Anchoring Etiquette Clashes with Local Culture

[mlaver]

I too am sorry it was a Catalina 34. I guess out of 1800 or so boats built one of the owners is bound to be a twit. I think you're showing admirable restraint (and some class) by not naming the boat.

Clearly you were in the right, local protocol notwithstanding. If the guy had been civil and explained what he was doing and why BEFORE anchoring things might have been different. Since you didn't have a dink out he'd also be expected to help you set your stern anchor. As it was, he acted like a jerk.

To the original question: "What would you do?" Personally, I'd pull up and reset somewhere else in the anchorage ... as far from this guy as possible. The point is to enjoy yourself, relax, and take in beautiful Santa Cruz Island. Let karma take care of him. People like him are an anomaly in the boating world; sometimes it's just best to avoid them.

 

[Breezy Chris]

150 ft in that part of the LS Anchorage has got to be about 6:1.

Did you shorten scope? What was the resolution anyway?
BTW, for those unfamiliar with SCI anchorages, these sort of interactions are quite common. If I'm checking out an anchorage and any other boaters there aren't on deck, I won't disturb their peace to inquire about rode length. So, if I've given myself 300' from the nearest neighbor (assuming here, too, that's easily inside the 30' depth line) I'd feel pretty good about it. Also, he had to have a stern hook or he could've swung into rocks if the wind shifted East.

I maintain, that what he did was entirely acceptable given prevailing local knowledge, and he was showing consideration by offering to help. Sounds like KG was on the tail-end of a trip gone somewhat awry, and just wanted to be left alone. There are better places for solitude than that particularly well-known anchorage.

 

[Kings Gambit]

150 ft in that part of the LS Anchorage has got to be about 6:1.

Did you shorten scope? What was the resolution anyway?
BTW, for those unfamiliar with SCI anchorages, these sort of interactions are quite common. If I'm checking out an anchorage and any other boaters there aren't on deck, I won't disturb their peace to inquire about rode length. So, if I've given myself 300' from the nearest neighbor (assuming here, too, that's easily inside the 30' depth line) I'd feel pretty good about it. Also, he had to have a stern hook or he could've swung into rocks if the wind shifted East.

I maintain, that what he did was entirely acceptable given prevailing local knowledge, and he was showing consideration by offering to help. Sounds like KG was on the tail-end of a trip gone somewhat awry, and just wanted to be left alone. There are better places for solitude than that particularly well-known anchorage.

I'm sorry you misunderstood my figure. The 150-ft includes the LOA of the boat. The water depth at the anchor is between 25 and 28 ft, then add 6-ft freeboard, so the realized scope was 110 ft chain/32 ft = 3.4-3.5. It doesn't matter what the guy might have figured; I told him he was anchoring inside my radius. He knew it otherwise he would not have "offered to help."

So, don't go to a national park anchorage in mid-week to relax if you're not ready to greet some bozo who might arrive two days later and foul your sea berth? Is that your conclusion? Now, I've really heard it all!! I'm sure the NPS would love to put that in its brochure for Santa Cruz Island. Maybe I'll send 'em a draft. Anyway--enough of this!!!

 

[scotmcpherson]

"Scope" is figured from your bow. You don't include the length of your boat. You'll confuse people by using a different figure and calling it Scope.

 

[ALNims]

Even though I fully agree with your viewpoint regarding this topic. For safety reasons I would probably would have moved my boat away from the stubborn and unprofessional captain of the other boat. Why? It is not worth the risk of damage and if he is both that foolish and stubborn the question of "what else is he doing wrong?" also arises. In short the guy is an annoyance and not worth the aggravation. I think you did the right thing by reporting him to the park authorities. Anyway, I try to keep in mind safety first. It only takes a few seconds to have an accident and could much longer to fix the result. Just my two cents.
Andrew

 

[Daveinet]

For all that is being said, it may be worthwhile to print the statements from U.S. Admiralty case law. Having something in print can be more persuasive than an argument. Then the argument becomes a case of the fact that I must follow the law, otherwise I take a chance of being liable for someone else's boat, which is a much stronger point.

I do have an old boat, so I would not be afraid of being one of those things that go bump in the night. Kind of like when you drive an old truck, people tend to be less likely to cut you off.

