Cruisers Forum
 


Join CruisersForum Today

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 07-12-2008, 08:47   #31
Registered User

Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 69
They don't like to look at people for whatever reason. They bought a big old house facing the water with a private beach area and then built a fence in front with a guard shack to keep out what they don't like.
How dare the rest of the world ignore their needs and live lives of their own that annoy these people, and they are doing it right in front of their private beach on the supposedly free waterways!
Don't you understand that crushing another freedom is perfectly ok as long as it stops these people from having to look at the real world!
__________________

__________________
Runner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2008, 11:23   #32
Registered User
 
Amgine's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 1,384
Images: 1
Analogies don't always work...

But if you insist on the RV analogy, remember that the RV is how many k metres from the rich guy's house on somebody else's land that is otherwise empty. And an equivalent comparison is the guy who buys a plot of mountain land with a gorgeous view down the valley, and who is asking police to push out everyone in the RV/mobile home park down there. Most of the boats affected are not derelict, unsightly junk.

And most of the people in Florida probably aren't doing this.
__________________

__________________
Amgine
Blog

On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog anchored in a coral atoll.
Amgine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2008, 15:23   #33
Registered User

Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 69
Be like me complaining about having to look at the huge subdivisions that now cover land I grew up hunting and playing on.
__________________
Runner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2008, 16:31   #34
Registered User
 
orion1's Avatar

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Slidell, Louisiana, USA
Boat: William Atkin Cutter, 35'
Posts: 147
Images: 8
(cruisersnet.net) has the Supreme Court ruling, re: anchoring rights, live aboard rulings etc. It is discussed in debth under Florida West Coast, Anchoring Rights.

One comment quotes Supreme Court cases, which seem to indicate that no State can prevent anchoring at anytime for any reason, as it falls under Admiralty Courts only, which are Federal. Any interfearance with navigation, which includes anchoring, for any period of time, is prohibited.

If this is true, all of the state restrictions are mute and have no weight over navigation whatsoever. The right to navigation and anchoring trumps the fact that the land may be owned by the state or a private party.

That is how it reads to me. I am not an attorney but have worked in the legal system for 40 years.

I wish some attorney or attorneys would challenge these unjust laws. The states, Florida primairly, do not want this in court as they fear the outcome, which put a hault to their silly games. Even several local courts have rulled against the states and cities recently. Marco Island is a prime example.

The latest is a proposal to allow anchoring for 30 consecutive days in one place and a total of 120 for the year. This is way up over recent preposals which were 3 days or so. They are hoping to avoid a court test by playing head games with the boating community hoping we will think they are trying to be reasonable.

They just want to intimidate to impress those who have the gold so that they can say "look we tried but the Supreme Court threw out our law" . Follow the money, its all politics.
__________________
"Love My Country, Fear My Government"
orion1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2008, 16:49   #35
cruiser

Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,167
Rules and regulations are in direct porportion to overpopulation . If you want to live where everybody else wants to live ,then these are the consequences. Or stop makig so many people and stop congratulating people who do ,and who are thus the cause of the problem.
Brent.
__________________
Brent Swain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2008, 18:11   #36
Marine Service Provider

Join Date: Oct 2007
Boat: Endeavour 42CC
Posts: 1,182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent Swain View Post
Rules and regulations are in direct porportion to overpopulation . If you want to live where everybody else wants to live ,then these are the consequences. Or stop makig so many people and stop congratulating people who do ,and who are thus the cause of the problem.
Brent.
Three cheers for abortion!
__________________
gettinthere is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2008, 18:29   #37
Marine Service Provider
 
AnchorageGuy's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Wherever the boat is!
Boat: Marine Trader 34DC
Posts: 4,618
this thread is getting out of control.
__________________
Chesapeake Bay, ICW Hampton Roads To Key West, The Gulf Coast, The Bahamas

The Trawler Beach House
Voyages Of Sea Trek
AnchorageGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2008, 18:49   #38
Registered User
 
orion1's Avatar

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Slidell, Louisiana, USA
Boat: William Atkin Cutter, 35'
Posts: 147
Images: 8
The Constitution Still Rules. No City, County, State, or Federal Agency can enact laws which violate it, providing we care enough to challenge those laws and carry that challenge to the offenders through the proper courts of law.

