Do you use a Daytime Black ball at Anchor?

[Jason Flare]

If anchor balls were truly required at anchor during daylight in Florida there would be fines assessed.

Word would get around and most boats would hang anchor balls to avoid the fines.

[Alan Mighty]

Originally Posted by StuM

an all round white light or a ball depending on whether it is day or night

It's not day or night.

COLREGS is more sophisticated than that:

20 (b) The Rules concerning lights shall be complied with from sunset to sunrise

20 (c) The lights prescribed by these Rules shall, if carried, also be exhibited from sunrise to sunset in restricted visibility and may be exhibited in all other circumstances when it is deemed necessary

20 (d) The Rules concerning shapes shall be complied with by day

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Alan Mighty

It's not day or night.

COLREGS is more sophisticated than that:

20 (b) The Rules concerning lights shall be complied with from sunset to sunrise

20 (c) The lights prescribed by these Rules shall, if carried, also be exhibited from sunrise to sunset in restricted visibility and may be exhibited in all other circumstances when it is deemed necessary

20 (d) The Rules concerning shapes shall be complied with by day

OK, whether it is day, conditions of limited visibility or night.


Maybe that is why the drafter left it as just the inference that COLREGs stipulates when the "or" applies

[CSY Man]

Originally Posted by Jason Flare

If anchor balls were truly required at anchor during daylight in Florida there would be fines assessed.

Word would get around and most boats would hang anchor balls to avoid the fines.

They are truly required, but most folks don’t know about it.
If some drunk jetskier run into you and kill herself and her boyfriend, the judge and the jury may think you are ignorant, reckless and guilty because you did not fly the Day Shape as required by the Rules of the Road and you go to jail for 10 years in Florida.
( but you saved $15 and a few minutes of work every time you anchored.
https://www.lalizas.com/product/28-v...-balls):frown:

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by CSY Man

They are truly required, but most folks don’t know about it.
If some drunk jetskier run into you and kill herself and her boyfriend, the judge and the jury may think you are ignorant, reckless and guilty because you did not fly the Day Shape as required by the Rules of the Road and you go to jail for 10 years in Florida.
( but you saved $15 and a few minutes of work every time you anchored.
https://www.lalizas.com/product/28-v...-balls):frown:

Is there any case law on this? Given the stats down there, I bet there have been plenty of possible events. Has anyone ever been charged with NOT flying an anchor shape or an underway cone?

I think the law demands it. I just don’t think it makes much sense. Whereas using proper lighting in times of low visibility certainly does make sense.

[billknny]

Originally Posted by boatpoker

Do you not see that it is wrong to fly an anchor ball while underway ?

Flying a radar reflector that LOOKS like an anchor ball while underway is, to me, a far stupider thing to do than not flying the ball when anchored. Talk about liability...

"He indicated he was anchored, then he moved right in front of me!"

Ya can't fix stupid.

[Jason Flare]

Originally Posted by CSY Man

They are truly required, but most folks don’t know about it.
If some drunk jetskier run into you and kill herself and her boyfriend, the judge and the jury may think you are ignorant, reckless and guilty because you did not fly the Day Shape as required by the Rules of the Road and you go to jail for 10 years in Florida.
( but you saved $15 and a few minutes of work every time you anchored.
https://www.lalizas.com/product/28-v...-balls):frown:

If they are truly required why aren’t the water cops fining people in FL.

They love to fine people.

They have fined people for not having an anchor light on a vessel (dinghy) in the water on a painter behind a boat at anchor.

[billknny]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Is there any case law on this? Given the stats down there, I bet there have been plenty of possible events. Has anyone ever been charged with NOT flying an anchor shape or an underway cone?

I think the law demands it. I just don’t think it makes much sense. Whereas using proper lighting in times of low visibility certainly does make sense.

I am pretty sure that in the US nobody gets "charged" with not having a ball hoisted when anchored. But... if somebody DOES hit you while anchored, the insurance company lawyers are sure going to being it up as a contributing factor to the event, and it will cost you money.

You can of course pick and chose which of the ColRegs you wish to follow and which you chose to ignore because you are smarter than the people who wrote the rules, but be prepared to accept the consequences of those decisions.

It's easy. Why not do it?

[CSY Man]

. I think the law demands it. I just don’t think it makes much sense. Whereas using proper lighting in times of low visibility certainly does make sense.

Required by the Colregs, no ambiguity about it:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_shapes

If they are truly required why aren’t the water cops fining people in FL.

Ignorance is accepted and okay in Florida, just like drunk driving if you don’t get caught.
If you end up in an accident however, you better be sober and better have your Day Shape up and visible.
$14, small price to pay, Duh..https://www.amazon.com/Lalizas-Inter...5H4BCJ2Z73EF5A

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by billknny

I am pretty sure that in the US nobody gets "charged" with not having a ball hoisted when anchored. But... if somebody DOES hit you while anchored, the insurance company lawyers are sure going to being it up as a contributing factor to the event, and it will cost you money.

