Long-Term Anchoring

[zeehag]

i use noonsite and cruisers net.net for the anchoring advisories....so far, so good..

[DotDun]

Originally Posted by ViribusUnitis

Don't forget the registration and tax requirements. No matter if your an American or not, if you stay in most states for more than 30-60 days they are going to want you to register your boat with them. There is usually a fee and taxes that must be paid to get a valid registration.

IIRC, a US CBP issued cruising permit to a foreign vessel exempts the collection of state or local taxes/registration fees.

[wolfaroo]

Originally Posted by GordMay

I think that he's a little "full of it".

That he may be, I have no way of knowing for certain. But I know this guy reasonably well and have no reason to doubt him - he is in his 70's and has spent most of his adult life at sea in one form or another. As I said in my post I don't know about his interpretation of the law, but I don't believe it is as cut & dry as your post implies.

It is an area of interest for me because I spend the summer months operating from a mooring in San Antonio bay, along with many other boats (100+), of which at least half are at anchor. Many in the community have been there for years, including at least 2 people I know who have lived at anchor there for over 30 years. The local government have been trying to move the boats on for a few years now, but have failed thus far, mainly due to the fact the whole bay is designated as a safe anchorage.

3 years ago the government even went as far as getting the port police to attach written notices to each boat, giving them 24 hours to leave voluntarily or face having their boats forcefully removed. Everyone living aboard met up to discuss, took legal advice and agreed to collectively ignore the notice. It was not enforced and everyone is still there 3 years on. The case is ongoing but has already been thrown out of a few courts, apparently due to the designation of the bay as an anchorage. It may well go through the higher Spanish courts and could even end up being heard in the European High court. It will certainly be interesting to see how it unfolds! According one commercial boat operater there, the local government have already tried and failed to get the designation changed, but I don't know with whom they are in discussions with.

As explained to me, there are a few factors in favour of a vessel at anchor:

The right of innocent passage in territorial sea (which includes anchoring) see UNCLOS part II, section 3, subsection A, article 17 & 18: UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA

That no charge may be levied upon foriegn vessels except for specific services rendered to them. See UNCLOS part II, section 3, subsection A, article 26 (link above)

And the fact a skipper can't be forced to put to sea (or do anything for that matter) if he believes doing so might endanger the vessel or crew.

I'm not saying he is right - the San Antonio case will probably analyse each appropriate code in due course and give us a better understanding - but I do think it is a matter of interpretation.

Finally, it is also important to remember this particular case is not 'boaters' challenging the local government, but is actually the local government challenging their own national laws.

Cheers,
Neal

[GordMay]

UNCLOS part II, section 3, subsection A, article 26

1. No charge may be levied upon foreign ships by reason only of their passage through the territorial sea.

2. Charges may be levied upon a foreign ship passing through the territorial sea as payment only for specific services rendered to the ship. These charges shall be levied without discrimination.

[wolfaroo]

Originally Posted by GordMay

UNCLOS part II, section 3, subsection A, article 26

1. No charge may be levied upon foreign ships by reason only of their passage through the territorial sea.

2. Charges may be levied upon a foreign ship passing through the territorial sea as payment only for specific services rendered to the ship. These charges shall be levied without discrimination.

Yes, splitting hairs a bit here , but as pointed out, passage through territorial sea includes anchoring...

Article18
Meaning of passage

1. Passage means navigation through the territorial sea for the purpose of:
(a) traversing that sea without entering internal waters or calling at a roadstead or port facility outside internal waters; or
(b) proceeding to or from internal waters or a call at such roadstead or port facility.
2. Passage shall be continuous and expeditious. However, passage includes stopping and anchoring but only in so far as the same are incidental to ordinary navigation or are rendered necessary by force majeure or distress or for the purpose of rendering assistance to persons, ships or aircraft in danger or distress.

[zeehag]

when in doubt ask about---- the local authorities may tell ye different than the maritime and federal laws and regulations.....doesnt hurt to ask the locals. many places place a 72 hour limit on anchoring, same as parking a car.

[Paul Elliott]

Be aware that some anchorage areas may be under discharge restrictions, so while you may be able to anchor indefinitely you will not be able to discharge your marine head or other black water. If you are living aboard this may be a difficulty, requiring you to regularly visit a pumpout station or hire a mobile pumpout service.

For example, in Sausalito / Richardson Bay there are many permanent anchor-outs, but the bay is a no-discharge zone.

[sdowney717]

Originally Posted by Paul Elliott

Be aware that some anchorage areas may be under discharge restrictions, so while you may be able to anchor indefinitely you will not be able to discharge your marine head or other black water. If you are living aboard this may be a difficulty, requiring you to regularly visit a pumpout station or hire a mobile pumpout service.

For example, in Sausalito / Richardson Bay there are many permanent anchor-outs, but the bay is a no-discharge zone.

A Deluge of Sewage when it rains!
Sewers at Capacity, Pollution Spills Into Waterways - Series - NYTimes.com

BoaterEd - No discharge zone?

We have the same problems in California with outdated plants discharging untreated sewage every winter.
Fortunately, no new NDZs have have been declared in California for more than twenty years

How about a head game, my lectrasan works good, but the cities get to continually release billions of gallons of raw sewage into the water.

[denverd0n]

The thing to remember is that there is no such thing as "international law." Every nation has its own laws. Some nations have signed agreements (like UNCLOS) saying that their laws will follow certain conventions. That doesn't mean that EVERY nation, in the ENTIRE world, is thereby obliged to follow those same conventions. I don't know of any specific examples, but it is entirely possible that there are nations that choose not to abide by the UNCLOS conventions.

You need to find out about the laws in the particular countries you are planning to visit.

[barnakiel]

No limits where we have been.

b.

[keyspc]

Dont know about there, but stay away from central FL USA!