What is the current FL anchoring policy?

[Group9]

Originally Posted by Sea7King

A64 Pilot, Here's the act that gave control of the water to the States:

I think you missed something in your post.

The SLA, however, expressly reserved in

the federal government the power to regulate these lands for the purposes of


“commerce, navigation, national defense, and international affairs.”

If the law was settled that Florida could do this, they wouldn't be bothering with all of the surveys, they would just do it. They are trying to build support for the changes they want to see happen in state AND federal law.

The Marco Island decision let them know that they are not operating in an unfettered arena.

[CaptTom]

I'm learning so much about the history of federal navigation laws, thanks!

I'm no fan of derelict boats or permanent liveaboards making entire anchorages unusable for cruisers, but I do feel like we need to protect our rights or lose them.

On a related note, I'm also no fan of filling a good anchorage with moorings, which has the same effect.

I support the right of people who live near or work on the water to keep their boat on a nearby mooring. That's not where the problem is.

The problem is when a town, or marina, or just a bunch of weekenders fill a good anchorage with moorings. Especially if they're only used once in a while.

The states and municipalities can and do regulate moorings, but it's supposed to be done in the public trust. In other words, in a way that maximizes access for all. It doesn't seem right to prevent anchoring by everyone else, all day every day, just so one person or one club member can visit there once in a while.

Moorings for short visits are great in areas where anchoring isn't good. But when I see a good anchorage made inaccessible by a mooring field, with little or no use except on weekends, it seems to me like a violation of the public trust.

For the record, I personally have no problem paying a nominal fee for a well-maintained mooring in a good location, assuming the marina or club that I'm paying is well insured and the mooring is well maintained. But we all know that's not always the case. Picking up a private mooring of unknown integrity or ownership is risky at best. If the anchorage is filled with them, you're left with no good options.

[unbusted67]

I keep seeing things in the cruising guides about cops coming and charging you money to anchor in places like lantana and Boca. Anyone have any experience with this? How are they able to justify it?


Sent from my iPhone using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[lesterbutch]

I dont think iv'e ever seen the cops drag anyone off their boat for being at anchor. The state would like to regulate mooring and anchoring, my opinion, for the same reason they regulate everything, too make more money! These things are cash cows for the state and county governments and what I think will happen is, you will have to get an annual permit to anchor or moor. That way they won't have to pay mooring cops. Just another infringement on our basic rights.

[Group9]

It just reminds me of how land based gambling came to be in Mississippi.

At first, we were assured that it would only be on boats, that traveled outside of the 3 mile limit to gamble (over and over again were voters assured that land based gambling was not the goal and would never happen).

Then, the casinos got the rules changed to allow gambling on the boats when they were away from the dock, but not 3 miles out (again, over and over again were voters assured that land based gambling was not the goal and would never happen).

Then, the casinos got the rules changed to allow gambling when the boats were tied up to the piers and the weather was deemed too bad to cruise (and again voters were assured that land based gambling was not the goal and would never happen).

Then the casinos got the rules changed to allow gambling when the boats were tied up all of the time (and,again were voters assured that land based gambling was not the goal and would never happen).

Then the casinos got the rules changed where the "vessels" didn't have to be vessels and could just be giant barges permanently fixed to huge piers (essentially giant floating docks) (and,again were voters assured that land based gambling was not the goal and would never happen).

Finally, the casinos got permission to build land based casinos. (This time, they didn't bother to tell us that land based gambling was not the goal and would never happen).

But, when it comes to anchoring restrictions in Florida, I think, like knowing land based gambling was the ultimate goal, having known what is going to happen ahead of time with anchoring in Florida, isn't going to really matter when it does.

Thank God for hurricanes in the Bahamas, or these people would be moving there, and doing the same thing.

[letsgetsailing3]

Originally Posted by Group9

It just reminds me of how land based gambling came to be in Mississippi.

At first, we were assured that it would only be on boats, that traveled outside of the 3 mile limit to gamble (over and over again were voters assured that land based gambling was not the goal and would never happen).

