etc.
Someone will immediately jump in with the `idea’ we should handle this with tax money. Our systems are already overtaxed. We don’t have enough taxes to do all the things others want them to do as it is, and we don’t need additional or new taxes. Besides, there is something immoral about requiring everyone to contribute to anything held sacred by a few.
We as a cruising community are perpetually lauded for being generous. We are, as are most all Americans. We just need to approach this problem from the standpoint of how might we solve it instead of `there’s nothing we can do about it’. And nobody should be allowed to complain about a problem without suggesting some possible solution.
Reggie Good
Similar problems in North Carolina! I’ve spent about 30 years cruising Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Long Island Sound. Depending on a given harbor, Yacht Clubs, Commercial Marinas, nearby property owners, and sometime town officials set out moorings, ususally with a harbormaster who assigns a space that won’t interfere with the swing of already-installed moorings. With 8′ tides, and 20-30 ft. deep harbors, this system has proven over the last 100 years to work fairly well.
North Carolina has banned ALL mooring installation except for 2 special cases:1) a city or town may designate an area as a mooring field, and install moorings on a grid pattern, and charge a nightly fee for them(becomes outrageous if you want to keep your boat in the harbor for the season) 2) a waterfront property owner is allowed 4 moorings fer each 100 yds of waterfront he owns. Most have no moorings, but many have lifts. I live on a man-made canal off the Pungo River, and the sandbar at the mouth can prevent my boat from getting over it after a long blow from the West.
About a year into using it, a CAMA officer came across it, and mailed me a $35,000 fine! Since the aterfront property inland of the moorng was a canal, there was no way for me to purchase 100 yards of it. My attorney finally settledthe case by getting an affidavit from the 2 property owners on either side of the canal to forgo installing 1 of their permitted 4 moorings. (They never had any intention of installing moorings anyway)
All-in-all, this policy is very detrimental to beginning boaters, or to those who cannot afford to tie up $ in 100 yds. of frontage in order to install a boat mooring. Most of New England would be out of the boating business if they imposed N.C. style restrictions.
Doug Green
Well said, Claiborne! I have always felt that many/most government regulations `punish’ the vast majority for the problems caused by a small minority.
Your proposal makes great sense, although I suspect that it may take a lot of time and money to enforce the derelict and MSD violations. Even if that is true, it would still be better for all concerned than the `prohibit everyone’ approach.
Thanks for your great website and service to the cruising community
Duane Ising
Claiborne,
The biggest issue with the impoundment of abandoned vessels is the absolute lock that USCG documentation has on the ownership of a boat. It takes upwards of 6 months in court for the IRS to establish their ownership of, and therefore ability to sell, a documented boat. A local municipality would be heavily burdened by the litigation required to be able to re-sell a boat they had taken custody of. I know a person who have found a vessel washed up on a beach and had no option but to negotiate with the owner who abandoned it in order to get the paperwork in place to register the boat himself. So even if there were a boat no one was claiming, it presents a big problem.
Much local anchoring legislation is federally illegal ‘“ I was boarded last year by Miami Beach police when I anchored there and was told that while I might ultimately win in court, it might take years and bankrupt me. They were asking me to agree to a 7 day limit on my stay with generous provisions for extensions due to weather, mechanical difficulties, or medical emergencies that might postpone my departure. I had to agree that they were between a rock and a hard place over this because of pressure from waterfront land owners who were tired of paying high tax bills to stare at others who were not. So a friendly compromise in Miami Beach ‘“ in Georgia there is a 30 day annual limit on living aboard; at anchor, on a mooring, or in a marina. That doesn’t sound like it would hold up in federal court, but it doesn’t stop Georgia from enforcing it.
I know if I’m boarded and my `Y’ valve is not locked or wire tied to the holding tank position, and if my overboard mascerator discharge thru-hull is not wire tied closed, I’m subject to an expensive summons. The MSD laws will stand up in any court, so I agree that would be the best place to enforce existing laws to see if the problem can’t be substantially resolved that way.
Peter TenHaagen
As a Florida liveaboard, I agree wholeheartedly with the concept of enforcing holding tank regulations as an easy way to deal with the derilict boat populations. However it has to be convenient to get your boat pumped and this is not always the case.
