Richardson Bay liveaboards, heads up!

[ASD]

This gets more interesting all the time.

So I guess you are against a mooring field and most of all enforcement of that mooring field because you are currently a squatter on a current mooring?

[Schooner Chandlery]

Originally Posted by Wrong

Ironically I am not a fan of moorings. Primarily because they benefit the "Smiths & Joneses" at the expense of everyone else. Whether there's one, 7 or 100 moorings, once taken it may be like in San Diego where folks possess the same mooring for upwards of 30 years while others wait on years long waiting lists. So, while I can offer my sympathy, do you really believe I'd vacate my mooring for you? Well, sure, provided a bushel or two of the unauthorized private moorings were removed in order to provide space to anchor. But, at this time my choice is driven by the reality anchoring is not a prudent alternative.

Doesn't matter how many moorings there are, you're right about that, they do fill up quickly just as good anchorages do and then there's no room in the navigable waterways for transiting boaters to anchor or pick up moorings.

As I mentioned, we're too large/heavy for most moorings in most places -- so you wouldn't be vacating for me. But you would be vacating for other boaters who need the temporary use of the moorings. It's a bit stupid that the public moorings are even there if they don't have time limits on them. W/o a time limit, what is public becomes private to the person on the mooring.

You didn't answer my question --how long have YOU been on one of the few official moorings there?

Originally Posted by ASD

This gets more interesting all the time.

So I guess you are against a mooring field and most of all enforcement of that mooring field because you are currently a squatter on a current mooring?

Self interest is a strong driver isn't it?

I originally thought this fellow was an anchored out boat who wants a safer anchorage. Then with his fenced in anchorage talk I thought he was in a marina there and wanted to occasionally anchor out. Never dreamed he was on a mooring since he's so set against moorings. LOL that's good. He doesn't want other people to benefit in exactly the same way he's benefiting from a mooring right now. Chuckle.

[Wrong]

Originally Posted by Schooner Chandlery

Doesn't matter how many moorings there are, you're right about that, they do fill up quickly just as good anchorages do and then there's no room in the navigable waterways for transiting boaters to anchor or pick up moorings.

It's a real problem. One I've been personally trying to address here in Sausalito. But the folks on their own private moorings turn a deaf ear to requests they engage in a cooperative effort to make room for local and transient boat owners wanting to anchor. It will require relocating and removing some private moorings in order to make room.

As I mentioned, we're too large/heavy for most moorings in most places -- so you wouldn't be vacating for me. But you would be vacating for other boaters who need the temporary use of the moorings.

So, who's to determine whether my need or the person's need wanting to move me off the mooring is greater or more justified? I need the mooring because in my judgement there is no available safe anchorage. Otherwise, I'd be anchored. Hands down, no doubt about it.

It's a bit stupid that the public moorings are even there if they don't have time limits on them. W/o a time limit, what is public becomes private to the person on the mooring

Makes no difference to me. Public or private, moorings with or without time limits are creations of the underworld. Both benefit the Smiths and Joneses while excluding everyone else. My druthers is a situation where there are none and people anchor. Period.

You didn't answer my question --how long have YOU been on one of the few official moorings there?

Days.

Self interest is a strong driver isn't it?

Yeah. When there's no safe alternative...

I originally thought this fellow was an anchored out boat who wants a safer anchorage. Then with his fenced in anchorage talk I thought he was in a marina there and wanted to occasionally anchor out. Never dreamed he was on a mooring since he's so set against moorings. LOL that's good. He doesn't want other people to benefit in exactly the same way he's benefiting from a mooring right now. Chuckle.

Hey. There's a mooring open. Don't know the details, but it's a stone throw from me. There was a power boat - about 30' in length - on it. Limiting factor may be draft since it's shallow in here. Check it out before ADS gets there first. He 'needs' to cut his costs staying in a marina and all...

