Anchoring and Cruisers' Responsibilities

[Dkdoyle]

I am getting the impaction that there is a huge problem out there in Saint Augustine among other places like key west. Key west is pretty easy. You have to find out why are there. Have you looked at rent or purchase in the keys? Try it on the minimum wages most places pay. You actually have people renting boats as houses in the keys. It's an affordable housing issue.

I don't know what's going on in saint augustine. I did do a google earth and could not discern more the 9 sailboats anchored out. Of course that could be years ago. I will admit that with the crash in the economy and lack of jobs that many more people are struggling and therefore they can't afford the slip rent so they anchor it out in the inlets hoping to get another job so they don't have to give the boat away. I can't honestly say I have seen an abundance of liveaboards anchored out but some do. It's pretty hot in Florida and not to many can tolerate it.

So back to what your trying to solve. Keywest is always going to have a problem without affordable housing. Solve that issue and your problem there goes away.
Can't really help you with the economy. It's going to hurt for a long while. We have tent cities down here. It really is a tragedy. I think maybe some social services or volunteer boating organizations might actually be helpful in education and services. There are bible thumpers on boats aren't there? No offense but aren't we supposed to look after those that can't look out for themselves.

I have always found most boaters to be independent but also very friendly and helpful.

[hummingway]

Originally Posted by canucksailor

I've seen that in smaller anchorages, but not in larger ones actually. Perhaps the west coast situation is different.
Charleston, Beaufort SC and NC, Hampton, Norfolk, Annapolis, etc., none of these have issues with space being unavailable for transients, other than during the fall and spring migrations and not really all that bad even then. In fact, until you get south to FL - more accurately, to the south OF FL, there really isn't a problem.

It is smaller anchorages I'm refering to. To do it wholesale in an area would seem to be overstepping any sense of reasonable use, however I do feel an expectation that you have the ability to move the vessel in short order if emergency requires it and proper sewage facitlities are reasonable expectations in populated areas. Environmentally sensitive areas should have special consideration as well.

[Randyonr3]

Originally Posted by canucksailor

I've seen that in smaller anchorages, but not in larger ones actually. Perhaps the west coast situation is different.
Charleston, Beaufort SC and NC, Hampton, Norfolk, Annapolis, etc., none of these have issues with space being unavailable for transients, other than during the fall and spring migrations and not really all that bad even then. In fact, until you get south to FL - more accurately, to the south OF FL, there really isn't a problem.

we had an issue out here in San Francisco a couple years ago with Clipper Cove at Treasure Island..
Clipper cove is one of the finest anchorages in the SF area, blocked by the sea wall from offshore winds and access to the Bay area.. Because it was a free anchorage, some people used it as an area to store their boats.. One guy went on the news and stated that the slip fees were to high and keeping it there was the only way he could afford to own a boat.
we had passed by a few times only to see the cove packed with boats to the point we just passed it by..
They've now regulated the stay and must call it when you enter if you are going to spend the night.. Dont believe there is a fee involved, but the cove is being monotered..
So in this case, I dont think you should own a boat if you cant afford it..
there are many ways to go sailing without owning a boat..

[capngeo]

Originally Posted by canucksailor

My thinking has been, for a long time, to use a rule that works well on land. If your neighbour's house is a dump, you complain, the city looks it over and, if justified, issues an order to clean it up. Failing that, the city sends workers in to do the job, adding the bill to the property's tax bill.
Something like that could work for boats. Question of course is, what standards apply, who develops them, and so forth.
And, if someone has to go aboard the boat and set it in order, where does the bill go?
I suppose it could be a lien against title, but that presumes the boat will someday be sold in that jurisdiction. And that the bill won't be in excess of the vessel's value, which in some cases could easily occur.
Still, it presents a solution that with some adaptation I've always thought could work. Another option is to correct the problems with the boat, then chain it to a dock until the bill is paid. If not paid in a reasonable amount of time, the boat is auctioned off.

OK, one more try at this.... LAND and buildings almost always (short of a Love Canal scenario) have SOME value and thus a compelling reason to cause the owner to act responsibly. Even at that, if the clean-up of the property exceeds it's value, the owner will likely abandon it to the taxpayer... Again, Love Canal or Piney Point here in FL. are examples.

Boats on the other hand, once on the slippery slope quickly become a liability.... EVEN WITHOUT an involving accident. To compound this, add in someone who is over their financial head in affording the boat to begin with, and a lack of any other seizable asset.... Bam! Taxpayer problem!

It was suggested earlier that a bond be posted at registration, I suggested mandatory insurance. Either way, financial responsibility is FORCED on the owner. Initially, there would be a lot of abandoned boats, but once those were dealt with, problem solved.

Before you go back to it being someone's "right" to live as they choose, I would like to live in a waterfront mansion with a mega-yacht... Is it my "right" to do so at taxpayer expense? NO! I can afford to live in a 425 sq ft cottage on the water with a 28' boat though, and only that by having worked for the last 40 years!

