What is the current FL anchoring policy?

[Neeltje]

Of course he is. Besides, being allowed to sail to Cuba is going to take a whole bunch of Acts of Congress, and that, as we all know, might take a little more time than many of us will be able to hold our breaths for.

My youngest daughter spent her honeymoon in Cuba about 10 years ago. She loved the place, but more so the people. Granted, she and her hubby spent most of there time inland, far away from the bustling French, German, Dutch and Danish beach crowds, where even in Cuba, "a Euro or a Floren is a Euro or a Floren", and unbridled capitalism reins (well, sort of).

For the time being, the European influence is limited to a number of swanky hotels along the coast. The rest of Cuba (like most of it's automobile park) still lives in the 1950s, and I wonder if our impeding (second) invasion is going to actually widen the average Cuban's smile, or turn it into a grin.

Jacques

[rwidman]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

What I do not like about it is loss of freedom, pure and simple. Barring some major catastrophe similar to the stock market crash of the 1930's or similar, I do not think I am in any danger of becoming a derelict live-aboard, essentially a homeless person on a boat, that seems to be the biggest driving force behind mandatory mooring fields. Truthfully, I do not see myself being anything but a transient in South Fl, so honestly I'm not real concerned, I do not like crowds, my idea of paradise is a secudled anchorage all to myself, not Walmart within easy walking distance. I have a few concerns though.
1. Currently you speak of buffer zones. I see those going away and boats only being allowed to stay in mooring field, dropping anchor will be illegal. Like being able to pitch a tent anywhere you want to in a State park is disallowed.
2. Once you lose a freedom, or the ability to do something that you have always taken for granted, it may not be possible to re-gain that right.

You lost the "freedom" to park (your car) just anywhere on city streets a very long time ago.

You just stated it in your post; Much of what's behind these anchoring restrictions is derelict boats with and without homeless people living on them. This seems to me to be a legitimate concern in many areas. Rather than trying to chase these people off again and again, charging for mooring is an effective way to keep the derelict boats away and ensure that moorings are available for cruisers who would like to stay for a few days.

This is really a "win" for legitimate cruisers.

[a64pilot]

Originally Posted by rwidman

Rather than trying to chase these people off again and again, charging for mooring is an effective way to keep the derelict boats away and ensure that moorings are available for cruisers who would like to stay for a few days.

This is really a "win" for legitimate cruisers.

No, I see it as class warfare, without elaborating on that as I do not want to inflame anyone, I think it's wrong.

[Neeltje]

One last note:

The "Rights" and "Freedoms" everybody seems to think they're entitled to were actually fought for tooth and nail by our ancestors. You want to keep them? Do the same. You want anarchy on the water? Fight for it. I'm sure that if you really invest yourselves in this cause (as opposed to just bitching about the status quo), you'll probably find a political party willing to add your banner to theirs. Then maybe you'll make some headway.

Until then, I strongly suggest that those of you who are sounding-off from as far as Texas or Maine ask themselves how they'd deal with similar issues in their back yard.

Florida is a State. Not just an aquatic "playground". We do our best to manage our waterways as best we can, but if you don't like the way we're doing it, I'm sure you'll find other venues to suit you.

Jacques

[letsgetsailing3]

Originally Posted by DotDun

No, feel free to anchor where you like outside the mooring field.



No cruiser would anchor where the west mooring field is at FMB prior to the moorings, too many derelicts and sunken junk.



To clean up the junk that a 'cruiser' leaves behind when their derelict sinks.



Again, read the rules. Yes, there is a buffer zone around the mooring field, outside the buffer zone, anchor where you want. Why is this hard to understand?

Not confining of activity to a controlled space, just controlling the activity within a space. Anchor where you wish outside the mooring field.

There are other laws that cover ALL of the undesirable activity that you reference.

The purpose of these laws, simply enough, is to open up another revenue source for localities, while also giving them control over local waterways. You use a nice strawman argument, but it falls apart rather quickly under actual analysis.

In all of the areas that have mooring fields, there are regulations limiting or eliminating anchoring elsewhere. So instead of being free to anchor anywhere along the coast or natural harbor, cruisers are forced to pay to connect to a mooring ball a lot closer to their neighbors.

Who primarily benefits from this? Cruisers? Or waterfront property owners who don't want to see a boat anchored in their vista.

I think we all know.

[rwidman]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

No, I see it as class warfare, without elaborating on that as I do not want to inflame anyone, I think it's wrong.

Well if that's the case, I'm not going to change your mind but unless you move to Florida and register to vote, you don't really have any say in it.

[letsgetsailing3]

Originally Posted by rwidman

Well if that's the case, I'm not going to change your mind but unless you move to Florida and register to vote, you don't really have any say in it.

Your location is listed as South Carolina.

[letsgetsailing3]

Originally Posted by rwidman

You lost the "freedom" to park (your car) just anywhere on city streets a very long time ago.

You just stated it in your post; Much of what's behind these anchoring restrictions is derelict boats with and without homeless people living on them. This seems to me to be a legitimate concern in many areas. Rather than trying to chase these people off again and again, charging for mooring is an effective way to keep the derelict boats away and ensure that moorings are available for cruisers who would like to stay for a few days.