We boaters are most likely willing to pay much more than $5.00 to get our boats pumped if it can be done on a timely basis. I would suggest that we reasearch how we can turn the honey boat business over to private industry who are able to make a profit, perhaps with government susidies. Maybe SeaTow and TowBoat US would relish a use for their boats when awaiting a tow job. Maybe the local government should BUY the waste from private honey boats.
Please shield my name so I can continue to get pumped, Eh?
H. M.
Unscientific Observations’¦.
We happened to take a tour of Boot Key Harbor in Marathon yesterday. It has one huge Mooring Field and I understand that `things are much better than they used to be’ here. The city apparently will pump out any boats requesting this service in and around the harbor.
On our tour I noticed that there are many boats outside of this field anchored for a variety of reasons I would call some abandoned or damaged wrecks, others in storage, some very nice boats, some obvious short term transients, other live-aboards, and some `live-aboard hulks’. While beauty is in the eye of the beholder most boaters would be able to categorize boats if given a list and looking at the condition of boats. Gray area boats could be inspected more closely!
One can get a sense of how long they have been present by the twisted rodes and slime buildup on lines and hulls. I was struck that the majority of these `questionable’ boats in my mind were FL registered.
I would hope the interpretation of existing laws can be used to address the concerns that boaters and non-boaters have on boats anchored or moored for long periods of time, those situations that seem to be of the most concern in this anchoring issue.
I have yet to stay on a mooring ball and like to anchor out, rarely not being able to find a place we like. We’ve now traveled from the top of Lake Huron to the Keys and have rarely seen areas or boats that should create related concerns. That said, I accept that there are many such boats and areas that as witnessed by our brief on-water tour at BKH.
Nature’s purification in the Northland is the winter ice that usually prevents very long term moorings.
I would be interested in seeing a list of the more friendly places’¦.one of the postings mentioned that they liked Vero Beach for example’¦.while others mentioned being boarded by police and asked to move on! Where is that happening?
Thanks, Jim
The above comments make sense. Why are we penalized for the 5% of the scumbags?
Capt. King
A couple yrs ago while traveling south we anchored south of lift bridge in Ft Pierce. Several other boats there and a couple were in bad shape.. No dinghy and boats had lots of growth. The next day SW winds blew hard. I was worried about this one boat and soon saw it draggin down toward us. After the fire drill was done we had a small dent, the others boat was luckily anchored again without draging to the bridge.. The CG showed up and boarded the other sail boat.. No one there of course. Boat US showed up and commented that he had to tow that boat off th mud after every wind storm..
Something has to be done about boats that are a constant nuisance. A eye sore to the cruising community.
CRAIG FARNSWORTH
So so tired of all of this BS by pompous property owners. It however is not ,unique to Fl or CA marine issues.
We have people who build an expensive home and barn 300 feet from a train track knowing the issues up front. Every day a freight comes and parks in front of their home blocking access to their drive and view of the back 40 for 6 hours. All hell breaks loose.
Same goes for the fool who builds his home near an airport and after a while tires of the noise.
Every single person complaining in anyway about the varied marine traffic, knew, without exception, the issues and the score going in, up front. They made their choice, and now want it like Burger King, their way.
They not only knew the situation, they knew up front what the taxes were also.
I have no sympathy what so ever for those land owners. This is coming from someone who lives on the water and welcomes, and helps all coming by water in my area. They are typically better people than those complaining.
The boat people do not polute nearly to the degree of those dumping lawn and plant fert, weed killer, etc. into the water. Their yard run off is not measured either, and is destroying other things too.
If you don’t like it move!
My home is worth plenty, but I chose to be here knowing all potential consequences. The water is free owned by none shared by all.
POPEYE
The above articles are right to the point and illistrate an easy solution the Florida’s dilemna. What I think is happening is the typical lazy approach of law enforcement to ticket the boats passing through whenever possible to generate a cash flow. Looks like they are enforcing the law. Boaters pay the fine and go on their way. They don’t want to chase after the derelicts because it may be difficult to find the owner or, the owner may be some local guy the cops know and sympathize with. Boats from the north look like fair game with deep pockets.
jim burke
You list MSD as the enforcable violation for trash boats. I would choose anchor light. To check a MSD the officer would have either have to catch the violator in the act of pumping overboard or go aboard, add dye to the head, flush, and see the dye apear in the water. An anchor light violation citation could be made by simply cruising the anchorage after dark, noting the boats without lights, and glueing the ticket to the boat beside the compaionway.
