Another Free Anchorage Gone - How Do we Fight This??

[Tropic Cat]

In the absence of federal legislation on the subject, the state would seem to have full regulatory authority over navigable waters within its limits, and may legislate even in the area of navigation. This is why these local ordinances are popping up. So, I figure we have to look at individual state law on the subject. Here in Florida, the applicable law is below. This is interesting in that the key here is in defining the term liveaboard.
Florida Statutes

327.60 Local regulations; limitations.--
(1) The provisions of ss. 327.01, 327.02, 327.30-327.40, 327.44-327.50, 327.54, 327.56, 327.65, 328.40-328.48, 328.52-328.58, 328.62, and 328.64 shall govern the operation, equipment, and all other matters relating thereto whenever any vessel shall be operated upon the waterways or when any activity regulated hereby shall take place thereon. Nothing in these sections shall be construed to prevent the adoption of any ordinance or local law relating to operation and equipment of vessels, except that no such ordinance or local law may apply to the Florida Intracoastal Waterway and except that such ordinances or local laws shall be operative only when they are not in conflict with this chapter or any amendments thereto or regulations thereunder. Any ordinance or local law which has been adopted pursuant to this section or to any other state law may not discriminate against personal watercraft as defined in s. 327.02.
(2) Nothing contained in the provisions of this section shall be construed to prohibit local governmental authorities from the enactment or enforcement of regulations which prohibit or restrict the mooring or anchoring of floating structures or live-aboard vessels within their jurisdictions. However, local governmental authorities are prohibited from regulating the anchorage of non-live-aboard vessels engaged in the exercise of rights of navigation.

So, if you have a driver's license, with a home address .....does this mean that you are not a liveaboard? I think it really is time for an attorney to comment on this thread. The local ordinances going in effect have the "not in my backyard" approach to liveaboards, and automatically presume anyone anchoring falls in this category.

Rick in Florida

[ssullivan]

As a quick response to an earlier statement... the Coast Guard seldom does anything with anchorages. It's always the local harbormaster or sometimes even a local police officer with a boat.

[hellosailor]

Rick-
"homes into 6 digits. Only the wealthy " where have you been slumming? The wealthy won't touch those cheap hovels that sell for under a million. really now, you've got to raise your standard. <WEG>

Kai Nui-
"I think we need to organize locally to get groups of 5 or more boats to anchor in some of these locations. " I'll have some of whatever you've been drinking! But do you know how happy you would make marine police by doing that? "Hey, I can write up five tickets and seize five boats ALL IN ONE PLACE!" Gonna get someone promoted and I wouldn't be surprised if some enterprising flunky got told "Arrest those boats for criminal trespass" and under Admiralty law, yes, they would arrest the boats and chain 'em to the police dock.

As Dubyah might say, that dog ain't gonna hunt.

But since it is the weekend and I'm not driving anywhere, how about another bucket of margaritas?<G>

[Tropic Cat]

Hellosailor you really have to slow down and read before you comment, or is your intent to stir controversy instead of adding to the discussion?

Look at the very next post, as I'm sure everyone else who read this thread did.

Rick in Florida

[hellosailor]

Rick, I don't know how I missed your next message (7 digits correction) but I did.

Stir controversy? No, quite the contrary.

BUt why do you bother to quote the Florida statutes and then quote them totally out of relevance? You emphasize the section "However, local governmental authorities are prohibited from regulating the anchorage of non-live-aboard vessels engaged in the exercise of rights of navigation." but surely you know that Florida, and the rest of the US, also rule that "navigation" basically means "passage through" and as we've said before, there is no precedent, no rule, no nothing that considers willy-nilly anchoring to be "navigation". The only time that anchoring is considered part of navigation is when it is NECESSARY, i.e. for repairs from storm damage and mechanical failure and perhaps a few other slim definitions. Parking your boat at your convenience? No, that's not "navigation". The courts ruled on that specifically in Florida as I recall.

Until you can find precedent, or statute, that defines willy-nilly anchoring as *necessary* and usual to *navigation* (as opposed to boating, etc.) you've got nothing here. The Man is right, and that's not fair, but the universe is not a fair place. So what?