This is really a "win" for legitimate cruisers.

Couldn't a well-defined "derelict boat law" accomplish the same thing with a more razor-like precision, rather than limiting where boaters can anchor?

[rwidman]

Originally Posted by letsgetsailing3

There are other laws that cover ALL of the undesirable activity that you reference.

The purpose of these laws, simply enough, is to open up another revenue source for localities, while also giving them control over local waterways. You use a nice strawman argument, but it falls apart rather quickly under actual analysis.

In all of the areas that have mooring fields, there are regulations limiting or eliminating anchoring elsewhere. So instead of being free to anchor anywhere along the coast or natural harbor, cruisers are forced to pay to connect to a mooring ball a lot closer to their neighbors.

Who primarily benefits from this? Cruisers? Or waterfront property owners who don't want to see a boat anchored in their vista.

I think we all know.

We might all know, but I don't think we all "know" the same as you or there wouldn't be any discussion.

I think you are wrong on several counts. Localities aren't making a fortune on $15 mooring fees. All told, they are lucky if they break even. You are still free to anchor anywhere there are no restrictions. Or just pay the fee and tie to a mooring ball.

I don't know what the fuss is, Annapolis, MD has had a city mooring field and anchoring restrictions for many years. I suspect other cities have this as well.

[rwidman]

Originally Posted by letsgetsailing3

Your location is listed as South Carolina.

Correct. That's where I live.

[Neeltje]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

No, I see it as class warfare, without elaborating on that as I do not want to inflame anyone, I think it's wrong.

"Class Warfare"? Give me a break. You live on a boat, you've got beautiful sunrises and/or sunsets, peace and tranquility, with water lapping on your hull to put you to sleep. Where does "Class" come into the quotient? Those who live in downtown projects might relate, but I don't.

Jacques

[a64pilot]

Jacques,
How much of this fighting for freedom have you done?
Not meant as a slur, but it's easy to talk of things that you have no experience with

[RTB]

Originally Posted by Neeltje

Until then, I strongly suggest that those of you who are sounding-off from as far as Texas or Maine ask themselves how they'd deal with similar issues in their back yard.

From my previous post to you, what do you want from me, as a cruiser travelling the waterways from Texas to Georgia?

We anchor out when we can. We go offshore when the weather is fair. We do use marinas very often. We spend weeks on moorings in Ft. Meyer's Beach, months at Boot Key Harbor. Weeks on the moorings in St. Augustine (where we have friends). We pump out, buy fuel, provisions, eat at restaurants, re-supply beer, wine, and rum at liquor stores. All the businesses and marinas seem to appreciate that we spend money with them. My wife buys blood pressure medicines at the pharmacies, and has had medical attention at a clinic in Florida. Typically, we're moving most days, making our way to the Bahamas, or going north to get away during hurricane season.



Everyone seems friendly, waves at us from their docks. Happily, I haven't met anyone like you. So, I ask what is your problem with cruisers? Honestly, I can only think of three anchorages where we are close to homeowners. Lake Sylvia, Cape Haze, and a tight little anchorage at Delray Beach, where we spend one night.



Maybe you can tell me exactly why I shouldn't be on your waterways ? The same inland waterway that stretches from Virginia to Brownsville, Texas.


And BTW....just where exactly are you looking, when you say the ICW is a 3,000 mile parking lot? Sorry, I must have missed that in our travels. Maybe you have problems with locals in some places, but I am not your problem.

Ralph

[letsgetsailing3]

Originally Posted by rwidman

We might all know, but I don't think we all "know" the same as you or there wouldn't be any discussion.

I think you are wrong on several counts. Localities aren't making a fortune on $15 mooring fees. All told, they are lucky if they break even. You are still free to anchor anywhere there are no restrictions. Or just pay the fee and tie to a mooring ball.

I don't know what the fuss is, Annapolis, MD has had a city mooring field and anchoring restrictions for many years. I suspect other cities have this as well.

I don't think it's really about localities making money on $15 a night mooring fields. I think it's about restricting anchoring. It is essentially a tax on boaters, even if the municipality doesn't make money on it.

I haven't seen any arguments here for it that convince me that it's different than that.

If you want to restrict derelict boats, it seems that you don't need to restrict anchoring in order to do that --- you could simply write enforceable and clear direction about derelict boats.

I think you'd find Florida a lot less restrictive than Maryland in just about every category.

Once you give up freedom to the government at any level, you usually don't get it back, so I like to see a good reason for giving up that freedom.

What's your reasoning? Convince us that it's a good idea.

[letsgetsailing3]

Quote:
Originally Posted by rwidman
Well if that's the case, I'm not going to change your mind but unless you move to Florida and register to vote, you don't really have any say in it.



Quote:
Originally Posted by letsgetsailing3
Your location is listed as South Carolina.

Correct. That's where I live.


---------------------------------

I was pointing out the irony of you telling someone else that they don't have any say in the matter because they don't live in Florida.