Then, the casinos got the rules changed to allow gambling on the boats when they were away from the dock, but not 3 miles out (again, over and over again were voters assured that land based gambling was not the goal and would never happen).

Then, the casinos got the rules changed to allow gambling when the boats were tied up to the piers and the weather was deemed too bad to cruise (and again voters were assured that land based gambling was not the goal and would never happen).

Then the casinos got the rules changed to allow gambling when the boats were tied up all of the time (and,again were voters assured that land based gambling was not the goal and would never happen).

Then the casinos got the rules changed where the "vessels" didn't have to be vessels and could just be giant barges permanently fixed to huge piers (essentially giant floating docks) (and,again were voters assured that land based gambling was not the goal and would never happen).

Finally, the casinos got permission to build land based casinos. (This time, they didn't bother to tell us that land based gambling was not the goal and would never happen).

But, when it comes to anchoring restrictions in Florida, I think, like knowing land based gambling was the ultimate goal, having known what is going to happen ahead of time with anchoring in Florida, isn't going to really matter when it does.

Thank God for hurricanes in the Bahamas, or these people would be moving there, and doing the same thing.

Just to add to the last bit about Mississippi gambling, the land-based casinos initially had to be over water, but then a hurricane destroyed some of them, so when they rebuilt they were allowed to rebuild in a safer spot, completely over land.

I don't know if there is a word for it, but it's regulation creep, and the wealthy are always plotting and loading up the local commissions with people who are friendly to their initiatives.

[Group9]

Originally Posted by letsgetsailing3

Just to add to the last bit about Mississippi gambling, the land-based casinos initially had to be over water, but then a hurricane destroyed some of them, so when they rebuilt they were allowed to rebuild in a safer spot, completely over land.

Exactly right. We all knew that there was a hurricane coming sooner or later that would do that, and laughed at the assurances from the casinos that they were "hurricane proof" (as if such a thing existed).

I don't know if there is a word for it, but it's regulation creep, and the wealthy are always plotting and loading up the local commissions with people who are friendly to their initiatives.

It's making people eat in small amounts, what they would choke on, if you gave them the whole piece at once (also referred to as boiling a frog to death).

[Boatguy30]

Originally Posted by lesterbutch

I dont think iv'e ever seen the cops drag anyone off their boat for being at anchor. The state would like to regulate mooring and anchoring, my opinion, for the same reason they regulate everything, too make more money! These things are cash cows for the state and county governments and what I think will happen is, you will have to get an annual permit to anchor or moor. That way they won't have to pay mooring cops. Just another infringement on our basic rights.

I was threatened with arrest in FT Myers beach 6 years ago. I was aboard my well found 43' ketch with my wife and 1 y/o son. It was a Friday afternoon. The cop told me it might get a bit rough over the weekend in the jail cell and the earliest I would be able to post bond would be Monday morning.

OR

Move to a private dock. The claim was I was anchored too close to the mooring field. This was before the pilot program established any anchoring distances from mooring fields.

[a64pilot]

Originally Posted by Sea7King

A64 Pilot, Here's the act that gave control of the water to the States:


1. The Submerged Lands Act (SLA)


Under the Submerged Lands Act (SLA),37 ownership of submerged lands and


control of the overlying waters was transferred to the states, subject to a reservation


of significant power by the federal government.38 The SLA recognized, confirmed,


and established each stateʹs claim of title and ownership39 as well as


management and administrative responsibility40 over submerged lands beneath


navigable waters. The Supreme Court has characterized the SLA as a transfer to


the states of rights to “submerged lands and waters.”41 Congress’ goal in passing


the SLA was to decentralize management of coastal areas and foster greater local


control to better meet the needs of the state and boaters.42 Congress stated that


because management of submerged lands is directly tied to local activities, “any


conflict of interest arising from the use of the submerged lands should be and can


best be solved by local authorities.”43 The SLA, however, expressly reserved in


the federal government the power to regulate these lands for the purposes of


“commerce, navigation, national defense, and international affairs.”44 The statutes


discussed below implement that authority.

I've been hesitant to answer this as I am NO lawyer, just some slob, but unless I'm mistaken the intent of that law was to allow the state to build piers, docks etc by giving them the right to the land under the water, not control of the water.

