Are Liveaboards Unwanted? Disliked? All over Everywhere?

[sailorchic34]

Originally Posted by Wrong

Thumbing one's nose at local ordinances that prohibit installing a mooring without a permit may seem like an honerable act by some, but doing so contributes later on to uneccessary conflict and costs. It provides a handy means for storing boats for sale, or leaving boats unattended that clog the Bay. Selfish behaviour that adversely affects other boaters rights to share the Bay.

My point is the diver installed moorings, prevents boats from dragging down on other boats and dragging across the bay to belvedere. That's a positive social benefit. Is it strictly legal, no. But it has real benefits and gee the city is not charged at all for it. A win win in my book.

To my mind, there is tons of space in Richardson bay to anchor. It's a big bay, though the back half is pretty skinny water. I never have a problem finding a spot to drop the hook for a day or so..

The other thing is there have always been a ton of boats anchored in Richardson bay. For well over 100 years. It's just that the 9000+ Square foot homes on Belvedere have to look down on the boats now. That's where the Idea for the RBRA was born.

Yes a few are selling old boats, which provides a place for a homeless or down and outs, a mostly dry bed. Beats living on a sidewalk. No there is not anywhere else for many to go as demand for homeless shelters far exceeds availability.

The RBRA is and has been removing boats from the bay for years. I see a number that are not there this year. Yes there is another 50 or so that probably need to be hauled away. But over half the boats look ok to me and there are quite a number of folks living out there getting by as best they can.

It is not easy living in Richardson bay. It's windy, cool and there are no shore facilities for the anchor outs, other then a dumpster and a few private dinghy docks. Myself, I avoild it, unless the herring are running or I need to vist the fuel dock there.

[Wrong]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

My point is the diver installed moorings, prevents boats from dragging down on other boats and dragging across the bay to belvedere.

Unfortunately I don't believe anybody is keeping count of the numbers of boats that drag a mooring illegally installed by the diver(s), or that drag anchor. Your's is an unwarranted assumption at the very least.

That's a positive social benefit. Is it strictly legal, no. But it has real benefits and gee the city is not charged at all for it. A win win in my book.

Your crediting a diver who illegally installs moorings in a public waterway for creating a social benefit is a stretch. How about corporations that justify breaking the law because after all, they're creating jobs? Why should they have to pay taxes when benefiting the 'public good' by creating jobs? In your world it appears breaking the law is o.k. as long as some good comes of it. For the diver his justification is he's making a buck, and that's good enough. Long term consequences don't matter.

To my mind, there is tons of space in Richardson bay to anchor. It's a big bay, though the back half is pretty skinny water. I never have a problem finding a spot to drop the hook for a day or so..

But you're perfectly happy being far from shore access and probably rarely leave your boat except to restock your cupboard or buy boat stuff from West Marine. Cruisers including myself appreciate an anchorage close to shore access and services. Most people who want to anchor and who actually MOVE THEIR BOAT want this. And you're absolutely right about Richardson Bay being large AND SHALLOW. Most areas you'd believe will make a good spot to anchor won't because it's too shallow. All the viable places to anchor are filled with boats on illegal moorings of questionable value that NEVER MOVE.

The other thing is there have always been a ton of boats anchored in Richardson bay. For well over 100 years. It's just that the 9000+ Square foot homes on Belvedere have to look down on the boats now. That's where the Idea for the RBRA was born.

Your myopic view is typical of anchor outs. But, the 'they' and 'us' attitude only serves to reinforce what most people in the surrounding communities probably believe; that anchor outs don't care about property damage caused by their boats. And should we be at all surprised if people who's property is damaged demand something is done to stop it? RBRA is a logical creation who's purpose is to manage the Bay, and yes, bring a stop to damage caused by dragging boats.

Yes a few are selling old boats, which provides a place for a homeless or down and outs, a mostly dry bed. Beats living on a sidewalk. No there is not anywhere else for many to go as demand for homeless shelters far exceeds availability.

I can't speak for others, but philosophically you and I are about as far apart as we can get on the matter of how Richardson Bay should be used.