[Schooner Chandlery]

Hi Wrong,

So you've been on this mooring for days? Do you mean thousands of days? How about telling us exactly how many days? It sounds like you live in the area for years though. Where do you usually moor, anchor, or berth your boat?

Go back take a look over the entire issue of the commons and the Public Trust Doctrine. We've beat the dead horse quite a bit here and me thinks you're not in support of the commons as it goes against what you're doing.

Safety? You're saying you're on a mooring because of safety? There is no reason to believe that you cannot safely anchor your vessel especially if shallow drafted in Richardson Bay. There are many, many shallow locations for the lucky folks with shallow draft vessels and small swing areas. The issue of room for transiting boaters really only has a sizable impact on those of us who have deeper drafts and larger swing areas. Then, it is a bummer to have a glut of permanently parked boat-dwellers/float-dwellers in deeper waters that could be used for cruising boats (mostly deeper draft). We anchored in Richardson Bay in two different areas last summer. The first was too exposed for winter storm anchoring but deep. The second was very protected but required us to essentially moor the boat (3 anchors) to keep our swing tight and not interfere with other illegally moored boats. We'd not put ourselves in that location/situation during stormy weather because of risk of other boats dragging into us.

And--of course it is totally worrisome that an uninhabited hunk-of-junk on a tiny anchor is going to drag into one's boat during heavy weather. That's why it's better for the uninhabited hunk-of-junks to be on real moorings rather than anchored. Or, even better yet--totally gone.

A anchoring permit system in and of itself could rid the area of problem vessels and problem squatters. A well thought out mooring field, with time limits, would assist all boaters as well.

[Wrong]

Originally Posted by Schooner Chandlery

Hi Wrong,

So you've been on this mooring for days? Do you mean thousands of days? How about telling us exactly how many days? It sounds like you live in the area for years though. Where do you usually moor, anchor, or berth your boat?

Normally I'd be anchored in the South Pacific or Australia or... But, illness prevented me from going south this time...

Go back take a look over the entire issue of the commons and the Public Trust Doctrine. We've beat the dead horse quite a bit here and me thinks you're not in support of the commons as it goes against what you're doing.

How so? Specifically. Citations, quotes and all. Fact is permission to exclude others comes with a permit. Whether to install a private mooring or to use an existing government mooring. Search for, download and read: "Newport's Mooring Regulations: Legal and Policy Analysis"

Safety? You're saying you're on a mooring because of safety? There is no reason to believe that you cannot safely anchor your vessel especially if shallow drafted in Richardson Bay.

You're on shaky ground now. Judge for yourself. I'm the arbiter of concerns that include safety when considering where and when to anchor my boat. Not you.

There are many, many shallow locations for the lucky folks with shallow draft vessels and small swing areas.

You are obviously not well informed in regard to shoaling and underwater hazards in Richardson Bay. Sounds like the solution to your problems from what you say is a shoal draft boat. Go fer it.

The issue of room for transiting boaters really only has a sizable impact on those of us who have deeper drafts and larger swing areas. Then, it is a bummer to have a glut of permanently parked boat-dwellers/float-dwellers in deeper waters that could be used for cruising boats (mostly deeper draft).

Can't agree more. I've recommended, no I've demanded the RBRA enforce Ordinance 87-1, Anchoring and mooring to remove the unauthorized private moorings. Start with a clean slate. Designate 3 well marked, organized and managed areas for anchoring only. One each of shoal, mid and deep draft anchorage. Then, if the RBRA will permit private moorings issue permits with the RBRA specifying locations. Failing to respond appropriately to my written demand will give rise to a Petition for Writ of Mandamus seeking a court order for the RBRA to comply.

We anchored in Richardson Bay in two different areas last summer. The first was too exposed for winter storm anchoring but deep. The second was very protected but required us to essentially moor the boat (3 anchors) to keep our swing tight and not interfere with other illegally moored boats. We'd not put ourselves in that location/situation during stormy weather because of risk of other boats dragging into us.

