More Anchoring Etiquette: should I move?

[Naughty Cat]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

Before you got there, the Oceanis was last in line? - What distance had he put between himself and his neighbour(s)? It might be an indication of what he considers a safe distance, and if there is no impediment to doing so, I would leave a similar distance.

40 m sounds more than reasonable, but how is that measured? Radar? Range-finder? Mark I eyeball?

Pretty well equidistant as I said. I use boat lengths as an eyeball - probably we all do. I am 14m. It gets harder in high multiples but at 1/2/3 x boat length it is fairly easy to estimate. Ironically a Corsair snuck in between him and the shore putting itself about the same - 35m upwind by the time the wind came round but I don't think he saw it as it was dark hulled, very low and didn't fly an anchor light!

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by JPA Cate

He wasn't home to deal with the problem when you anchored. When you were unable to convince him both of you were safe, you should have left.

The only thing being on a catamaran has to do with it is that you will be more affected by the wind than he, who will be affected by the currents in the area, if any. Any time it blows up in the night, your swinging circle and his could coincide in such a way that your vessel strikes his, and he was there before you.

IMO, it doesn't matter if someone is being irrational, if they claim their "I was there first rights," it was up to you to move. Even at night, even if you have to use radar and go in the pouring rain. (You might have to remind yourself "I have been wet before." It was exceedingly unfortunate that the two of you could not come to a meeting ground in daylight hours, but the time of day doesn't change the obligation to move, and nor does inconvenience.

Not to be down on your case, but I am wondering whether your fear that he might ram you was because your talk did not focus on the safety of both vessels, and more about arguing rights, and you wanted to win the argument.


Ann

The law says "you cannot cause a foul berth." It does not say that you cannot anchor within the swing circle, only that 2nd in has a responsibility to stay clear of contact.


If you are implying that you cannot anchor within the swing circle of another, that is different from the law and accepted practice.


I don't find moving and re-anchoring in the dark to be particularly "safe," so in the absence of a real hazard, I'm not going to hazard my boat or crew. In this case, the hazard was minimal and in his head. I have been asked to move at night in similar circumstances, and I explained that re-anchoring at night was a greater hazard than staying put (well set anchor, well soaked-in) which I believe was true. Was he asking you to put to sea? Or to anchor, most likely, in other close quarters without being able to see? Without dragging, closer approach, or very foul weather coming (a real hazard), there is no solid claim of "foul berth."


The real danger is dragging, and more space is nice. Much of this comes down to local custom. For example, If you drive in many old cities and park on the street, you will learn that parking is a contact sport. If that is not OK with you, don't park on the street. If you don't like crowded harbors, don't go there.

[Mike OReilly]

You appear to be the outlier on this one Ann. My understanding of your perspective is that it doesn't matter what anyone else believes; that "first in" gives some sort of absolute right to over-ride everyone else's rights. This makes no sense to me, and doesn't agree with either law, civil practice or basic common sense.

Yes, the 'first in' does have additional rights to the space. It is absolutely the responsibility of those who follow to anchor safely, and I would add, to anchor in a way that minimizes intrusion. For me, that means going as far away as possible. But this doesn't confer some magical power on the 'first in' to dictate how everyone else must behave.

All we can go on in this hypothetical discussion is the OP's description. We all create our own reality, so none of us knows what really transpired. But given the facts as presented, there is no way I would move. A close approach of 25 metres is more than adequate for normal conditions.

[sailorboy1]

There was no unsafe anchoring situation. This is just a case of someone "not liking it". So like really all anchoring situations he who is most afraid or doesn't like it most has to move first.

[Dockhead]

Being first, the Blue Oceanis had the legal right not to be fouled - swung into. But he did not have the right to be free of an irrational fear of being swung into. Your legal responsibility is to the fact, not to his feelings. So certainly nothing legally wrong in your actions.

I cruise for pleasure, and avoid all kinds of conflicts like this simply because it spoils the mood. If I had been in your place and the demand had been made in a timely manner, I would definitely have moved. But at 00:30, after you'd been there for nearly half a day? No, I think in that case I might have done as you did.

That does not however - N.B.! - take away from the fact that you would be 100% responsible legally had you swung into each other.

I'm presently at anchor in a gorgeous bay of an island, several square miles in area, with perfect shelter, just a few miles from Stockholm. And there is not a single other boat in the anchorage. The kind of situation described by the OP is why I avoid the Med in summer. That and the scorching heat.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Naughty Cat

Pretty well equidistant as I said. I use boat lengths as an eyeball - probably we all do. I am 14m. It gets harder in high multiples but at 1/2/3 x boat length it is fairly easy to estimate. Ironically a Corsair snuck in between him and the shore putting itself about the same - 35m upwind by the time the wind came round but I don't think he saw it as it was dark hulled, very low and didn't fly an anchor light!

Eyeball is a poor distance-measuring tool IMO. Particularly at night. It's possible the other fellow's eyeball was under-ranging.
I use radar, but a laser range-finder is perhaps a worthwhile investment. Then you could prove the distance between yourself and a testy neighbour, in such a situation.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

Eyeball is a poor distance-measuring tool IMO. Particularly at night. It's possible the other fellow's eyeball was under-ranging.