The RBRA is and has been removing boats from the bay for years. I see a number that are not there this year. Yes there is another 50 or so that probably need to be hauled away.

And they will be disposed of at significant expense, borne by people who pay taxes but don't even own a boat, let alone use Richardson Bay. And based on your philosophy of live & let live, leave things as they are, this chaotic and expensive situation will have no end.

But over half the boats look ok to me and there are quite a number of folks living out there getting by as best they can.

Then nothing is likely to change for them as RBRA builds a mooring field and lays out a managed anchorage...

It is not easy living in Richardson bay. It's windy, cool and there are no shore facilities for the anchor outs, other then a dumpster and a few private dinghy docks. Myself, I avoild it, unless the herring are running or I need to vist the fuel dock there.

[sailorchic34]

Originally Posted by Wrong

I can't speak for others, but philosophically you and I are about as far apart as we can get on the matter of how Richardson Bay should be used.

.

What with me living in my magic unicorn rainbow land. its no wonder we are at opposite ends of that bell curve.

No question that the diver is doing things a bit under the table as it were. But that is how corporate America operates. GE earns Billions each year, pays zero in taxes. Apple stores it's earnings in overseas banks and pays little in taxes. Why I'm not at all worried about a diver making a few bucks.

LOL, well you cruisers (nice dig, BTW) can have the mooring ball near the fuel dock. Not my idea of a nice place to anchor. Too much boat traffic.

I know you've been around the world a few times. but I bet I have more miles sailed these last 4 months then you. OK it's only about 150 miles, really nothing. But gee has your boat even moved in the last four months?

Where is this You and us. You talk like you live on the hill. yet, you yourself are anchoring (well mooring) out. Sort of the pot calling the kettle black. To the fine folks on the hill, you are part of the problem.

Just saying.

[BandB]

There are a lot of generalizations taking place as always. All liveaboards aren't the same. All cruisers are not the same.

I have a problem in comparing illegal divers to GE and other corporations. One does things against the law. The other operates within the law. If we don't like either one of those situations we should change the laws.

The other generalization is references to those with nice houses on the hill or on the water in Florida or wherever and claiming "they" are the ones trying to run all liveaboards away. They don't all share the same opinions anymore than we do as boaters. I live on the water and in the neighborhood we live in which is all waterfront homes, a survey was taken and over 90% opposed the anchoring regulations one lady was proposing and pushing. Most saw no issues with anchoring but did see them with derelict boats in some places, although none in our area.

Now, back to the issues, both sides have to work together to find a suitable compromise. Sometimes one group chooses not to participate in the discussions and their side doesn't get heard.

There's a marina in Florida that is managed by a large company and the homeowners board recently told them no more liveaboards. They were shocked, but so were the vast majority of home and condo owners. There was no vote taken, no polling even of the members. It was just an arbitrary move by three board members. Oh, and it was all brought on by one man who lived aboard. The marina management had already started eviction procedures on him and cancelled his slip lease. Also to make their point to him that they were serious they had him arrested for public intoxication and for use of obscene language in public.

If these were all simple cookie cutter issues they would already be solved. But instead if you talk to 100 people, you have 100 views and 100 agendas.

[oldragbaggers]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

Not everyone wants to work 9 to 5 for 50 years and then die. Sounds like your brother lives the life he wants. Not a bad thing.

Myself I did that work 40-60 hours a week for 30 years. Then got right sized during the great recession. Best thing that ever happened to me.

Now I work 15-20 hours (sometimes no hours, sometimes a bit more) a week from my boat, while also sailing, kayaking, swimming etc. It's not too bad and beats commuting to work every day by roughly 10000 percent. I don't own a house, car, TV. Have not had a single utility bill (other then phone and or internet) in ten years. My total taxes and insurance (property/income) a year is generally under $1000. It was well under $500, but that work thing is causing me to pay more taxes this year.