Clearly then, you understand my concerns and reluctance to put myself and my vessel at risk by anchoring in the present environment in Richardson Bay.

And--of course it is totally worrisome that an uninhabited hunk-of-junk on a tiny anchor is going to drag into one's boat during heavy weather. That's why it's better for the uninhabited hunk-of-junks to be on real moorings rather than anchored. Or, even better yet--totally gone.

A anchoring permit system in and of itself could rid the area of problem vessels and problem squatters. A well thought out mooring field, with time limits, would assist all boaters as well.

Yeah? The RBRA objective is 100 moorings with the only boats coming into Richardson Bay will be "short term visitors or on a ball". That translates into no cruisers wishing to visit the Bay area for any appreciable time at all. The Ordinance RBRA will rely on is one limiting anchoring to three days in a week without a permit. No matter the CFR33 delegating authority to the RBRA does not include the authority and power to restrict or prohibit anchoring in Richardson Bay.

[Schooner Chandlery]

I know I'm touching a nerve here and that's why you're responding to each sentence I typed. As I've said before, it is pretty obvious that you cannot be objective about this situation because you're right there in the middle of it. Impacted by the decisions made by others. Just how many total days, months, or years have you been there on the public moorings since you came back from your travels aboroad? Are you there because you want to be or because you feel you have to be?

If you are ill, I'm sorry to hear of it. If your illness is long term, since you're a world traveler who doesn't have a problem moving his boat, perhaps you should relocate to a low cost of living area where you could position yourself in a marina, mooring field, or anchorage where the pressure from people who are just living on a boat because of high apartment rents wouldn't be there. In lower rent places or places where the climate is less conducive to living aboard at anchor, you won't find so many boat dwellers parked in the good anchorages. From that, more distant, location you might find yourself with an entirely different frame of reference for discussion of the Richardson Bay situation.

Since you yourself are not anchored in Richardson Bay, you're permanently moored, it seems like the better focus of discussion for you would be on the moorings and how those are going to change--and your access to them--once RBRA and the locals do what they plan to do. What actual part of your own situation is at risk here? Are you worried that your cost will increase? Or that you won't be able to get a mooring if you come and go from the area? Or? what aspect of this is bothering you?

Best of luck with your personal situation.

[ASD]

SC I would have to agree with you and Wrong appears to be hiding something, not sharing the entire story.

Here I was thinking of supporting Wrong's position, but now that it appears he is one of the permanent moorings that are suppose to be public (right?) , he may not want to give us all the details as he could be in violation?? The shadiness here has given me pause.

Wrong, why RB? Are there not areas in the Delta where you could hook up for free and away from other folks?

[Paul Elliott]

Shouldn't anyone interested in this topic be able to form an opinion on the proposed rule-making without prying into Wrong's personal stake in it all? To me, that's the least important part.

I'm not in Sausalito any more, but I kept VALIS in a marina there for over ten years and the bay is quite congested with semi-permanently anchored or moored boats, the vast majority not moving year to year (unless they break loose in a storm). There aren't many good places to anchor left, and it's been this way for years.

[Schooner Chandlery]

Originally Posted by Paul Elliott

Shouldn't anyone interested in this topic be able to form an opinion on the proposed rule-making without prying into Wrong's personal stake in it all? To me, that's the least important part.

I'm not in Sausalito any more, but I kept VALIS in a marina there for over ten years and the bay is quite congested with semi-permanently anchored or moored boats, the vast majority not moving year to year (unless they break loose in a storm). There aren't many good places to anchor left, and it's been this way for years.

Many of us have shared opinions and since that's pretty much all we can do on an online forum is "opine" we often share the context that this opinion was formed in. We give each other valuable insights into what a person in our particular situation wants/needs/thinks/has or wishes to see happen. Those insights are only valuable when provided "in context." The OP, Wrong, is strongly advocating (not just opining) for the action of others here. Given his advocacy position, it is reasonable for people to ask him about his own relationship with the topic of advocacy. This topic was dead until Wrong brought it back up -- keeping us as a community informed about the topic of his advocacy -- That is what takes us in this direction.