If we continue to sit still for this, our rights will deminish further. That is exactly what they are banking on.

"Once we let the camel get his head under our tent, we too are in the sand storm!"
__________________
"Love My Country, Fear My Government"
orion1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2008, 19:10   #39
Marine Service Provider
 
AnchorageGuy's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Wherever the boat is!
Boat: Marine Trader 34DC
Posts: 4,618
Quote:
Originally Posted by orion1 View Post
The Constitution Still Rules. No City, County, State, or Federal Agency can enact laws which violate it, providing we care enough to challenge those laws and carry that challenge to the offenders through the proper courts of law.

If we continue to sit still for this, our rights will deminish further. That is exactly what they are banking on.

"Once we let the camel get his head under our tent, we too are in the sand storm!"
So when are one of you going to hire a lawyer and challenge this? or is that just for forum discussions. I sure can't afford it.
__________________
Chesapeake Bay, ICW Hampton Roads To Key West, The Gulf Coast, The Bahamas

The Trawler Beach House
Voyages Of Sea Trek
AnchorageGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2008, 19:18   #40
Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Tampa Bay
Boat: Columbia 8.7 As You Wish III
Posts: 164
I have five dollars that says there is at least one attorney who is reading these post right now.
__________________
ksmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2008, 19:39   #41
Registered User
 
orion1's Avatar

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Slidell, Louisiana, USA
Boat: William Atkin Cutter, 35'
Posts: 147
Images: 8
There are active groups doing exactly that. Their activities have already had an impact. Two different captains have defied the orders to move. Both were arrested and taken to trial. Both were found innocent.

If you are truly interested, take part and speak out. Read the information presented in great detail on Claiborne Youngs cruisersnet.net. It is not a forum such as this, but an information site primarly related to Florida and the East Coast. It provides info on marinas, anchorages, hazards, current fuel cost updated weekly, etc
__________________
"Love My Country, Fear My Government"
orion1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2008, 18:55   #42
cruiser

Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,167
Making it an issue in election campaigns can work . The reason they are able to ignore the rights of cruisers is because we tend to not make it an issue and the non boating public is allowed to be unaware of such violations of civil rights. With the internet we are all intenational publishers with an international voice.
Brent
__________________
Brent Swain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2008, 11:28   #43
Moderator Emeritus
 
GordMay's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Thunder Bay, Ontario - 48-29N x 89-20W
Boat: (Cruiser Living On Dirt)
Posts: 31,573
Images: 240
FWC will propose new boat anchoring and mooring legislation

FWC News - FWC will propose new boat anchoring, mooring legislation

The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) directed staff to proceed with submitting draft legislation to the Florida Legislature which, among other provisions, will create a pilot program to test boat anchoring and mooring regulations in various parts of the state.

Public access sites for boaters have diminished because of development of waterfront properties and privatization of boating facilities. As a result, some boaters have anchored or moored their vessels on the water permanently, or for long periods, and often behind waterfront properties. The vessels can become derelict, create navigational hazards and property damage, harm sea grass and corals, and create pollution.

Under pressure from homeowners and others, local governments implemented local codes and ordinances that are in conflict with state laws. However, for boaters it was confusing because they often experienced local jurisdictions with different rules and regulations.

The FWC also will propose language in the legislation pertaining to codification of the 2nd District Court of Appeals ruling, vessel registration, sea grass protection and signage, inland waterway signage, and clarification of local rules and regulations.

