What if we had "intent" in anchoring laws?

[Schooner Chandlery]

Originally Posted by 2hullvenus

But thanks to people abusing the freedom, with no consideration for their own community...

The end result is we will lose 100% of anchoring freedom to a mooring field or extremely short limits of less than a week.

It's much better to strike a deal than to lose everything, which is pretty much what they said is happening.

You're correct. People are so self-centered that they take, take, take until rules have to be made and enforced. With that entirely self-centered-focus of many folks, they can't handle it if someone else is getting a better "deal" than they might get themselves. So they push the rules and complain if they're not "fair" so that "everyone" gets the same deal. The rules become tighter and tighter to deal with all this selfishness until, sadly, everyone is impacted by the worst of the worst being dealt with.

Money is never an appropriate substitute for treating everyone equally, but yet we've come accustomed to having an expense associated with using a particular resource (like a mooring field or anchorage) do the job of regulating and moderating over-use by a few parties.

Greed and self-interest will continue to drive things.

[zboss]

Originally Posted by Schooner Chandlery

Marinas slips are rented for boats, not people staying on boats, so there's no right to stay aboard included. It's like renting a spot in a parking garage for your car and then expecting to be able to live in your car. Doesn't work that way.

OK, since when? People have been living on their boats for hundreds of years in "marina slips".

The boat slip is rented for the purpose written in the contract you sign.

The closest approximation is not renting a parking spot for your car, its for renting a slot for your RV at a campground. Leisure yachts are by definition for the purposes of leisure.

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by zboss

OK, since when? People have been living on their boats for hundreds of years in "marina slips".

The boat slip is rented for the purpose written in the contract you sign.

The closest approximation is not renting a parking spot for your car, its for renting a slot for your RV at a campground. Leisure yachts are by definition for the purposes of leisure.

Zboss, you can't take a statement like that and take it entirely out of context of Florida, where the conversation was being discussed.

Because it entirely depends on the location. We have 'marina's here that are for visiting yachts, you can rent by day, week or month and they are for living on. But they are not permanent. Our local ***** marina is very much only for boats on long term contract and no liveaboards are permitted.

And frankly, I very much doubt marina's have even existed anywhere for 'hundreds of years.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by SunnySky

valhalla360
All buisness must profit or they go away. It's not greed its survival.

It's not that I have a dislike of capitalism, and actually I fully understand and respect that businesses need to be able to make money in order to stay in business. But there needs to be certain checks and balances and a bit of common sense, if a private interest is profiting from the use of a public resource it is entirely reasonable for the public to place limits on the amount of profit that can be made off that public resource.

What I have issues with is unnecessary encroachment on the rights of the individual and small groups of individuals; in popular areas it is reasonable to institute limitations on the amount of time a vessel may be anchored based on how popular the location is but rarely does the privatization of otherwise public resources for private interests work out the way people claim it will.

I am fully opposed to "the merger of corporate and government power" (Benito Mussolini regarding fascism), whether it is privatization of public toll roads, using eminent domain to force the sale of private property which will subsequently be privately developed for an influential private interest to profit, or the privatization of public water resources that are contrary to the benefit of the public at large

"If you move to an isolated wilderness anchorage, no one is proposing anchoring restrictions." Yet...

2hullvenus
"We should just give the cops full power to give "good people" (who they deem to be good) anchoring as long as the cops want, with a "30 days or less" limit for everyone.. unless you extend through the cops, at their sole discretion."

The police already have a tremendous amount of discretion on how they choose to or not to enforce the law, given any person or group of people that much unrestrained power over any other person or group of people is a recipe for abuses of power. Some police pull a motorist over that was going 12 mph over the speed limit and let them off with a warning because they deemed they were "good people," while other cops kill unarmed civilians that simply knew their rights or committed a minor motor vehicle violation. There are plenty of laws currently on the books to deal with boats that are actually creating a legitimate problem and considerable latitude of enforcement so any and all anchoring regulations should be geared towards respecting the rights of all individuals while facilitating an equal opportunity to sustainable use of that public resource.

You greatly exaggerate the profitability of marinas. I see plenty go bankrupt or are bought out by condo associations, which tells me that they aren't the
cash cows, you think they are.

As far as your second point, I still fail to see anyone suggesting anchoring restrictions in isolated areas. If that is what you took from 2hullvenus' comment, I suspect you aren't grasping the issue.

Again, this is only an issue in popular places where people want access to capitalist facilities. Yes, the commons must serve the larger public but the fact is capitalism is the most efficient means of doing that. Only an idiot would develop a marina or a mooring field in the hopes of breaking even.

[2hullvenus]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Again, this is only an issue in popular places where people want access to capitalist facilities. Yes, the commons must serve the larger public but the fact is capitalism is the most efficient means of doing that. Only an idiot would develop a marina or a mooring field in the hopes of breaking even.

Correct. Adding to what valhalla is saying: Just about everywhere, this is a non issue.

However, visiting the most popular boating state's most urban area in season means a shortage of space.