Bill Murdoch
Claiborne,
I have, as both a Florida Resident and an “extended cruiser/liveaboard….watched this issue with some interest.
I find the comments by Jay Marko to be a tad “disingenuous” and the reason I say that…. is because anyone above the age of 7 knows that if you are caught dumping untreated waste into Florida waters you are in for trouble. Trespassing on someones property….be it a vacant lot is illegal, and discharge of bilge water containing anything but water is illegal as well… My question to Mr. Marko would be: WHY have you and your neighbors not called the local Sheriff regarding the trespassing, and why not the FWC regarding the disposal or pumping over of waste and other chemicals??? Seems to me he sounds a bit like someone who wants to make noise and not see a boat anywhere anyway. I find it difficult to believe that he and his neighbors (who could afford waterfront property on sailboat water) couldn’t get the attention of enforcement authorities to correct the situation. Sorry, I don’t buy his story….
B.C. Adams makes “vague assertions”….. and it sounds like he or she, like so many others….LITERALLY FAILS to understand that their property line ENDS at the seawall or high tide mark on navigable waters…. It legally does not matter that they bought the property for “the view”….their legally entitled view ENDS at the aforementioned points. How long a boat is anchored in one spot is of no concern to them as long as the boat or the boater is not in danger or causing problems that are addressed by law. While it is quite possible that thievery is taking place….how do they know it is a “boater” doing it?? It could just as easily be their neighbor doing it, or their neighbors son or just about anyone. If they can afford a “Private Marina”, one would think that they could afford some kind of security, even if its automatic lights or even a security guard or two.
I personally find abandoned and junked vessels hazardous….. and the current laws make it difficult to get rid of sunken boats. Punta Gorda had a running battle with a local fisherman for a number of years over his sunken boat…. Maybe the issue should be laid at the feet of the lawmakers in DC to clean up that section of the laws and make it easier to get these things taken care of…..
I am strongly considering taking my boat and retirement to another place…outside this country….because I’m sick and tired of arrogant people who claim to own what they don’t and demand to have things their way….. Florida used to be a great place to live and in some places it still is…but I can tell you….the shine has dulled badly in others….
Rob Homan
How come the State has the right to allow livaboards at anchor who are in navigation, but severley restricts the time allowed for the same boat if at a Marina, seems conflicted.
Dennis McMurtry
I have been fortunate enough to sail all the waters from the St. Lawrence to the Mexican border and well as the Bahamas.
I know Live in SW Florida(25 yrs) and have watched as a few attempt to spoil cruising. Yes, there are a few derilect boats. I see the same ones year after year. There actually are so few, I’m amazed that the local enforcement agencies can’t be bothered with enforcing existing laws and eliminating them.
In Charlotte county I spent many months going to the marine meetings and came to the conclusion that it was actually a very small group of complainers(4 or 5) and that they had little knowledge of cruising sailboats and the wildest imaginations and fabrications.
If not for the state anchoring laws they would have kept everyone of “thier” harbor and “thier” surrounding waters. Thanks to all groups that fought for the anchor law.
Robert Burney
Most of the comments here remind me of the good old US Congress. What everyone needs is more and more laws removing freedom from some while granting more freedom to others. This is usually determined by which group generates the most money for the politicians.
I like the method used by the Indians best. No one owns the water, no one owns the land. First come, first served. How simple and straight forward. It removes the driving force behind this whole issue, which is greed.
It is a given, that when one chooses to build near water there will be boats, those that we like and those that we don’t.
There are certainly boaters at these anchorages that find some waterfront homes beautiful and others an eyesore, which detract from the natural beauty of the area. Beauty is in the eyes of, well you know. Does that give the boater the right to have the ugly or unkept home seized in 30 days and sold.
The home owner certainly polutes with roundup and lawn feed and the like. How about it, bring on the EPA, check into the runoff from these poluters too. In the Keys a study has already revealed that the land dwellers polution far exceeds that of the boaters. Look it up, it is well documented.
It is not really about polution at all, it is about the money and the greed and always is.
The boats were here first and every single home owner knew this, without a shadow of a doubt, going in.
To the home owner I say, suck it up or move, after all that is exactly what you want and expect the boater to do.
Popeye
Be the first to comment!