[PBzeer]

The overwhelming fact is......that liveaboards are too few in number to matter to any political group, and like it or not, right or not, the vast majority of politicans are only interested in getting re-elected. It really is that simple. If supporting liveaboards would futher a politicans re-election efforts, they'd do so. Since they don't, it's not going to happen. The only way you're going to get the attention of most politicans...is by throwing money at them

Yes, I'm cynical about the whole thing, but I'm not naive enough to think otherwise about the way things go. The individualism that made this country grow is no longer wanted, because those are the people (pun intended) that cause waves. End of rant.

On a positive note...
The NY state canal system dropped their annual fee for using the Erie canal to encourage more activity. Most parts of the canal have free tie ups along the walls for cruisers. I don't know if there are time limits but the point is, the canal system recognised the value of boaters and did something to lure them in. It is a very picturesque cruise up and down the canal system from all accounts I've read..

[Tropic Cat]

Hellosailor,

Florida Law specifically prohibits any local town/city from passing local ordinances which encroach on a non livaboard's right to anchor, "willy nilly" or not. That's the statute in Florida, and that's why I emphasized it in my post. There is no clause in the statute which refers to "for repairs from storm damage and mechanical failure and perhaps a few other slim definitions". This is your invention, not the Law in Florida.

One last point, if this is considered irrelevant, what's the point of this discussion?

I don't attack people, I discuss, and expect the same in return. I'm getting tired of defending my posts to you and will refrain from commenting on your posts in the future. My posts stand on their own merrit, and I will leave it at that.

Rick in Florida

[Tropic Cat]

xort, if you can raise the temperature on the Erie canal to about 70 degrees in February, I'm on my way (grin)

Rick in Florida

[S/V Elusive]

John - I didn't take it as a 'rant'. Just a little venting of frustrations that we all feel about these restrictions that we can't seem to effect. Isn't that part of the reason we decide on the cruising / liveaboard / sailing lifestyle to begin with?

For sailors, there's also the issue of stepping the mast and carrying on deck.
I mentioned that I don't know if there are restrictions on how long you can stay in one place. I would imagine they would run you off if you tried to park along the canal wall for a month.

All this does show is that somebody got at least a little smart and decided that cruisers are a good thing to have around. Cruisers, not full time livaboard residents.

If you want to livaboard, you'll have to plan on keep moving. Actually, that's why I plan on cruising, to keep moving. Although 72 hours is quite tight for some situations.

[mike d.]

if you look at the picture in totality you would see that the govs. don't want people out there like us, because we are free birds, and free birds will make it harder for them to take full control of our lives, forcing their way of thinking on every one. it's a form of controlled conditioning and slowly they are agining control of the public because they have fractured the unity of the people. remember smaller groups are always easier to take control of than large ones.

regards Mike
this how i see it anyway

All very good points. Hellosailor, that "dog" might not hunt, but, there are a few finer details that I have experienced here that make it slightly less far fetched. FIrst, as far as navigable waters, the Coast Guard boarded us at the dock a few months back, as well as about 19 other boats. THey justified this action by stating that even though we were in a slip, we were considered to be in navigable waters. True enough. I would consider this as a presidence. Maybe not clear cut, but I think it would apply. As for local police enforcing these ordinances, that will not fly here. The local police have been prevented from boarding documented vessels in this harbor without being accompanied by the Coast Guard, and have acknowledged that they do not have juristiction on board a documented vessel, and may not enter the vessel, even to serve a warrant without the permission of the skipper, or, as accompanied by the Coast Guard.
Still, all that being said, I prefaced my idea with "hair brained" so there it is. I am not trying to organize a revolt, I am just throwing a thought out there.

[N.M.I.ke]

Well, I'm NOT licensed in FLA and certainly NOT licensed to dispense advice willy-nilly over the Internet so I won't give any legal advice.

I will mention that people interested in this topic get ahold of the Florida AG opinion on the statute. 1985 Op. Atty Gen. Fla. 127 It's an interesting read (takes a stab at both "liveaboard" and "rights of navigation") and is where I would BEGIN my research....

If you got the impression I was giving legal advice, let me clarify. No way, no how. Simply repeating statements made to me by local law enforcement, and citing first hand experience. But, it does support my hair brained scheme