You can of course pick and chose which of the ColRegs you wish to follow and which you chose to ignore because you are smarter than the people who wrote the rules, but be prepared to accept the consequences of those decisions.

It's easy. Why not do it?

There are plenty of laws which I don’t agree with, and don’t necessarily follow to the tee. I guess I don’t blindly accept dictates without thinking about them myself. And yes, I accept the consequences of my choices.

But let me ask, since you raise it, are there any examples of insurance companies not paying out, or reducing their payouts, based on someone not flying an anchor or underway shape. Again, there must be tons of possible examples. There’s no lack of complaining about insurance claims gone bad here. I can’t recall any which involved a day shape, but I could easily have missed it.

BTW, I assume you fly an underway cone when required.

[Jason Flare]

Originally Posted by billknny

Flying a radar reflector that LOOKS like an anchor ball while underway is, to me, a far stupider thing to do than not flying the ball when anchored. Talk about liability...

"He indicated he was anchored, then he moved right in front of me!"

Ya can't fix stupid.

Originally Posted by billknny

I am pretty sure that in the US nobody gets "charged" with not having a ball hoisted when anchored. But... if somebody DOES hit you while anchored, the insurance company lawyers are sure going to being it up as a contributing factor to the event, and it will cost you money.

You can of course pick and chose which of the ColRegs you wish to follow and which you chose to ignore because you are smarter than the people who wrote the rules, but be prepared to accept the consequences of those decisions.

It's easy. Why not do it?

I’m not arguing that it’s not better to spend the $15.00 and fly the anchor ball, I’m simple stating that the navigation rules do not require it.

But I will ask a Florida fish cop someday what he thinks the words mean in the navigation rules.

I’m genuinely curious why I have never seen an anchor ball on a vessel between 7 and 50 meters.

[CSY Man]

Originally Posted by Jason Flare

I’m not arguing that it’s not better to spend the $15.00 and fly the anchor ball, I’m simple stating that the navigation rules do not require it.

But I will ask a Florida fish cop someday what he thinks the words mean in the navigation rules.

I’m genuinely curious why I have never seen an anchor ball on a vessel between 7 and 50 meters.

Looks like the rules require it, whether you like it or agree with it, or if a “fish cop” thinks whatever.

APPLICATION (From Rule 20)
Rules in this part shall be complied with in all weathers. Rules concerning lights apply from sunset
to sunrise. During such times no other lights shall be exhibited, except lights that cannot be mistaken for and that do not impair the visibility or distinctive character of the lights specified in these Rules, or interfere with the keeping of a proper lookout.
The lights specified in these Rules shall also be exhibited from sunrise to sunset in restricted visibility and may be exhibited in other circumstances when deemed necessary.
The Rules concerning shapes shall be compiled with by day.

[senormechanico]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

We have used an anchor ball religiously for some years now. This was stimulated by a friend being anchored in the Brisbane river and being hit by two drunken young men in a go-fast inflatable (the kind that do 50 knots or so) which resulted in their deaths. For some while she was being charged with negligent manslaughter. It was only when neighboring yachts reported that she routinely displayed two anchor lights (this incident was in the wee hours) as she claimed that these charges were dropped.

This was a real eye opener! I don't know what would have happened if that evidence had not been available, but it would not have been pretty... it was very stressful for her even when exonerated. We'd always used anchor lights, but now it seemed prudent to add the day shape. It isn't a big deal to do so... just one more step in the anchoring drill, one that gives you the high ground legally and perhaps morally.

And then a few years later we were T-boned while at anchor in Port Cygnet, Tasmania. The ball didn't protect us from the drunks that hit us, but it avoided any possible legal repercussions from its absence. That incident was settled out of court and without interest of the authorities (local cops and marine authorities were not at all interested in the mandatory report that I made). Before the case was resolved I was very glad that the ball had been flying. It flies above us as I type!

Jim

I never have used one or even seen anyone else hoisting one.
Up until the start of this month neither have I had a traffic cam in either one of our cars, but after getting one of them totaled by a little old lady who turned left right in front of me without signaling, I now have one in BOTH cars (one is of course, new).
I suppose I should be first on my block to hoist an anchor ball as well !

[Jason Flare]

Originally Posted by CSY Man

Looks like the rules require it, whether you like it or agree with it, or if a “fish cop” thinks whatever.

“It looks like the rules require it” isn’t quite the same thing as “The rules require it.”

[fivecapes]

All four yachts on the forum page header are saying you don't need it