Given his earlier (and current) advocacy stance regarding RB, I am astounded to learn he is sitting on one of the handful of port-maintained moorings. I hope his personal situation is good and improves in whatever way that he needs/wants it to. I hope that he gets around to sharing the basis of his advocacy position AS IT RELATES TO HIS PERSONAL SITUATION rather than in the context of others. It is now difficult to take his advocacy seriously other than seeing it as advocating for self interest.

[Wrong]

Originally Posted by Schooner Chandlery

Many of us have shared opinions and since that's pretty much all we can do on an online forum is "opine" we often share the context that this opinion was formed in. We give each other valuable insights into what a person in our particular situation wants/needs/thinks/has or wishes to see happen. Those insights are only valuable when provided "in context." The OP, Wrong, is strongly advocating (not just opining) for the action of others here. Given his advocacy position, it is reasonable for people to ask him about his own relationship with the topic of advocacy. This topic was dead until Wrong brought it back up -- keeping us as a community informed about the topic of his advocacy -- That is what takes us in this direction.

Which aspect of my "advocacy" disturbs you to the point you must turn the discussion into a critique of my choices in the current Richardson Bay environment? I see them as two distinctly separate endeavors. On the one hand advocating for changes that will benefit you and I who've encountered the same challenges to finding good anchorage in Richardson Bay. Comparing the limits characteristic of your boat, size and draft, to mine and suggesting I have more choices than you as an avenue to saying I am somehow wrong for using a mooring misses the point. Which leads me to the second endeavor; to weigh my options making the most prudent choice to ensure the safety of myself and my boat. It has nothing to do with my politics or as you put it my advocacy.

Given his earlier (and current) advocacy stance regarding RB, I am astounded to learn he is sitting on one of the handful of port-maintained moorings. I hope his personal situation is good and improves in whatever way that he needs/wants it to. I hope that he gets around to sharing the basis of his advocacy position AS IT RELATES TO HIS PERSONAL SITUATION rather than in the context of others. It is now difficult to take his advocacy seriously other than seeing it as advocating for self interest.

Add to myself, you and every cruiser who hopes to ever visit Sausalito in the future and find good anchorage. It's more than personal self interest, but you no doubt may find this hard to believe.

By the way. I gave you a very short list of places you'd "normally" find my boat at anchor. I've completed the better part of two global circumnavigations lasting roughly 4.5 years each time. The better part because I had my boat hauled to Ca. from Texas on both occasions. In any case, finding anchorage was never, no matter where I was, as challenging as it is in Richardson Bay.

So, I choose to use a mooring while advocating for change.

You do what's "right" for you and I'll do what's right for me.

Enuf said.

[Schooner Chandlery]

Hey Wrong, I'm not saying you're "wrong" in using a public mooring. You just never shared that information before and since you're advocating from your first post #1 to this thread onwards for other boaters to fight against having MORE moorings put in -- unless an anchorage that you've basically said YOU will never use is maintained too -- I am confused by you, entirely.

Anchoring or mooring in RB is sort of like deciding to go shopping for an ordinary non-sale item on Black Friday. The prudent shopper waits a few days to make the purchase and avoids Black Friday craziness altogether. If one just has to go buy the thing, then yeah, s/he braves the nutty crowds to do it. Same goes here entirely. There are plenty of places to anchor along the California coast that do not involve RB and all it's crazy-making shortage mentality. If the authorities DO manage to do as they plan and install a managed mooring field as well as a managed anchorage, it is highly likely to benefit the average (but not every) boater. Liveaboard boaters who want to stay in a single place for a long time are not the average boater. Livaboards who want to use a public mooring but actually want to prevent others from doing the same? I'm not getting that at all.