Many of the folk living in Richardson bay have jobs. Others have a pension and a part are on welfair/food stamps, or disability. Some have a mental illness and a good many love to drink. Generally they and I include myself are a sub-culture. One that the average land folks just don't understand. But there is not a thing wrong with that sub culture.

Myself I think the average American is a bit crazy. Then I realize, I might be the crazy one. I'm OK with that.

Sailorchic, I totally get what you are doing and you are in no way in the same camp as my brother (or the thousands like him), at least not in my mind. The lifestyle my brother has chosen is almost completely dependent on what he can get or use from other people or the government. Only when he has exhausted every resource for a handout will he resort to working to pay for his own existence. That's not exactly the same as what you do. You have defined a lifestyle that works for you and you (yourself) do the work necessary to support it. Nothing wrong with that.

[Hudson Force]

I remember being in Trout River on the north side of Jacksonville, Florida about twenty years ago when a boat dragged upon me in a midnight thunderstorm. I took my boat hook and attempted to shove the vessel off, but my metal pole went through the rotting bullwark of the encroaching vessel and I was unable to dislodge it. I packed the border between the boats with fenders and we held in place 'till morning. In the daylight I saw the offending boat was covered with rusting barbeque grills, washing machines and lawn mowers. The owner had limited communication skills, but he was able to find assistance to tow his boat back to his original location where he had been tied to his previous liveaboard vessel that was underwater. Boats and their owners like this are the greatest examples of a problem, but not the typical case. Most derelict vessels that cause problems are not lived aboard like this one, but they have been left abandoned for years before dragging to the shore or to shallows. Most derelict vessels have not been recently occupied or ever had people living aboard.

[sailorchic34]

Originally Posted by BandB

I have a problem in comparing illegal divers to GE and other corporations. One does things against the law. The other operates within the law. If we don't like either one of those situations we should change the laws..

Somehow, I'm thinking the laws are not going to change anytime soon. From my perspective, current laws, that is laws over the last 30-80 odd years are generally written for the most part to benefit corporations in the USA. I don't see that changing anytime soon. Though I think it should.

Ah Florida, where they build condos around the marinas, kick the liveaboards out, and then complaint about folks anchoring out. A lovely place. Use to live there for a bit. A bit to suburban for my tastes.

Oh no question there are all types of cruisers and liveaboards. Checking the Belvedere real estate lising show homes for sale on the bay side starting at about $5 million going up to $15 million. Belvedere is one of several very high end areas in the bay area. Tom Perkins who had the Maltese falcon built, lives there. He, during an newpaper interview was talking down about the poor folks who could only afford a Rolex.

I have a feeling that Tom, might not understand the reasons someone would want to live on a small boat. I might be wrong.

But you are correct, it is a complex issue and like so many things not easily solved.

BTW I was basing my statements about the folks on the hill, partly on past newspaper reports over the last 15-20 years as it relates to the anchor outs in Richardson Bay (Google Sausalito anchorouts).

Sorry I was not throwing stones at you. While we occupy opposite ends of the social/economical phylum, I find your posts well thought out and pointed. I may not always agree with you, but I respect your point of view.

[onestepcsy37]

Sorry you left Florida Sailorchic. We need liveaboards like you.

[BandB]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

BTW I was basing my statements about the folks on the hill, partly on past newspaper reports over the last 15-20 years as it relates to the anchor outs in Richardson Bay (Google Sausalito anchorouts).

Sorry I was not throwing stones at you. While we occupy opposite ends of the social/economical phylum, I find your posts well thought out and pointed. I may not always agree with you, but I respect your point of view.

I didn't take it personally and I'd be very happy with you anchoring near me anytime. Newspaper reports too sometimes are based on one person who is anti-whatever they're talking about. I know in Fort Lauderdale a tremendous amount of noise made by one woman. I would have liked to ask her, "Exactly when and what made you such an activist over the issue?"