What I and the local marine patrol (and probably that homeowner that causes all the ruckus) see as the problem are all these beat up, abandoned, piles of garbage anchored on a shoestring and paperclip.

Marine patrol is visibly upset they can't do anything about it and was quite apologetic to me explaining that unfortunately, us regular visitors will be caught up in the sweep.

[tomfl]

Originally Posted by SunnySky

SNIP

Just my two cents..
David

Which totally ignored my point.

There are too many boats and too few places for the boats to dock/moor/anchor.

The result is that boats try and anchor in places that no one use to anchor in and then act shocked when they are told they can't anchor there.

I have spent lots of time anchored in places where there are no restrictions and no one in sight. This is because they are away from cities. The problem is very few folks want to cruise in the traditional sense. They want to anchor close to stores/bars/West Marine/what ever. That is not cruising, rather living on a boat that is not self sustaining and having to go to shore daily, or weekly.

Most of the boats I see anchored/moored/docked don't go out daily, weekly, or even monthly. In fact it would be dangerous for many of those boats to try and venture into the open ocean. What those boats do is put additional pressure on dinghy docks/pump out facilities/garbage facilities in addition to destroying the bottom with continual anchoring.

As I have posted many times the problem is there are simply too many boats.

[Schooner Chandlery]

Originally Posted by tomfl

Which totally ignored my point.

As I have posted many times the problem is there are simply too many boats.

If there were even the most basic requirement for boats to PASS a safety inspection in order to be on the water--similar to cars must have safety inspections to be on the road...all those extra boats would not be on the water.

[Sandero]

Originally Posted by Schooner Chandlery

If there were even the most basic requirement for boats to PASS a safety inspection in order to be on the water--similar to cars must have safety inspections to be on the road...all those extra boats would not be on the water.

What a sweet thought... get the jerks off the water!

[zboss]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

Zboss, you can't take a statement like that and take it entirely out of context of Florida, where the conversation was being discussed.

Because it entirely depends on the location. We have 'marina's here that are for visiting yachts, you can rent by day, week or month and they are for living on. But they are not permanent. Our local ***** marina is very much only for boats on long term contract and no liveaboards are permitted.

And frankly, I very much doubt marina's have even existed anywhere for 'hundreds of years.

I was thinking more along the lines that people have always lived quayside on their boats.... its not like its something new. What is new is "marinas" not allowing live aboards. Its arbitrary. Throughout the 80's and 90's it as pretty much a given that people were living on their boats when they spent time enjoying them. They were social destinations.

Also, there have been marinas for a long time. Venice, canals of london, france. The USA had Boston, Philly, NYC. Yes, most were commercial but the crew lived on board.

There are bunches of live aboard marinas in Florida. We have never had trouble finding one, although of course they are around.

If we all get forced into Marinas what do you think the chances are that they follow it up with a "no live aboard" law?

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Only an idiot would develop a marina or a mooring field in the hopes of breaking even.

There are large corporations that are very successful in this regard. They build marinas but they don't intend on generating income from them - they generate their income from the shore side attractions like the hotels, restaurants, bars, etc.

So, I don't think they are idiots.

I put a link to one early in this thread.

Originally Posted by tomfl

There are too many boats and too few places for the boats to dock/moor/anchor.

The result is that boats try and anchor in places that no one use to anchor in and then act shocked when they are told they can't anchor there.

I have spent lots of time anchored in places where there are no restrictions and no one in sight. This is because they are away from cities. The problem is very few folks want to cruise in the traditional sense. They want to anchor close to stores/bars/West Marine/what ever. That is not cruising, rather living on a boat that is not self sustaining and having to go to shore daily, or weekly.

Most of the boats I see anchored/moored/docked don't go out daily, weekly, or even monthly. In fact it would be dangerous for many of those boats to try and venture into the open ocean. What those boats do is put additional pressure on dinghy docks/pump out facilities/garbage facilities in addition to destroying the bottom with continual anchoring.

As I have posted many times the problem is there are simply too many boats.

I disagree there are too many boats.

I DO agree that many of the boats exist in poor condition. We had one next to us in a slip one time and we could not fathom why they wanted to live on such a boat... but to them it was paradise. Their dream. They were very young, poor, and didn't know any better.

I DO agree we tend to congregate around the areas we need services in. Why would that not be expected?

I don't think that Florida is a "cruising destination" between say St. Augustine and Miami south (the middle area)... it just happens to be in the way. So that is a correlation with what you say about "not traditional cruising". No offense to places like fort pierce but if we were not passing by we probably would not be going out of our way to visit.

I believe that people are anchoring in places they never did before because if (a) better charts and chart plotters and (b) better communication and exploration of anchoring locations.

[2hullvenus]

Originally Posted by Sandero

What a sweet thought... get the jerks off the water!

Sander: Picture the Newport anchorage. That strip down the middle of the harbor where you can anchor.

Remove the rest of the harbor a moment.

Now... reduce the anchorage size by half.

Place in this anchorage 2 sunken boats with just masts peeking above the water, a dozen of the most dilapidated 23'-30' sailboats you've ever seen, none with masts or winches or anchor lights, dirty as can be, most with no people aboard. Add a few more of those 23-30' boats with some people on them.