[Bash]

Originally Posted by Randyonr3

we had an issue out here in San Francisco a couple years ago with Clipper Cove at Treasure Island..
Clipper cove is one of the finest anchorages in the SF area, blocked by the sea wall from offshore winds and access to the Bay area.. Because it was a free anchorage, some people used it as an area to store their boats.. One guy went on the news and stated that the slip fees were to high and keeping it there was the only way he could afford to own a boat.

A huge number of the boats that were being moored for free in Clipper Cove are now being moored for free in Richardson Bay. The problem in Clipper Cove wasn't solved, it was just moved to a different venue.

[zeehag]

i WATCHED in sin diego as folks from coronado cays snot club actually TOWED small derelict sailboats into the a-8 anchorage without anchors , left them , then called the police that the folks in the anchorage were leaving derelict boats to drift.
i heard calls from the rich folks in penthouses calling for removal of anchored boats--not derelicts, but gorgeous boats, from their view in glorietta bay anchorage.
i cannot believe that the problem of allegedly derelict boats is truly a problem that has not been made worse by idiots with dollars in pocket.
yes, i saw many derelict boats in icw when i was sailing gulf of mexico. yes i saw many shrimpers looking like crap. yes i docked at a dock where the boats docked were sunk boats--was a great dock--just full of sunk boats. shrimpers and sailboats alike. the sailboat till had radar and roller furling and other wonderful stuff, was sunk in a named storm. that storm was actually years before i sailed the area. thank the gods there is no one there to complain of the mess made by sunken boats.
sin diego fell into the "those with money talk the rest walk" situation---anyone with not much money and a boat in sd is a criminal. try to anchor there.
if one enters sd with the haha, one can anchor in a special area designated only for the haha. go figger.
ensenada is no anchoring EXCEPT for during the newport to ensenada sailboat racing week. was done by the marinas so they could get more money from boaters coming into ensenada. (as told me by a son of one of the marina owners)
we are coming into a time during which ther ewillbe NO anchoring in many citified areas. oh well. we didnt do it ourselves--we had much help-- and a lot came from snot clubbies who donot appreciate those with low incomes having ownership of any kind of boat. jealousy?/ insecurity?/ whatever it is, is ugly and unnecessary.
overstaying a welcome could well hve something to do with it, but when a city removes federal anchorages because of fone calls and manipulations, then there is a problem.

[Aussie_Sequoia]

I agree with callmecrazy. Who gets to decide that drying laundry equals derelict? We should be careful before we start regulating things too far when the line is already blurry.

I have never lived aboard but I do live on right on the coast and look at boats everyday. Here is a post I had in another forum which never really got any replies - I imagine it might on this one:

-------------------
(original post)

OK... I expect to get a bunch of negative replies by people who might not understand my question.. but:

What's the big deal with folks who have stuff out on their deck? (say laundry, surfboards etc.) - things would be considered untidy.

For the record I have never kept anything like the aforementioned above deck on any of my past smaller boats and when I get my cruiser I certainly don't plan to... but in my opinion some people who are living their version of a cruising dream may be in a situation where they need to dry some laundry or may have some recreational extras such as fishing gear or surfboards etc. while hanging out in protected bays out on the islands.

Families who live on boats come to mind.

I don't mind seeing surf vans or British backpackers with camper vans loaded up with stuff on their travels around Oz... in fact it makes me smile and I think to my self 'what a fun and free life'. Surely one of the reasons we are into sailing is for the freedom?

And yes I am aware of the perceived shanty/ugly nature of a bunch of untidy yachts in front of a 4 million dollar harbor view... I guess I'm talking about the folks who keep to the less populated areas - there is still a very negative perception by fellow cruisers about 'untidy' boats.

Thoughts?

[hummingway]

There's degrees of here. Some boats become storage sheds, they cease to be boats. Some even look like they've become garbage dumps. I know a fellow who lives on a tiny tri. He keeps a cabin cruiser for his junk. They are rafted together and neither looks sea worthy. He is a floating hoarder and an environmental disaster.

[zeehag]

when you are cruising in a boat which is your home and only place to keep your cruising stuff--dinks, surfboards, etc, is on deck, where ye gonna store em?????
cruisers do use deck space for stowage of necessary stuff-- doesnt have to look untidy, but it will look cluttered to the eye of a racing yachtie.
definition of derelict needs to be made . cruising boats with supplies on deck, inclusive of fuel jugs, water jugs, canoes, kayaks, surfboards and inflatable dinks is gonna happen-- doesnt mean they are derelicts. they are just cruising. they may even hang laundry out to dry. omg!!! how disgusting.
get real, folks. ye going to cruise or make nasty about cruising? is a difference between cruising and dereliction.

isnt a matter of our determination to force boat owners to have grand incomes. get real. tolerance is a good thing. understanding comes from education and experience, not from seeing and judgementalism.

now, if a boat is in same place for a year, is a derelict?? or just broke ass trying to fix??? are you so clean and perfect that you are able to make a judgement without being judged yourself???

have you worn their shoes a mile before opening mouth to speak of the problem you perceive?

as for the floating disasters-- ye wanna make em homeless and statistics, or are they allowed to detract from environmentally aesthetics??? i donot advocate trashiness, but i also donot advocate laws against the low income folks who need shelter of some kind--even submersible--there are no shelters after feb for these folks. and would you advocate their taking up fee money from government to live in a shelter?? fact is, there will be more of this problem as the economy fails. and that it will. is it better than running over bodies of homeless folks or having to step over them as you enter buildings in a city????
seems that everyone has a solution to resolving the appearance of the waterways, but no one has a solution to sheltering homeless folks who havent ability to find obtain and keep housing--many of our veterans are such individuals. unfortunately so are drunks, druggies , etc.
is kind of a viscious circle, isnt it?????