To learn more about anchoring and mooring, and other boating issues, visit
Boating and Waterways

Here’s a copy of the current draft language:
http://myfwc.com/boating/Docs/Boating2009.pdf

Stakeholders and interested parties can also submit comments, recommendations, and solutions relevant to Vessel Management, Anchoring, and Mooring issues to: Anchoring.Mooring@myfwc.com
__________________
Gord May
"If you didn't have the time or money to do it right in the first place, when will you get the time/$ to fix it?"



GordMay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2008, 12:53   #44
Registered User
 
mangomuffins's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Bradenton Beach, Florida
Boat: 27' Albin Vega - mangomuffins
Posts: 277
from cruisersnet.net

Subject: Anchorage Rights
Message: It might be helpfulto be aware of what existing U.S. Law regarding navigation, and anchoring is an act of navigation. Unfortunately these cases are almost without exception prosecuted in state courts when there is an immediate filing in Admiralty Court, and only federal courts can sit in admiralty.
Admiralty and Maritime Synopsis
of a state’s right to refuse anchorage
1. What follows is what the U.S. Constitution, U.S. Law, and the Federal Courts say in regards to the rights of navigation, all of which is superior to any state or municipal, legislation.
a. U.S. Constitution, Article III, Sec 2.1
“The judicial power shall extend to all cases in law and equity arising under this constitution, the laws of the United States,…. (and) to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction…”
b. U. S. Supreme Court, Butler v. Boston Steamship Co. 130 US 557, 141 US 1, Detroit Trust Co. v. The Thomas Baslum 293 US 21, 42.
“As the constitution extends the judicial power of the United States to ‘all admiralty and maritime jurisdiction,’ and as this jurisdiction is held to be exclusive, the power of legislation on the same subject must necessarily be in the national legislature and not in the state legislatures.”
c. U.S. Supreme Court, Knickerbocker Ice Co. v. Stewart 253 US 149, 164
“Congress cannot transfer its legislative power to the states,--by nature this is nondelegable.”
d. U.S. Supreme Court, The J.E. Rumble 148 US 1, 12
“The admiralty and maritime jurisdiction is conferred on the courts of the United States by the Constitution, and cannot be enlarged or restricted by the legislation of a state, no state legislation, therefore, can bring within the admiralty jurisdiction of the national courts a subject not maritime in its nature. But when a right, maritime in its nature, and to be enforced by process in the nature of admiralty process, has been given by a statute of a state, the admiralty courts have jurisdiction, to enforce that right according to their own rules of procedure.”
e. U.S. Supreme Court, Lewis Blue Point Oyster Cultivation Co. v. Briggs, 229 US 82
When overturning a lower court case the U.S. Supreme court said: “If the public right of navigation is the dominant right, and if, as must be the case, the title of the owner of the bed of navigable waters hold subject absolutely to the public right of navigation, this dominant right must include the right to the use of the bed of water for every purpose which is in aid of navigation.”
f. U.S. Supreme Court, Scranton v. Wheeler 179 US 141, 145
“It must from these constitutional principles, follow that the State of Michigan held the soil beneath her navigable rivers under a high public trust, to forever preserve them free as public highways, subject only to the power of Congress to regulate commerce among the states, ….The right of Congress to regulate commerce, and, as an incident, navigation, remains unaffected by the question as to whether the title to the soil submerged is in the state or is in the owner of the shores.”
g. U.S. Supreme Court, Sisson v. Ruby 497 US 358, 359
“…the need for uniform rules of maritime conduct and liability is not limited to navigation, but extends at least to any other activities traditionally undertaken by vessels commercial or non commercial.”

h. U.S. Law 28 USC 1333
Admiralty jurisdiction covers every vessel under the American flag, whether it is on the ocean or within the boundaries of a state, no matter what size or means of propulsion, or whether it is documented or not.
i. Federal District Court. Anderson v. Reames 161 S.W.2d 957, 961
“…’rights of navigation’ include the right to anchorage, which may be exercised for either business purposes or pleasure.”