Oh and as to the marina I was referring to, it was built by the development and owned by them. What I've seen in those situations is some boat owners are thrilled about having a marina and then some home owners who don't boat dislike it's very presence. I heard one lady was complaining "boats coming and going all the time, especially weekends." I just thought, "what part of buying a waterfront condo did you not understand?" I remember in one marina in Mexico, Panagas coming and going. For us it was nice seeing that aspect of the local culture and when they pulled in beside us, we made a point of speaking to them. Bought some very cheap fresh fish too.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

The BABR kicked Google's barge out of treasure island that was docked at the old navy pier because they somehow missed that they needed a permit from the RBRA to be docked at a pier. From my perspective the RBRA is a perfect example of too much government.

The Richardson Bay Regional Agency (RBRA) had nothing to do with the Google barge at Treasure Island. The RBRA does not have jurisdiction at Treasure Island. The Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) were the agency requiring a permit which Google did not obtain.

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

I for one don't want the bay area turning into another San Diego. That is what the RBRA wants long term.

Illegal anchor-outs in Richardson Bay have turned that body of water into a dangerous eyesore. People have died attempting to wrangle adrift vessels during winter storms there. Maybe you don't mind a large fleet of POS boats and their owners abusing public property with no remuneration to the taxpayers that are responsible for it, but the rest of us do.

[Capt Phil]

The RBRA is emblematic of the reason I left the Bay Area 30 years ago never to return. The intrusion of local government into my life became too much to put up with.
There are many locales on the west coast where living aboard is peaceful without hassles and outstanding scenery. The west coast of British Columbia comes to mind as do several of the fjords of the Alaskan coast. Sure, you have to deal with a bit of weather from time to time but that is better than waiting for a rap on your hull by some officious prick tell you to up anchor and move. Unless you are fitting out, SF, LA and San Diego are best left to the nuts and the fruits of the west coast life style! Phil

[captain58sailin]

The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.Anatole France, The Red Lily, 1894, chapter 7

Anyone who thinks that GE and other large corporations follow the rules is living in a fantasy land. The rules that they do follow are the ones that they paid for in DC to prevent others from profiting like they have, just because it is legal, doesn't make it right.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by Capt Phil

The RBRA is emblematic of the reason I left the Bay Area 30 years ago never to return. The intrusion of local government into my life became too much to put up with.
There are many locales on the west coast where living aboard is peaceful without hassles and outstanding scenery. The west coast of British Columbia comes to mind as do several of the fjords of the Alaskan coast. Sure, you have to deal with a bit of weather from time to time but that is better than waiting for a rap on your hull by some officious prick tell you to up anchor and move. Unless you are fitting out, SF, LA and San Diego are best left to the nuts and the fruits of the west coast life style! Phil

The areas you mention that do not have intrusive government oversight are sparsly populated. Here in the Bay Area there are over 7,000,000 residents and over 20,000 boats vying for places to live. Those kinds of numbers require some regulation from government. You want to live in the boonies away from people- hey, more power to you. But for those of us who choose to live in civilization, there are always more than enough selfish a**holes (like those in Richardson Bay) to go around. That is why government was invented.

[sailorchic34]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

Illegal anchor-outs in Richardson Bay have turned that body of water into a dangerous eyesore. People have died attempting to wrangle adrift vessels during winter storms there. Maybe you don't mind a large fleet of POS boats and their owners abusing public property with no remuneration to the taxpayers that are responsible for it, but the rest of us do.

Ah the BCDC... Your right. I just can't keep the alphabet agency's straight.

Yet there have always been anchor outs in Richardson bay. Yes some of the boats are an eyesore. No question there. But many, maybe 50% or so, appear to be clean and seaworthy, or at least bay worthy.

So your saying as long as they pay for the privilege to anchor in the bay, with no services provided, it's fine. Mind you it is a federal special anchorage. Maybe the boaters need to pay BLM to anchor and not the state or city.

But no worry's looks like the fine folks anchoring will be paying their fair share to anchor in Richardson bay, based on what Wrong was saying. Then everything will be 100% fine......

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

So your saying as long as they pay for the privilege to anchor in the bay, with no services provided, it's fine.

You don't get to park your derelict camper on a public street so that you can live in it for free. Richardson Bay is no different.