[hummingway]

Originally Posted by zeehag

now, if a boat is in same place for a year, is a derelict?? or just broke ass trying to fix??? are you so clean and perfect that you are able to make a judgement without being judged yourself???

have you worn their shoes a mile before opening mouth to speak of the problem you perceive?

If you are suggesting there are no derelict boats out there then I'm sure you won't be the one judging. It could be you've never been anywhere where there are boats that will obviously never be fixed and where the outcome is going to be negative for the environment and the anchorage. A person doesn't need to be "clean and perfect" to make an assessment and guidelines can be developed for that very purpose.

What has having been in their situation got to do with it? A boat that has sunk or broken loose, that is leaking toxins becomes someone elses problem or it becomes a problem for the environment. There is nothing noble in ignoring this problem.

[zeehag]

anchorage 8 in sd was akin to richardson bay. the answer made to that was close down all the federal anchorages in sd. now no one can anchor in sd bay without a special permit and without a police inspection for safety and seqworthiness. is that how ye wish to deal with your special problems?? ban EVERYONE for the sins of a few? hqve more police interaction with anyone and everyone wishing to anchor out? tickets given out for improper anchoring when folks are 10 mins over time, as the police in sd are doing? does impacting an already overworked judicial system have the answer all seek to the problem of dereliction of boats??
there has to be a better answer to this than merely banning anchoring in certain places,like all of sd bay.
is really easy for folks with homes other than their boats to make judgements about liveaboards and cruisers who donot have houses to fall back on. is also really easy to make judgements about others who are less fortunate than yourselves when you are merely looking from the comfort of your own home.
it is much more difficult to place yourself into their shoes and walk the mile to see what is truly the problem. yes drugs and alcohol are a problem and many chose to make those their life--i am not speaking of those-0they die off soon enough--just be patient. ready your goat and go cruising--the mayhem will no longer be in your face.
do we HAVE to encourage big brother intervention and total loss of anchorages due to lack of tolerance?
i know there are derelict boats--i have sailed past many and seen many-is not just in kali anchorages, even tho kali anchorages are nearly a thing of the past. outlawing anchoring isnot gonna help that situation and isnt gonna be a productive move is all i am saying. and cruising sans back up house is similar to derelict boat appearance on wash day.omg. the ugliness of laundry on a line. or on a rail of a boat. omg.
there must be a satisfactory compromise somewhere.
i am not advocating slovenliness--just tolerance of other lifestyles you have not yet encountered first hand and survived.
if our government here in usa does as they are threatening-- not paying ssi and ssdi , there may be a few more boats leaving the pricey marinas for anchoring out. are these folks to be dissed as derelicts as their homes are forced from them by unthinking government greed?
where do we stop the problem???

[hummingway]

Who said anything about outlawing anchoring?

[zeehag]

is being done in kali, the liberal state. more and more than you wish to hear. is what happened in sd. is why there is need for permit obtained 24hours in advance of desire to anchor in the bay. is happening in kali as we write here. is done because the complaints from those in homes and apartments on th water cannot stand the sight of a boat at anchor in bays below their bedrooms.
the alleged rationale was too many derelict looking boats staying more than 72 hours in one place. that included cruising boats and local offenders. is the wave of the future. coming to a bay near you sooner than you think
yes the locals can and do close down federal anchorages as they see fit to so do. if that is not outlawing anchoring, i truly do not know what it could be considered.

[hummingway]

That's one of the reasons it makes sense to come up with a solution to the problem of derelicts in my opinion. It will help head off problems for responsible boaters and keep the ocean from becoming more of a dumping ground. Some areas it makes sense to keep them available to transient anchoring as well, and some areas need to be protected from anchoring altogether, which means some areas need controls. The right to live in a clean environment is important to my view of freedom and one that can only be achieved with some regulation. If that means restricting some else's freedom to foul the water or damage an important ecosystem so be it.

If the only response from boaters is to say no to any controls then people who have no interest in seeing any anchorages will be the ones who have the say.

[zeehag]

but--what will the definition of the term derelict be--will it include hanging laundry on rails as it dries while you rest up from a hard passage??
will that definition include the kayak on the deck and jerry jugs holding fuel and water for the next long passage??
there MUST be some kind of common sense answer to this ....
is a boat left alone for a yr a derelict, if there is a sudden illness needing to be attended to in another locale???/
who is to decide the defining terminologies???