Else, why would it be called the 'submerged land act'?

I do not believe the intent was to give control of navigable waters away, but that of course is just my opinion.

[DotDun]

Originally Posted by Boatguy30

I was threatened with arrest in FT Myers beach 6 years ago. I was aboard my well found 43' ketch with my wife and 1 y/o son. It was a Friday afternoon. The cop told me it might get a bit rough over the weekend in the jail cell and the earliest I would be able to post bond would be Monday morning.

OR

Move to a private dock. The claim was I was anchored too close to the mooring field. This was before the pilot program established any anchoring distances from mooring fields.

Or anchor outside the mooring field.

The State of Florida controls the bottom. Those who install a mooring field lease the bottom from the state and then they control what happens within the lease area.

That's current law. Granted, you could claim safe harbor, disabled vessel, crew issues, whatever, but you would likely be fighting that after you were released from jail.

[soverel]

Originally Posted by Boatguy30

I was threatened with arrest in FT Myers beach 6 years ago. I was aboard my well found 43' ketch with my wife and 1 y/o son. It was a Friday afternoon. The cop told me it might get a bit rough over the weekend in the jail cell and the earliest I would be able to post bond would be Monday morning.

OR

Move to a private dock. The claim was I was anchored too close to the mooring field. This was before the pilot program established any anchoring distances from mooring fields.

There are plenty of places to anchor there outside of the mooring field.

If your to close to the mooring field without grabbing a ball its considered trespassing and the signage in mooring field indicates that.

If there was a problem a ball can always be grabbed for a short while, just let harbor master know.

You would be interested to know the town of fmb paid/pays sheriffs dept roughly 50 grand a year to monitor mooring field on the weekendd to make sure no one is not paying the 13 bucks a day. They are trying to do away with the expence but overtime for harbor master costs too.



Sent from my HUAWEI-M931 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Group9]

Look how long it took, and how much money and trouble, to get the Marco Island regulations thrown out in court.

It's going to take somebody being the victim again, and willing to pay the initial penalty, to fight all of these things (if there is someone willing to do that). And, even then, as history has shown since the Marco Island case, you're fighting people, who can re-initiate the fight as many times as they want, until they win.

I'd like to think this will have a happy ending for boaters, but I'm just too old, and have seen too much stuff like this happen in my life, to believe that. In the end, he who can spend the most money, usually wins every political fight for control over resources that are supposed to belong to everyone. And, that's all this is, no matter how much the people pushing it try to dress it up or disguise it.

[Neeltje]

I still can't understand why nobody seems to be claiming their "right" to pitch a tent for a few weeks on the side of our National Highways whenever and wherever they feel like it. After all, they've got the same basic status as our Federal Waterways, don't they?

I still believe that well managed, affordable, municipal mooring fields with mobile pump-outs are the only way to go in increasingly congested (and often sensitive) areas.

Jacques

PS - Please stop systematically blaming the "Rich Waterfront Homeowners" of Florida for all your anchoring woes. Many of them have done more to keep these waters attractive for you than you'll ever know.

[Group9]

Originally Posted by Neeltje

I still can't understand why nobody seems to be claiming their "right" to pitch a tent for a few weeks on the side of our National Highways whenever and wherever they feel like it. After all, they've got the same basic status as our Federal Waterways, don't they?

I still believe that well managed, affordable, municipal mooring fields with mobile pump-outs are the only way to go in increasingly congested (and often sensitive) areas.

Jacques

PS - Please stop systematically blaming the "Rich Waterfront Homeowners" of Florida for all your anchoring woes. Many of them have done more to keep these waters attractive for you than you'll ever know.

Well, you may not blame them, but you should thank them. Because, they, and the real estate developers who market to them, are bankrolling this legislation.

Don't be such a sourpuss. I said your side was going to win.

I just hate the idea of having to go offshore all the way to the Bahamas one day.

[DotDun]

Originally Posted by Group9

Look how long it took, and how much money and trouble, to get the Marco Island regulations thrown out in court.

How long did it take?

How much money?