j. Federal District Court. The Hubbard v. The Pollock 229 F. 837
“…but her master had a legal right to select his own place to anchor,…”
k. Federal District Court, Hayn v. Culliford 3 C.P.Eiv 417
“Navigation” for some purpose, includes a period when a ship is not in motion, as, for instance, when she is at anchor.
l. U.S. v. Monstad, 134 F.2d 986, 988
A navigable seagoing barge, having been converted from a self propelled vessel to barge carrying fishermen but retaining her steering apparatus and her hull lines, which had been anchored at bay for a period of two years, for use by fishermen, is being “navigated”.
2. In researching federal admiralty law I found two cases which appear aberrations. Both of these cases were decided by the Ninth Federal District Court, which is the most overturned district court in the nation, and neither has been appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. A court only considers what is brought before it. One must surely wonder what would have been the outcome had this case been argued on U.S. Constitutional grounds since admiralty and maritime jurisdiction comes directly from the constitution, has been judged by the U.S. Supreme Court to be exclusively federal and that all legislation must be federal, not state. And that such legislative authority cannot be delegated by congress to the states. It would appear in order to change this and allow the states to legislate and rule in this area either the U.S. Constitution must be amended or the U.S. Supreme Court must change its present standing decision. In my judgment the two cases which follow are merely the expected result of poorly argued cases. A brief discussion of these two cases follows:
a. Beveridge v. City of Santa Barbara, U.S. Court of appeals, 9th Cir No.9055642.
In this case it was argued that the 1972 Ports and Waterways Safety Act and U.S. Coast Guard regulations preempt Santa Barbara from preventing anchoring. In this case the court concluded that they do not. Additionally the court addressed the fact that the area in question was a federally designated special anchorage area and reasoned that such an area is not an area where anchorage is permitted but it is merely an area where navigational lights are not required. This is clearly in error, a careful reading of the Inland Rules of the Road (federal law) require a vessel underway, or at anchor, to display navigational lights at night and in reduced visibility. It is only when a vessel, under 65 feet in length, is at anchor in a special anchorage area that it is not required to display lights. How can one uphold a judgment that concludes a special anchorage area is merely an area where navigational lights are not required and then deny the only condition under which by federal law such lights are not required?
b. Barber v. State of Hawaii, 42 F.3d 1185 (9th Cir)
In this case it was argued that the federal government had so occupied the area that they had preempted the states from controlling anchoring. The Court ruled that it had not. True, the congress has not preempted the states from this area but rather it is the U.S. Constitution itself which has.
3. A brief summary of the above:
a. U.S. Constitution defines the control of admiralty and maritime law.
b. Admiralty and Maritime jurisdiction is exclusively federal by a standing U.S. Supreme court ruling,
c. Anchoring is an act of navigation and a vessel at anchor remains in navigation, at least for a period of two years

any lawyers??
__________________
mangomuffins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2008, 13:02   #45
Eternal Member
 
imagine2frolic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Las Brisas Panama AGAIN!
Boat: Simpson, Catamaran, 46ft. IMAGINE
Posts: 4,508
Images: 123
I just wonder what the reaction would be from the officer that you hand that to? I can only imagine being boarded, and hassled for every little thing found wrong if it exist, or not. I am going to have to print that out, and keep it aboard!
__________________

__________________
SAILING is not always a slick magazine cover!
BORROWED..No single one of is as smart as all of us!
http://sailingwithcancer.blogspot.com/
imagine2frolic is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
anchor, anchoring, florida

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Anchoring in Florida hideaway Rules of the Road, Regulations & Red Tape 33 27-05-2011 07:21
Anchoring in Stuart, Florida Harriet General Sailing Forum 8 02-06-2009 05:34
Anchoring in Florida at risk starfish62 Cruising News & Events 2 19-03-2008 12:00
Anchoring in South Florida chuckr Other 25 15-10-2007 07:24
Anchoring question shellback Anchoring & Mooring 32 04-05-2007 22:45



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:07.


Google+
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.