Visit our Popular Forums

captain58sailin · 13-12-2013, 03:11

I am glad to see the process is providing a far more positive outcome than going to war with "the man", I applaud those that took the time to take the problem to those in a place to affect change and bring that change about in a good way, cheers to all of you!

Factor · 13-12-2013, 03:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by CarlF

Unlike the Constitution which is supposed to lay down unchanging principals, Laws are designed to be changed as circumstances change.

Funny - most of what I hear about the US Constitution is the 1st/2nd/4th/ etc etc amendement - which sort of suggests it not only can change but has changed and indeed has might change again (last change was 1992 I think)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Svdestiny

And "I'll look into into it and get back to you".

In my former life in Law enforcement we used to call that "Doing the mirror job" (as in - Looking into it)

Quote:

Originally Posted by captain58sailin

I am glad to see the process is providing a far more positive outcome than going to war with "the man", I applaud those that took the time to take the problem to those in a place to affect change and bring that change about in a good way, cheers to all of you!

Yeah, sticking with the process usually gets better results than whining.

The key issue I have as a person who spent the majority of his working life in Law Enforcement and Justice, and a bit in the Military, is that actions and efforts like these are often just a waste of resources.

mikeod · 13-12-2013, 04:02

Does anyone know what happens if you simply tell them NO they can not board your vessel. They were doing the same thing a few years ago when I was there, but they took off chasing a dingy without lights on before they got to my boat. I posted before that courts have ruled against this recently. If someone can find those cases it might be nice to have at the meeting.
Mike
S/V BAY TRIPPER

sailorboy1 · 13-12-2013, 04:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thin Line

The FWC Sgt that is representing the FWC at the meeting used to be an officer here in Marathon and still lives here. When he was here the other day we discussed several of the issues at hand and both sides of the story were presented to each other.

The Sgt will be helping us understand what they are looking for, discussing the legality of their boardings and what they can and can't do, as well as acting as a point of contact if we have any further problems. On that note, we have not seen and FWC boat in the harbor in 4 to 5 days, maybe someone received a memo?

Sounds to me that this problem has been solved.

DotDun · 13-12-2013, 05:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikeod

Does anyone know what happens if you simply tell them NO they can not board your vessel. They were doing the same thing a few years ago when I was there, but they took off chasing a dingy without lights on before they got to my boat. I posted before that courts have ruled against this recently. If someone can find those cases it might be nice to have at the meeting.
Mike
S/V BAY TRIPPER

This seems to suggest they can board with probable cause, even when the operator refuses.

Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine

READY2GO · 13-12-2013, 05:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thin Line

The city council meeting went better than anyone could have imagined. The city manager brought the issue to the attention of everyone before I even had a chance to speak, the mayor and the city council are extremely troubled by the actions of the FWC. I spoke in front of the largest attended meeting in the history of the city of Marathon, our presence was obvious and kudos to everyone that rallied together. The mayor and the city council will be attending our meeting with FWC here at city marina on Dec 18th at 6pm, along with the city manager.

The FWC Sgt that is representing the FWC at the meeting used to be an officer here in Marathon and still lives here. When he was here the other day we discussed several of the issues at hand and both sides of the story were presented to each other. While I agreed most of the tickets were valid, he also stated that it wasn't the right way to go about things. "just because officers can do something, doesn't mean they should" We discussed the fact that while many of the tickets written were law, several of them were ones nobody would ever write. For instance there is a law that states your dinghy, if not tied up beside your boat needs to have it's own anchor light. However who writes that ticket? A new officer trying to make an impression that's who

.

The Sgt will be helping us understand what they are looking for, discussing the legality of their boardings and what they can and can't do, as well as acting as a point of contact if we have any further problems. On that note, we have not seen and FWC boat in the harbor in 4 to 5 days, maybe someone received a memo? Boot Key is worth stopping, it's a wonderful place full of families and a strong sense of community. My two children are both surrounded by other kids and right now the harbor has well over 15 kids. The problem appears to be on the mend and things seem to be on their way back to normal.

