Our shrinking rights and the fight in Oriental NC

[goboatingnow]

The fact is the local ordinances are not in place to limit the time at anchor. ( for whatever reason) hence anyone has the " right" to anchor there for as long as they desire.

What's moral, fair , decent or whatever are hypothetical abstract positions.

What is acceptable is a campaign in TownDock to convince the authorities to apply new rules and regulations.

What's not acceptable is attempts to drive away individuals simply because you disagree with their social position. That's simply called intimidation and is a written form of turning up with burning torches etc. in that case the rule of law should be mercilessly applied. Perhaps primadomma should take a libel action !!!

Riparian rights etc are all red herrings.

You can't simply have your cake and eat it Oriental

Dave

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

The only problem with that is money. Most of the anchor outs live on a really small monthly budget, pension or retirement. So even with a part time job, there isn't money available to pay a marina for a slip, liveaboard fee and electricity.

Lord knows I live on less then that anyway. So they don't have an option for a slip and eat too. Just how it is.

Gosh darn, your right and since not everyone has a lot of money, we should give them a house on the water, a new car and they can just go into stores and take what they need (sarcasim).

In case you haven't noticed, life takes money. Not having money is not justification to get things for free. They have a right to reasonable usage of public spaces. Being poor gives them no special right to monopolize public spaces against those evil middle class folks (and the vast majority of boats in the harbor are middle class).

[Captain Bill]

Originally Posted by Delancy

When I look at the before and after photos side by side, it looks like the after photo is a wider view from farther away that shows a low spot in the breakwater before the end with the red marker beyond.

When I look at after photo I can't see the end of the break water, only the low spot which would suggest to me that the boats in the before view are in fact all inside the breakwater.

Look to me like the marina goes up to or maybe past the row of boats on the left side of the anchorage as seen in the before photo whereas the boats in the after photo are outside the breakwater as you say.

So in the old picture we have 17 boats behind the breakwater. In the new picture we have maybe 70 boats behind the breakwater if you count all the boats resident in the Marina with 6 or so in the anchorage. If even 11 of the slips in the marina are rented to transients then to the town it's a break even on the number of transient boats in the harbor, and more than half are paying for the privelege. Sounds to me like as far as the town is concerned this is a win. If another dozen or so are locals down for the weekend sitting on their boats but spending money in town instead of some other town then the town really wins. My guess is that people that stay in Marinas at $2/ft spend more money in town than people who anchor out. Those cheapskates among us (i.e.me) who just want to anchor probably don't mean a lot to the town. I have to wonder how many of those boats that are anchored out in the old picture would have used the marina if it had been available. I think it's pretty nice that the town has a free dinghy dock, the free town dock and is seriously talking about another free town dock. Despite the lack of anchoring space (for boats with taller masts) I think that Oriental is a great town. Last year I spent several weeks there getting some work done on the boat and really enjoyed the stay. This is a very cruiser friendly town.

[Kenomac]

Nobody has a "right" to be a freeloader and anchor in one place indefinitely. I'm at anchor four months of the year, and I expect to have to move around and obey the rules in any given anchorage. 'Nuff said. Only in America do people debate the "rights" of freeloaders. Other countries don't put up with this nonesense.

[sailorchic34]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Gosh darn, your right and since not everyone has a lot of money, we should give them a house on the water, a new car and they can just go into stores and take what they need (sarcasim).

In case you haven't noticed, life takes money. Not having money is not justification to get things for free. They have a right to reasonable usage of public spaces. Being poor gives them no special right to monopolize public spaces against those evil middle class folks (and the vast majority of boats in the harbor are middle class).

Ah truely enlighten thinking. But life does not take a lot of money. IF I had no money at all I would still survive of the land/ sea. Luckily I know how. You know I live better on less then $500 a month then most middle class boaters do. Many folks I come upon, say then wish they could live life like I do.

I never said it did not take money, only that most anchorouts and homeless have very little of it. Some can't afford to move. They are there and just telling them they can't be there is not going to make them move.

So the city takes the boat and the anchorout become homeless, maybe he's arrested and put in jail where, he costs the system $50k a year for incarnation. It costs the system less to leave him/her alone. That is a major reason that the fine folks anchoring out are still there. It costs too much to do anything at all about it.

Life is not fair. There will always be the poor boaters taking up anchorages, just like there will be rich boaters taking up anchorages.

Me I see a crowded anchorage, I just go elsewhere. It's just not worth getting all in a huff about.

[tamicatana]

Sailorchic, I think the term for your paradigm is "enabling."

[SVNeko]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

The fact is the local ordinances are not in place to limit the time at anchor. ( for whatever reason) hence anyone has the " right" to anchor there for as long as they desire.

What's moral, fair , decent or whatever are hypothetical abstract positions.

What is acceptable is a campaign in TownDock to convince the authorities to apply new rules and regulations.

What's not acceptable is attempts to drive away individuals simply because you disagree with their social position. That's simply called intimidation and is a written form of turning up with burning torches etc. in that case the rule of law should be mercilessly applied. Perhaps primadomma should take a libel action !!!