 

[woodster]

"Scope" is figured from your bow. You don't include the length of your boat. You'll confuse people by using a different figure and calling it Scope.

while that may be true mathematically the boat length is also included in the radius of the swing ...the other boater needs to be outside the perimeter your full radius

 

[Sandy Stone]

We made canal passage to a marina ..

Where was this? Local? Can't think of a marina around here with a canal entrance.

 

[Stu Jackson]

Some people still don't "get it"

I maintain, that what he did was entirely acceptable given prevailing local knowledge, and he was showing consideration by offering to help. Sounds like KG was on the tail-end of a trip gone somewhat awry, and just wanted to be left alone. There are better places for solitude than that particularly well-known anchorage.

This is so very wrong. KG was there first. Solitude had nothing to do with it. Awry? Only on bozo's part. Offering to help? After he fouled KG. I'd sure appreciate it when someone comes over to me, minding my own business, and then offers to make more work for me!!! A true "helper." Geez.

Prevailing local knowldege? Please read this entire post. You are missing the point. Bozoi was NOT THERE when KG anchored. There are no "prevailing local knowledge" signs...

The reason I keep coming back to this is that new skippers could get it wrong, and it just is disappointing to hear anyone come up with this kind of carp.

 

[scotmcpherson]

while that may be true mathematically the boat length is also included in the radius of the swing ...the other boater needs to be outside the perimeter your full radius

Woodster, and that my friend is not called scope. Scope is the ratio of rode length to depth measured from the bow.

Swing radius, rode length and scope are related and are correlates of each other but they are different. Swing radius is the radius your boat swings anchor to stern. It is influenced by your scope, but this circle may be much larger or may be smaller than the rode length depending on your depth. If you out out 150 ft of rode for a 3:1 scope, your swing radius is going to be less than your rode. If you put out 18 ft of rode for a 6:1 scope, your swing radius is going to be much larger than your scope perhaps double or triple your ride length depending on your boat length.

So you see it's important to use the correct term, otherwise someone can make an error and swing their stern into the bow of their neighbor because someone said scope when they should have said swing.

 

[woodster]

Woodster, and that my friend is not called scope. Scope is the ratio of rode length to depth measured from the bow.

Swing radius, rode length and scope are related and are correlates of each other but they are different. Swing radius is the radius your boat swings anchor to stern. It is influenced by your scope, but this circle may be much larger or may be smaller than the rode length depending on your depth. If you out out 150 ft of rode for a 3:1 scope, your swing radius is going to be less than your rode. If you put out 18 ft of rode for a 6:1 scope, your swing radius is going to be much larger than your scope perhaps double or triple your ride length depending on your boat length.

So you see it's important to use the correct term, otherwise someone can make an error and swing their stern into the bow of their neighbor because someone said scope when they should have said swing.

thank you for that clarification...its always nice to learn something new

 

[Kings Gambit]

Swing radius, rode length and scope are related and are correlates of each other but they are different. Swing radius is the radius your boat swings anchor to stern. It is influenced by your scope, but this circle may be much larger or may be smaller than the rode length depending on your depth.

Let's at least get this straightened out.

In the figure, the 150 ft refers to the full radius of the boat's potential swing around the anchor as measured from anchor position to the vessel's stern when, or if, the chain rode is fully stretched. That is, the full or maximum radius. It's irrelevant with respect to what radius the boat may actually reach over a given day, b/c that is variable up to the maximum, depending on wind force and current, etc. A boat does not have to "sweep an arc"; with a strong wind shift it can travel, in a minute or two, right over the anchor and into a boat on the other side which is within the radius!

The full radius equals the full length of chain veered out [110 ft] PLUS the LOA of the boat [40 ft] = 150 ft.

The scope is the full length of chain veered out divided by the water depth PLUS height of bow above the water. That's [110 / (26 + 6)] = 110/32 = 3.4.

Breezy Chris appears as confused about scope versus radius as he evidently is about anchoring etiquette and the clear meaning of the admirality law on the subject as it has been posted in this thread. Let's not get anyone else confused.