All of these boats are held by undersize rope and Danforth anchors. 1 our of 10 has an anchor light.

People living on these are wasted 24/7 and appear ragged from drug use. The dinghies on these few occupied boats are kayaks from Walmart.

Add a few people with boats like your own in, though not even close to in as good of condition. These ones are temporary. The others are permanent.

This is a typical south Florida anchorage.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Schooner Chandlery

If there were even the most basic requirement for boats to PASS a safety inspection in order to be on the water--similar to cars must have safety inspections to be on the road...all those extra boats would not be on the water.

I've owned cars for near 30yrs. Never had to pass a safety inspection. I know some states have emissions inspections but that's not the same.

Not saying it's a competely bad solution but be careful of unintended consequences. A lot of boats in the 10-20yr range will suddenly drop in value as a the "rules" make it too expensive to keep the boat "safe" or since it's now reported officially, the insurance company doesn't want to touch your boat because it is "officially" unsafe.

Suddenly, it's no longer a suggestion, running rigging must be replaced at 10yrs. It must be done by a qualified rigger. All thru hulls removed and replaced every 5yrs. Again by a certified professional. That old atomic 4...yeah that has to go.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by zboss

There are large corporations that are very successful in this regard. They build marinas but they don't intend on generating income from them - they generate their income from the shore side attractions like the hotels, restaurants, bars, etc.

So, I don't think they are idiots.


I DO agree we tend to congregate around the areas we need services in. Why would that not be expected?


I believe that people are anchoring in places they never did before because if (a) better charts and chart plotters and (b) better communication and exploration of anchoring locations.

Your first point is completely wrong. You are confusing accounting with reality. What you are describing is called a loss leader. Grocery stores do it all the time. They sell a product at cost or even a small loss to get you in the store where they know you will spend enough to more than make up the difference. The end result is the overall buisness is profitable. If the marina wasn't expected to improve the overall profitability, they wouldn't be putting it in. My point still stands.

Sure we expect people to congregate near services. No one said we didn't and there is nothing wrong with that. The part that doesn't make sense is that some should get the benefit of those services without paying thier share for them and while pushing out others who want access to those services. If the derelick boats cruised in anchored for a few days, did some shopping, laundry and conducted some other buisness before moving along, 95% of the issue would go away. It's the ones that take up permanent residence that create the problem.

Better charting is at best a tiny part of the issue. Most anchoring is still done in the same locations it always has. Where you get new anchorages in populated places, it's more typically overflow from the better placed anchorages.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Schooner Chandlery

If there were even the most basic requirement for boats to PASS a safety inspection in order to be on the water--similar to cars must have safety inspections to be on the road...all those extra boats would not be on the water.

Some European countries went that way and it seems to be the future tendency here. A sure way to end up with derelict boats in no condition to sail besides making sure people maintain their boats in good condition.

Not different in philosophy regarding car inspections and those inspections are not expensive even if the repairs to have cars or boats in acceptable conditions to pass inspections may be, depending on the condition of the car or boat.

[Sandero]

Originally Posted by 2hullvenus

Sander: Picture the Newport anchorage. That strip down the middle of the harbor where you can anchor.

Remove the rest of the harbor a moment.

Now... reduce the anchorage size by half.

Place in this anchorage 2 sunken boats with just masts peeking above the water, a dozen of the most dilapidated 23'-30' sailboats you've ever seen, none with masts or winches or anchor lights, dirty as can be, most with no people aboard. Add a few more of those 23-30' boats with some people on them.

All of these boats are held by undersize rope and Danforth anchors. 1 our of 10 has an anchor light.

People living on these are wasted 24/7 and appear ragged from drug use. The dinghies on these few occupied boats are kayaks from Walmart.

Add a few people with boats like your own in, though not even close to in as good of condition. These ones are temporary. The others are permanent.

This is a typical south Florida anchorage.

I can say that I've never encountered a harbor with anything close to what you describe. I've seen one or maybe two very shabby unseaworthy boats anchored in a few NE harbors. I have no idea if they are occupied or used. It's not a pretty sight nevertheless. If this sorts of thing became widespread I would be very disturbed and I imagine everyone that lived along or passed by the shore for whatever reason. This is not a solution for homelessness.

[2hullvenus]

Originally Posted by Sandero

I can say that I've never encountered a harbor with anything close to what you describe. I've seen one or maybe two very shabby unseaworthy boats anchored in a few NE harbors. I have no idea if they are occupied or used. It's not a pretty sight nevertheless. If this sorts of thing became widespread I would be very disturbed and I imagine everyone that lived along or passed by the shore for whatever reason. This is not a solution for homelessness.

From about Titusville, FL down, this is what it looks like.

It's another world.

I think this is why so many people have such differing views on anchoring rights. An anchorage is a different thing based on your location.

I'd never seen anything like this before either before coming down here.

The most frustrating part for a transient boater is you can't get into the anchorage because it's jam packed with the unused and sunken boats.

They truly have a problem down here.