Thank you CF and all those that are supporting our cause. Fair winds..

Two things about this bother me.

First, I would like someone to show me where the rules say that a dingy tied to your boat needs an anchor light if it is behind the boat and not if it is beside your boat. From all the reading I have done a dingy is not mentioned AND a vessel is considered anchored ONLY if its anchor is in contact with the ground. I think he is making this up to try and justify the officers action.

Secondly, why is the officer that is here representing the fwc not stationed here? Makes me think the meeting will only be about generalities and not specifics.

The good that has come from this so far is that they have been absent from the harbor lately. Maybe they are out patroling like they ar supposed to be rather than here shooting fish in a barrel so to speak.

tamicatana · 13-12-2013, 06:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Svdestiny

And I am a BIG believer in the power of cookies but seriously?

So am I. I can recall from my youth a girl who was being harangued by several boys. She prepared chocolate chip cookies for the boys, who devoured them greedily.

The boys were in a dormitory next door to ours, and we could hear the toilets flushing all night. The 'chocolate' was Ex-Lax.

Best. joke. ever.

capt-couillon · 13-12-2013, 06:40

Glad to hear the response from the elected officials in Marathon. Their decision to attend the meeting with FWC in their official capacity as representatives of all the residents (afloat and ashore) of the City of Marathon also bodes well for the outcome. While a united group of concerned residents carries a good amount of weight, the additional leverage of the elected representatives of the entire city cannot but help to resolve the issue in a manner favorable to both the cruising community, and the city residents we support by our presence within their community.

It would seem my earlier decision to make Marathon my future home port is being validated by the local cruising community, and the people at large of Marathon.

Almost sorry I am missing the skirmish, but I fought my battles (and lost) in Georgia.

tomfl · 13-12-2013, 07:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElGatoGordo

Again, good job guys for being smart and talking to the bosses. No one gets a new job and knows what to do right away. These young folks will learn to be great officers and will gain a lot from this experience. Hopefully they will stop plenty of poachers, arrest some drug dealers, and leave the average Joe cruiser to his business.

(edited in respect to the OP and the real issue at hand. I really am smart enough to know better than to engage the nonsense, I was just bored. My apologies)

My interaction with FWC has been very disappointing. During the mini lobster season I came across some poachers loading two ice chests over flowing with lobster tails into an SUV and got the tag number. Over the next hour and a half I made eighteen phone calls to FWC and with one exception got recordings. The only live person I spoke to was when I called the central Tallahassee number, where I was told to call the Miami office. When I told the officer in Tallahassee I had called the Miami number and only got a recording he told me to call the next day.

Subsequent conversations with FWC officers were of no help. They just told me to call the same numbers I had been calling. Sailors with experience in the Keys all know that if the FWC was serious they would concentrate their efforts on the commercial fishermen in the area from Boca Grande to the Dry Tortugas. There are always more commercial fishermen anchored off Garden Key than cruisers and the commercial fishermen ignore all the national park rules. Problem is that it usually takes a real sailor to get to the Dry Tortugas and it seems like the FWC would rather stay in the protected confines of Boot Key Harbor.

scuba0_1 · 13-12-2013, 07:56

great out come some far.

LakeSuperior · 13-12-2013, 08:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coops

That study was highly discredited in that thread both on statistical information and relevance to this forum.

Coops.

As it has seemed like the thread has concluded with a positive result I now address the above points without even looking back at the referenced thread.

Simply, the referenced scholarly study was not highly discredited in that thread. The study was an honest attempt at an apples-to-apples comparison for the stated class of crimes.

So then what specific section of the report was refuted past the bunch of opinion posts and the introduction of non-comparable statistics by CF members?

It's has more relevance to the CF forum than the joke thread IMHO.

In terms of the OP's topic it was related to a minor point in a rant from one of the posters.