I use radar, but a laser range-finder is perhaps a worthwhile investment. Then you could prove the distance between yourself and a testy neighbour, in such a situation.

I completely agree. Eyeballs lie about distance in anchorages, usually exaggerating the nearness of other boats. I always use radar.

[Jammer]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

You appear to be the outlier on this one Ann. My understanding of your perspective is that it doesn't matter what anyone else believes; that "first in" gives some sort of absolute right to over-ride everyone else's rights. This makes no sense to me, and doesn't agree with either law, civil practice or basic common sense.

I don't believe you characterize Ann's point of view accurately. I do not believe it has anything to do with "first in."



I understand Ann's perspective to be, that she would move if asked, regardless of the facts, to avoid conflict and to be sure to leave a clean wake. Among her goals in so doing is to be sure that future cruisers in similar vessels, of similar demographic background, flying her home country's flag, etc., will be regarded highly. Though unstated I would conclude that she finds the inner peace garnered from allowing the other boat to have their way, to be of sufficient importance to overcome the more pragmatic and immediate frustrations of picking her way through a crowded anchorage at night to find a different berth.


I believe this is laudable as a general approach and philosophy. I believe it is misapplied in this particular situation given the facts.

[Anders]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

The kind of situation described by the OP is why I avoid the Med in summer.

I think it's unusual to be asked to move in the Med. Most are used to anchorages beeing busy and personally I can only remember being asked to move once.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Jammer

I understand Ann's perspective to be, that she would move if asked, regardless of the facts, to avoid conflict and to be sure to leave a clean wake.

I know Ann can, and will , speak for herself.

But to speak about our hypothetical Ann... While I think of her as incredibly kind, generous and considerate to others, I don't think of her as a pushover. By this logic, anytime someone asks our hypothetical Ann to do something, she'll acquiesce just to keep the peace? I really doubt this.

She has stated quite clearly that 'first-in' conveys the right to dictate how others anchor nearby, irrespective of actual reality of the case. In this case, the OP's boat was anchored far enough away, but the other fellow didn't agree. We can't know who is right, except the OP says they never came closer than 25 metres. This is certainly sufficient space.

I understand the perspective, but I just don't accept that 'first-in' rule means we have to ignore reality, nor do we have to agree to irrational demands, especially not at 0030.

[Naughty Cat]

Fair point about things looking closer and harder to gauge at night. The same can be said for waves breaking on rocks or the shore, which always sound closer in the dark.

I had looked at rangefinders in the past and could not think of why I really needed one. It might have helped in this situation, even if I had just looked at the result thoughtfully to show that I was taking his ire as seriously as possible.

As I ponder the perspectives there are a couple of reasons this incident has played on my mind. Apart from the fact I really don't like to upset people, in the previous anchor etiquette thread someone said that if anyone anchors within 200' of them they go and ask them to move, and that got me thinking again about this instance. The other reason is that, as skipper, I set the example for my crew, and this one had me baffled. In this case it was just my wife on board but she always asks me whether we are ok and I always run through how I think the time at anchor is going to unfold and whether I think there might be a chance we would move. So telling her that we will always move if someone asks us to would be a bold commitment and might need some explaining!

I definitely think it would have helped if he could have contributed to the discussion with his actual concerns, but I also have to consider that if I didn't speak the local language - say I was in Spain perhaps - it would probably have been the right thing for me to move.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Naughty Cat

As I ponder the perspectives there are a couple of reasons this incident has played on my mind. Apart from the fact I really don't like to upset people, in the previous anchor etiquette thread someone said that if anyone anchors within 200' of them they go and ask them to move, and that got me thinking again about this instance.

If someone close to 65metres from me asked me to move I'd request he go swivel.
A jokes a joke but that's a bludi pantomime.

[thinwater]

Moving at night, in a crowded anchorage, is a big factor in this example. If someone got aggressive with me during the day I would almost certainly move; I don't want to be near him anyway. I might hesitate if conditions were difficult, and then the reasoning would come down to whether staying or moving were safer.



But at night it is easier for me to hit someone, snag a line I didn't see, or anchor poorly, and they it will be 100% my fault. It is much harder to gauge distances and stay oriented. I have anchored in crowded places at night, but I need to have a reason. To lift a well-placed anchor, I would need a very good reason.

[Stewie12]

Let common sense prevail.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by thinwater

Moving at night, in a crowded anchorage, is a big factor in this example. If someone got aggressive with me during the day I would almost certainly move; I don't want to be near him anyway. I might hesitate if conditions were difficult, and then the reasoning would come down to whether staying or moving were safer.

But at night it is easier for me to hit someone, snag a line I didn't see, or anchor poorly, and they it will be 100% my fault. It is much harder to gauge distances and stay oriented. I have anchored in crowded places at night, but I need to have a reason. To lift a well-placed anchor, I would need a very good reason.

The timing of this "request" certainly matters, as does the fact that the OP has had sufficient time to watch how the two boats were swinging, so had more information to make an informed decision.

I suspect most of us here would go a long way to avoid conflict and to leave a clean wake where ever we go. But for me, at least, that doesn't mean I have to acquiesce to what I deem to be irrational or selfish demands.

The problem got solved by the person who decided there was a problem. I would certainly move anchor if I felt unsafe, and couldn't reach another solution.