Death of an Anchorage

[Suijin]

Originally Posted by billknny

The problem is any other rule than time is totally impractical. Would you prefer having the local police inspect your boat for "seamanship" as a requirement to stay in the anchorage? That's a non-starter.



And nobody says you have to go far, just to the next anchorage (in this case it is just 1/2 mile away). Bounce back and forth once a week. If your boat is "seamanlike" that ought to be easy. Otherwise you are just turning the bay into a floating (NON)mobile home park.

I was at South Lake in Hollywood a week ago. I did not think it was overly crowded and there were several spots to anchor. And I draw too much for the north lake 1/2 mile away.

Maybe it’s all relative. Maybe you were triggered by how you remember it, virtually empty. Maybe I was not triggered because I was just happy that there was *any* place to anchor near Ft. Lauderdale.

Also most of those longer term anchored boats are in good condition. I have a feeling that a few of them are cruisers who left the boat to go somewhere for a week or two.

I don’t know what the solution is. The FL legislature is still wrestling with the proposed anchoring regulations and the SSCA and Trawler Assoc. are lobbying effectively against them.

[GordMay]

... so why the time should be limited by laws ? ...

A time limitation is one way to share a scarce public resource.

[PLANET EXPRESS]

I believe that there is a portion of boat registration fees to deal with derilict boats in Florida? And I also think that portion has been misappropriated. Reading about someone asking for records to where that money went and was told to get a lawyer for those records. I read that here somewhere a few months back. Which Is against another Florida law on transparency.
Also think that what someone said above about colregs could work as most don’t have anchor light. So ticket boats with expired registration and colreg violations. Ticket goes unpaid boat impounded not claimed ownershit forfited and boat auctioned off. If not sold at first auction boat taken to ramp striped and cut up before it becomes another problem when storms come and it sinks.

[misfits]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

I don’t have an understanding of all the details in this specific Florida situation, but the initial post got me thinking about a comparison to camping on public land.

In Canada it is called Crown Land. In the USA a similar designation is BLM land (Bureau of Land Management), or perhaps National Forests. In these cases, free (or very cheap) camping is allowed, but there are time limits of how long someone can stay in one location — usually in the range of weeks.

Seems to me there is an obvious parallel. In both cases it is a right of citizenship to be able to use these lands. But this right is tempered by the need to share this commons with others, hence the time limit.

Obviously enforcement is a problem in these cases, but setting that aside, why hasn’t the same standards of ‘free’ but time-limited usage, become the norm with anchoring?

That's a really good comparison Mike.
Not saying it would solve the problem in Fl but if you had an old derilict camper on public lands not being used & taking up space, it would be removed.

[Tetepare]

The problem in FL are the boaters who would otherwise be homeless. They live on cheap boats, anchored near services including VA hospitals, and live the vagabond life. Many have mental health issues. If their boat breaks free and blows ashore they leave it and find another. From their perspective they are doing the best they can with nothing and stick to their community. But to the taxpayers these folks are drunks, bring crime, and derelict boats.

The cost to remove their boats once abandoned is high and the community has to pick up the tab.

[CaptTom]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

...Seems to me there is an obvious parallel. In both cases it is a right of citizenship to be able to use these lands. But this right is tempered by the need to share this commons with others, hence the time limit.

Obviously enforcement is a problem in these cases, but setting that aside, why hasn’t the same standards of ‘free’ but time-limited usage, become the norm with anchoring?

Yes, it's a classic "Tragedy of the Commons" problem.

Yes, we (cruisers) need to work with local communities, and respect their concerns, if it's going to be solved. If not, a solution will be found without us.

The status quo won't work. The argument that we should have the right to "visit" some anchorage for free for months on end is short-sighted. If I have that "right," so do all the derelicts.

I'm not a fan of mooring fields. Too quickly they turn into a revenue stream. While $30 to $50 per night might not sound like much to someone who cruises for a week or two each year, it can add up pretty quickly if you have to do it every night.

In Maine, anchorages are filling up with "destination" moorings issued by local communities who are happy to take a couple of hundred dollars a year for a permanent space in some remote anchorage they (the locals) only use for the occasional weekend. We show up to find the anchorage filled with private mooring balls, no place to anchor.

Likewise, charging a fee for anchoring is going down a dangerous path. Again, locals would see an unlimited revenue stream. Since local voters aren't paying, but benefiting from that income, there's no motive to keep fees reasonable. A bureaucracy would have to be created to manage the anchorages and collect the fees. Bureaucracies aren't known for efficiency, and will continue to grow (and increase fees) forever.

I've seen cases where marina owners complain about competition from fee-based municipal mooring fields, and demand that fees be raised to protect them from losing business to the lower-cost moorings.

The only solution I can think of is to go back to the fundamental right of navigation. Define anchoring as an exercise of that right, by imposing time limits and seaworthiness requirements. If you're not navigating, you're not entitled to free anchoring. If you want to visit your cousin for a month, or work a seasonal job while living on your boat, rent a mooring or slip.

