Marinas using cameras for rules enforcement

[Jammer]

Last summer a fellow boater was singled out by management for violating the marina's unusually strong blanket prohibition on pets. Management is rarely on site and only became aware of the violation by reviewing camera footage.

I find this to be a disturbing extension of a societal trend; many apartment and condo managers have started using cameras not for safety or for investigation of criminal acts but rather for enforcement of petty rules against their own residents, particularly residents that they find unprofitable or burdensome for reasons unrelated to the actual rules violation being enforced.


Every marina I've stayed at has a long list of rules that are not universally followed, among them restrictions on maintenance and repair, limits on guests, limits on parking, and in some cases curfew times after which access to and from the marina is closed whether by land or sea. In essence everyone who uses their boat regularly is in violation some of the time.


Wondering if others are encountering this brave new world.

[rslifkin]

I haven't seen it personally, but it doesn't shock me. Our marina has plenty of cameras, but I don't think they go looking for issues, it's more so they have something to look at if an issue is reported.

Now on to the issue you mentioned... A marina banning pets? What the heck is that about? That's certainly a marina that will never get a penny from me, and that better not be a new trend in the industry.

[Mike OReilly]

The near-ubiquitous presence of all sorts of cameras, everywhere, has long been a concern of mine. It drives me nuts to see those cutsie posters saying "Smile, you're on camera ." As if my loss of privacy is anything to laugh about. Your specific situation is just another example.

But is your concern about the expansion of constant surveillance, or more about the apparent decrease in tolerance for any rule-breaking? Would you be OK with cameras that aren't used for enforcement?

[markxengineerin]

It's interesting, but isn't marina management kind of like the IRS? They'll get you, if they want, for something, because there are enough laws, nobody could follow them all. So don't upset Big Brother, and thus avoid problems..

The pet one I don't find to be arbitrary. It's their choice, they own the place!

I recently stayed in Gibraltar, and there were cameras EVERYWHERE. At night a security guard watches some big montiors showing them all. I didn't have a problem with it- definitely preferable to places where things disappear from deck.

[wholybee]

It's private property. As long as they are not in bathrooms/showers I have no problem with cameras on private property.

My marina doesn't have cameras. But, the harbormaster lives on-site, right at the gate and also with a clear view of the parking lot. Nothing gets by her, and she doesn't need to spend time reviewing cameras. There are a few rules that I don't like, but overall I am happier that there is no dock drama and my boat is safer than at nearby marinas.

[wholybee]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

The near-ubiquitous presence of all sorts of cameras, everywhere, has long been a concern of mine. It drives me nuts to see those cutsie posters saying "Smile, you're on camera ." As if my loss of privacy is anything to laugh about. Your specific situation is just another example.

But is your concern about the expansion of constant surveillance, or more about the apparent decrease in tolerance for any rule-breaking? Would you be OK with cameras that aren't used for enforcement?

The line for me really is public vs. private. A person or company can do what they want on their private property. They can choose (with some restrictions) who they do business with. They can set their own rules. I don't want to put restrictions on that. But I don't like a police state/big brother government that monitors our activity and where we go.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by wholybee

The line for me really is public vs. private. A person or company can do what they want on their private property. They can choose (with some restrictions) who they do business with. They can set their own rules. I don't want to put restrictions on that. But I don't like a police state/big brother government that monitors our activity and where we go.

Yes, they can do it. But should they? In some cases, it's justified, but a lot of monitoring is happening because it is now so easy. I don't take much solace in the idea of a massive corporation being in control of my privacy vs the State.

Besides, all those CCTV cameras can be accessed by the State.

[two-rocks]

I find the disturbing societal trend of what people think they should do with their dogs more of an issue.

Or when a marina 'lax' policy turns into a problem, and other measures are required.

Technology changes, and we must as well.

[HeinSdL]

It's obviously a huge problem going forward because 1. cameras are now so small that they will simply disappear/have already disappeared from view and 2. monitoring will be done by AI.

[David Mathis]

Many marinas now have cameras but this is the first report of using them to enforce rules. Most are there to discourage thefts and detect boats coming in to dock after closing time then leaving early to avoid paying the dock fees.

[marcjsmith]

Originally Posted by two-rocks

I find the disturbing societal trend of what people think they should do with their dogs more of an issue.

not just dogs, but pets in general. furbabies can't be left at home anymore it seems.

back to the OP. most of us are being tracked daily outside of the cameras, we just don't think about it. Phones, credit cards, cars, toll plazas, computers. you are leaving a trail for someone to follow.

not fond of selective enforcement, but also, I don't have all the information.

what if person X got permission to do ABC, and person W saw this and then figured "Hey if X can do ABC it then so can I." All the while W doesn't have all the information to make an educated decision.

I've tried to embrace the fact that I don't always have all the information and I try not to worry about things that I can't control.

And I also try to remember that no matter where I am or what I'm doing I may end up on someones youtube or tiktok doing something stupid.

it is a strange world we live in....

[Shanachie]

Cameras are endemic. I used to get irritated by them. Now I just assume that anywhere I go, something or someone is recording me.


I gave up when I was 10 miles offshore in a small fishing boat and got buzzed by a camera drone. There truly is nowhere left to hide from Big Brother.

[rslifkin]

Originally Posted by marcjsmith

not just dogs, but pets in general. furbabies can't be left at home anymore it seems.

Leaving the dog home to go out on the boat for a few hours in one thing, but if we spend a weekend on the boat, or are leaving for a trip, the dog is coming with us. Plus, he absolutely loves the boat. So the idea of a marina banning pets would mean that marina is useless to us, as we'd have to either not have a dog, or we can't use boat for more than a few hours at a time.

[markxengineerin]

Interesting reading that I go back to whenever I think "I have nothing to hide"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothin...t%20activities.

[Jammer]

Originally Posted by rslifkin

Now on to the issue you mentioned... A marina banning pets? What the heck is that about? That's certainly a marina that will never get a penny from me, and that better not be a new trend in the industry.

I believe it's an outlier, not a trend. Apparently the marina owners don't like dogs.

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

But is your concern about the expansion of constant surveillance, or more about the apparent decrease in tolerance for any rule-breaking?

I think they go hand-in-hand. Capitalism has generally not been effective in driving competition on terms and conditions in residential rentals, and this is doubly true in marinas. Others have observed that surveillance cameras always give more control to the powerful, and here we see them being used for enforcement of a rule that largely exists by the whim of the owner rather than for legitimate business reasons or the good of the community.


Marinas are always something of a package deal with availability, location, cost, services, and facilities driving the decision. Dock culture and the overall nature of interaction with ownership/management are important but hard to judge while shopping for a new place. Lots of places have rules that they don't enforce.

Would you be OK with cameras that aren't used for enforcement?

I think there is a legitimate place for them in deterring and investigating more serious matters, theft of boats, theft from boats, setting boats adrift intentionally, fire, allisions.

Originally Posted by markxengineerin

The pet one I don't find to be arbitrary. It's their choice, they own the place!

I don't have pets so it isn't my battle to fight. But I do find it troubling when businesses penalize people for what are effectively lifestyle choices that have little if any impact on the business.


What this has done is made it more feasible for marinas (among others) to create and enforce rules on conduct that were previously impractical to enforce. Previously there were cost and logistical hurdles involved in observing and documenting the proscribed behavior.