Riparian rights etc are all red herrings.

You can't simply have your cake and eat it Oriental

Dave

On the one hand you say what's moral or fair are hopelessly abstract and unworkable. Yet in the next breath you decry attempts to drive individuals away as "not acceptable". Based on what? Your own moral code? Fairness? There is no law against applying such pressure. So by your reasoning its completely above board (by the way, libel in the US is very hard to prove and completely inapplicable here). So by your "if there are no written rules..." credo, a mob's pressure on an individual to leave should be perfectly fine. Its quite funny that you then go on to talk about having cake and eating it after trying to do exactly that. You are hopelessly conflicted and cannot think your way out of a paper bag. You should let this go.

[Sand Castle]

Originally Posted by Delancy

Found an undated photo of the anchorage pre-marina development. I count seventeen boats at anchor. Now there's room for four? Go figure.

Try to take a more recent picture. I took THIS one. August 2013. What you're showing is somebody's marketing brochure. Pardon me, but I think you are either being toyed with, or you are toying with this audience. You can see here - Pink, White, Red. A blue one has joined them since this photo.

[Sand Castle]

Originally Posted by Delancy

Found an undated photo of the anchorage pre-marina development. I count seventeen boats at anchor. Now there's room for four? Go figure.

OOPS! Sorry, my bad. You did say undated photo.



Dunce cap for me.

[sailorchic34]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

Nobody has a "right" to be a freeloader and anchor in one place indefinitely. I'm at anchor four months of the year, and I expect to have to move around and obey the rules in any given anchorage. 'Nuff said. Only in America do people debate the "rights" of freeloaders. Other countries don't put up with this nonesense.

Ah,But its not a right at all. There is no right or wrong about it. The poor are at the bottom of the ladder, with nowhere else to go. Most other developed countries do more for the poor then the us does.

Gee no one chooses to be poor. Things happen. No one thinks at 20 that they are going to be on a park bench at 30 or 40 years of age. I know of people living in cars right now, trying to find a job, any job, washing clothes in a public sink and looking for an iron, so they can look good for a job interview. Wheres the "Right" in that.

There are a whole lot of homeless out there. They don't have a "Right" to be homeless, they just are. So tonight at home, Imagine having no job, no home, no bed to sleep in, no car, no tv and not alot of money and maybe no family. What would you do?

There are millions of folks, whole families homeless with not a lot left to live for. It's not a "right", its tragic.

[Kenomac]

The boats in question appear to be SAIL BOATS. How much money does it cost for them to move along and become a nuisance someplace else and give the locals a break?

When I anchored many times in Dana Point, CA it was understood 10 days max in the harbor. When I anchored in Mahon, Menorca... 10 days max. What's so hard to understand about local towns and cities making rules to follow?


While anchored anywhere, you're a guest in THEIR town, city or country. Some people seem to think that just because they're in a boat, that they have special squatters rights to the anchorage.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

Nobody has a "right" to be a freeloader and anchor in one place indefinitely. I'm at anchor four months of the year, and I expect to have to move around and obey the rules in any given anchorage. 'Nuff said. Only in America do people debate the "rights" of freeloaders. Other countries don't put up with this nonesense.

The 'rules' are stay outa swimming area's and channels.... no one pushes you out tho'... until you overstay your visa.
And even then its just you... not your boat.

[familycruisers]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

Ah,But its not a right at all. There is no right or wrong about it. The poor are at the bottom of the ladder, with nowhere else to go. Most other developed countries do more for the poor then the us does.

Gee no one chooses to be poor. Things happen. No one thinks at 20 that they are going to be on a park bench at 30 or 40 years of age. I know of people living in cars right now, trying to find a job, any job, washing clothes in a public sink and looking for an iron, so they can look good for a job interview. Wheres the "Right" in that.

There are a whole lot of homeless out there. They don't have a "Right" to be homeless, they just are. So tonight at home, Imagine having no job, no home, no bed to sleep in, no car, no tv and not alot of money and maybe no family. What would you do?

There are millions of folks, whole families homeless with not a lot left to live for. It's not a "right", its tragic.

Well said chickie!

[sailorchic34]

Originally Posted by Sand Castle

Try to take a more recent picture. I took THIS one. August 2013. What you're showing is somebody's marketing brochure. Pardon me, but I think you are either being toyed with, or you are toying with this audience. You can see here - Pink, White, Red. A blue one has joined them since this photo.

Nice looking boats. Like the Pink, BTW...

[Sand Castle]

For clarity...
Primadonna is the French boat. Southern Cross is believed unoccupied. The Shire is the letter writer to TownDock.net | Oriental NC News, Weather, Photos

The pain point is length of stay from a displacement aspect for wishful visiting cruisers and local businesses wishing to capitalize. The French folks have gained notoriety from their languid and mischievous exploits. Obviously, breaking the law is offensive to some, not so much to others. Some letter writers have advocated a compassionate approach to the French crew's dilemma. I personally am curious why they have not taken steps to resolve their situation earlier, pre-controversy, pre-rancor. But that's just me.

Southern Cross has just sat there. I don't know about occupants, perhaps GVH does?