[Island Time O25]

The problem starts with local, state and Fed gov'ts not enforcing the existing laws. Adding new laws into that pile won't solve anything but will saddle those who obey the rules already with add'l costs of obeyance.

Making new laws is easy and looks good on the politicians' resumes. Enforcing the existing ones not so much and costs money and perhaps some votes of those neg. impacted by vigorous enforcement. Enforcement costs money, enactments of new laws are free. Or even beneficial to the pols as they rake in lobbyists $$ from all sides of the issue. We need to change that equation before we change how the politicians' approach these, or any, issues.

There must be some serious consequences built in into the system (or a threat of them) for not enforcing/not funding enforcement of existing laws. Such as law's automatic demise if enforcement of it is not fully funded X budgets in a row. That'll grab everyone's attention quickly.

[Woodland Hills]

Nobody wants a floating homeless encampment, but there sure are a lot of them in Florida!

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by CaptTom

Yes, it's a classic "Tragedy of the Commons" problem.

Yes, we (cruisers) need to work with local communities, and respect their concerns, if it's going to be solved. If not, a solution will be found without us.

The status quo won't work. The argument that we should have the right to "visit" some anchorage for free for months on end is short-sighted. If I have that "right," so do all the derelicts.

I'm not a fan of mooring fields. Too quickly they turn into a revenue stream. While $30 to $50 per night might not sound like much to someone who cruises for a week or two each year, it can add up pretty quickly if you have to do it every night.

I certainly agree with your summary, and that in many cases it's a problem of managing a scarce resource.

It seems to be a triangle:

1. cruisers - making their way around, looking for convenient and safe places to overnight, a week or two, or sometimes longer
2. shoestring sailors - cruisers on a rock-bottom budget, or boat-owners of limited means, and the impoverished liveaboard
3. waterside land-owners

Groups 1 and 2 are competing for a resource, and group 3 are demanding restrictions on, and reduction of that resource.

The socialist in me would make all waterways public, and the only reason for restricting anchoring/mooring would be for reasons of navigation and safety.

Realistically, I fear that the landowners usually have the upper hand here. They live there (mostly), pay taxes and vote in the area. Unless a community decides that boaters are a net benefit to the area, boating won't get any love.

I hear you re mooring fields, but it's a solution that would chase off group 2, thereby ensuring that the average cruiser could more easily find transient spots.

A tough problem, indeed. And I don't think that cruisers/boaters are a large or liked-enough group to have the influence to change that.

Originally Posted by Woodland Hills

Nobody wants a floating homeless encampment, but there sure are a lot of them in Florida!

The people who are in them like them well enough, it seems.

[motion30]

I am very familiar with the area in question although I think it fairly represents most anchorage's in the state.. here's my read on these things and somebody correct me if I'm wrong the state anchoring laws says you can stay indefinitely if you are a cruiser. Boats that sit with no one aboard or certainly not Cruisers. Therefore the law is already in place to deal with these boats. So I think rather it is a lack of effective enforcement that is causing these problems . In Hollywood as well as Key West where I currently am the standard for derelict vessel it seems to be if it has a means of propulsion. I'm not convinced that that's how the state law reads very proud of someone that knows more than I could clarify

[HBrew]

It seems to me that if you are in an anchorage you should be capable of leaving safely. Boats that are not seaworthy should be moved by the owner to a yard for repair. Definition of seaworthy is already well defined in many countries.
Similar principle to a community rule that cars parked should be able to be driven. As an anchored boat you should also have the minimum 3rd party insurance requirements.

I think that would drive out the shitheaps.

[gmakhs]

[QUOTE=HBrew;2854775]It seems to me that if you are in an anchorage you should be capable of leaving safely. Boats that are not seaworthy should be moved by the owner to a yard for repair. Definition of seaworthy is already well defined in many countries.
Similar principle to a community rule that cars parked should be able to be driven. As an anchored boat you should also have the minimum 3rd party insurance requirements.

I think that would drive out the shitheaps.[/QUTE]
I agree but not about insurance .

[motion30]

in Key West authorities are much more aggressive in regards to removing derelict vessels, but their standard still seems to be... boat needs to be able to move on its own propulsion. Once the boat is tagged as a derelict it needs to have an inspection before it can be allowed on. State waters again.

[Gene Neill]

Originally Posted by billknny

I would absolutely support a rule that instituted a maximum stay of 3 to 5 days to eliminate the freeloaders who have taken over a perfectly good anchorage and basically kicked the REAL cruising boats out.

I'd make the time limit a little longer (I dunno, two weeks?) but the concept is spot on. Crystal River is a sailboat graveyard these days, it's disgusting.

[Cheechako]

Well, it's similar on land. Blue tarp encampments everywhere, trash, needles etc. Court cases have decided they cant be eliminated or moved without giving them another place, because they are "homes". I imagine the same thing is happening on the water now. The good news is when Fed Courts decide they are "homes", those uppity landowners will loose their hold on dictating anchorages, the bad news is they will be filled with about 60% drug addicts and thieves. According to news reports.