You CAN make your voice heard from another location in the SFBay area or even elsewhere, worldwide, as part of the cruising population who frequents RB as a transiting mariner. One doesn't need to be right there to express one's opinion and have a positive impact on the situation.

I do hope whatever your present situation is, if you desire to go cruising again, you get things worked out so you can do so.

[Wrong]

Originally Posted by Schooner Chandlery

Hey Wrong, I'm not saying you're "wrong" in using a public mooring. You just never shared that information before and since you're advocating from your first post #1 to this thread onwards for other boaters to fight against having MORE moorings put in -- unless an anchorage that you've basically said YOU will never use is maintained too -- I am confused by you, entirely.

My "advocacy" is against a RBRA mooring field that once in operation will be used as justification to restrict anchoring in Richardson Bay to three days in 7 without a permit. In fact, without such a restriction it's doubtful the moorings will be filled anywhere near capacity. I don't know about you, but my experience shows that given a choice most sailors will choose to anchor rather than take a non-free mooring. Provided that is, anchoring is a feasible alternative. Where you got the idea I'd never anchor unless the anchorage is "maintained" is a mystery to me. In fact, I can state unequivocably I've never used the word in this thread.

Anchoring or mooring in RB is sort of like deciding to go shopping for an ordinary non-sale item on Black Friday. The prudent shopper waits a few days to make the purchase and avoids Black Friday craziness altogether. If one just has to go buy the thing, then yeah, s/he braves the nutty crowds to do it. Same goes here entirely. There are plenty of places to anchor along the California coast that do not involve RB and all it's crazy-making shortage mentality. If the authorities DO manage to do as they plan and install a managed mooring field as well as a managed anchorage, it is highly likely to benefit the average (but not every) boater. Liveaboard boaters who want to stay in a single place for a long time are not the average boater. Livaboards who want to use a public mooring but actually want to prevent others from doing the same? I'm not getting that at all.

You're right. You don't get it at all. Where do you get the idea I want to "prevent" others from using a mooring? It's twisted logic to suggest my using a mooring is unjustifiably preventing other liveaboards from doing the same. And, I am not an average boater. I've lived aboard in the Northwest for years, moving between anchorages depending on the prevailing conditions; lived continuously aboard as I completed the better part of two global circumnavigations, anchoring most of the way. And, the few exceptions when I took a marina slip or mooring is because anchoring was not an option. By the way, "...a well marked, organized and managed anchorage..." is my idea, not the RBRA. If the RBRA has it's way, there will be no anchoring allowed except for short term visitors. This is what I'm against.

You CAN make your voice heard from another location in the SFBay area or even elsewhere, worldwide, as part of the cruising population who frequents RB as a transiting mariner. One doesn't need to be right there to express one's opinion and have a positive impact on the situation.

I do hope whatever your present situation is, if you desire to go cruising again, you get things worked out so you can do so.

Thanks. And I hope you'll manage to get things straight in regard to what I'm trying to achieve here in Sausalito.

[ASD]

Wrong, you slipped by SC direct question. How long have you be on a public mooring in RB? Specifically?

[tomtom]

I'd bet dollars to donuts "wrong" has rarely left his mooring ball. There are very few boats on moorings out in Richardson bay that are capable of circumnavigating. His argument sounds like he is trying to protect his cheap living arrangement more than anything else.


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[Wrong]

Originally Posted by tomtom

I'd bet dollars to donuts "wrong" has rarely left his mooring ball. There are very few boats on moorings out in Richardson bay that are capable of circumnavigating. His argument sounds like he is trying to protect his cheap living arrangement more than anything else.
Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

So, 8 posts. Enlighten me with all your sailing experience. And pray tell, is my boat on a mooring "out in Richardson Bay"?

You're getting off to a lame start on this forum...

But, you've got lots of work to do before you're on par with ASD's inane lassitude.