Here it is again:

Decision No. 124-5861 (1956) in U.S. Admiralty case law states: “A vessel shall be found at fault if it anchors so close to another vessel as to foul her when swinging (and/or) fails to shift anchorage when being dangerously close to another anchored vessel. Furthermore, the vessel that anchored first shall warn the one who anchored last that the berth chosen will foul the former’s berth.”

 

[Doug4bass]

That formula may work........until one guy drags.

 

[Jackdaw]

This is so very wrong. KG was there first. Solitude had nothing to do with it. Awry? Only on bozo's part. Offering to help? After he fouled KG. I'd sure appreciate it when someone comes over to me, minding my own business, and then offers to make more work for me!!! A true "helper." Geez.

Prevailing local knowldege? Please read this entire post. You are missing the point. Bozoi was NOT THERE when KG anchored. There are no "prevailing local knowledge" signs...

The reason I keep coming back to this is that new skippers could get it wrong, and it just is disappointing to hear anyone come up with this kind of carp.

Stu,

Love both you and KG, but I think you're wrong here.

I've anchored/moored/slipped all over the world, and the FIRST thing I do before I enter is find out how the locals do it. Because they do it that way for a reason. If I cannot find out, and someone local comes and tells me 'that's not how it's done here', I change, pronto.

In particular in tight popular places, being the first one there does not give you the right to take the whole damn place. Up here we have lots of great spots that if the first person dropped in the middle and swung through 250 feet, they would monopolize the whole anchorage. It's wrong, and that not how the game is supposed to be played.

That guy KG ran into could have done that a lot better; talking before setting up etc, but still.

I figure by the time that I have to quote Admiralty Law in a boating discussion, if I'm not driving a Bulk Carrier I've lost.

 

[scotmcpherson]

If it came to a court decision admiralty law would take precedence UNLESS local custom was ratified into law.

 

[cruisingdog]

This doesn't make sense to my newbie brain:

Let's at least get this straightened out.

In the figure, the 150 ft refers to the full radius of the boat's potential swing around the anchor as measured from anchor position to the vessel's stern when, or if, the chain rode is fully stretched. That is, the full or maximum radius. It's irrelevant with respect to what radius the boat may actually reach over a given day, b/c that is variable up to the maximum, depending on wind force and current, etc. A boat does not have to "sweep an arc"; with a strong wind shift it can travel, in a minute or two, right over the anchor and into a boat on the other side which is within the radius!

The full radius equals the full length of chain veered out [110 ft] PLUS the LOA of the boat [40 ft] = 150 ft.

The scope is the full length of chain veered out divided by the water depth PLUS height of bow above the water. That's [110 / (26 + 6)] = 110/32 = 3.4.

You say that you have 110ft of rope out and the depth is 26+6 which gives you a scope of 3.4:1. Understood.

However your radius is NOT 110ft + LOA. If the rode is fully tightened you distance from the anchor is not the hypotenuse length but the adjacent length.

Simple trigonometry will show that the adjacent (pythagoras theorem) = SQRT(hypotenuse^2 - opposite^2) = adjacent. Therefore in your case your bow to anchor distance max = SQRT(110^2 - 32^2) = ~105ft. For the swing radus = 105ft+ LOA (worst case). This may be insignificant here but for a smaller scope the radius is significantly shorter than the rode length from what I can see.

Feel free to comment/correct me. Still figuring this stuff out !!

 

[Kings Gambit]

This doesn't make sense to my newbie brain:

You say that you have 110ft of rope out and the depth is 26+6 which gives you a scope of 3.4:1. Understood.

However your radius is NOT 110ft + LOA. If the rode is fully tightened you distance from the anchor is not the hypotenuse length but the adjacent length.

Simple trigonometry will show that the adjacent (pythagoras theorem) = SQRT(hypotenuse^2 - opposite^2) = adjacent. Therefore in your case your bow to anchor distance max = SQRT(110^2 - 32^2) = ~105ft. For the swing radus = 105ft+ LOA (worst case). This may be insignificant here but for a smaller scope the radius is significantly shorter than the rode length from what I can see.

Feel free to comment/correct me. Still figuring this stuff out !!

Understood; sounds right. I've done a lot of figuring on that rt triangle and have decided to ignore the fairly minor discrepancy in length between the hypotenuse and leg, especially with a lot of rode veered out. It (the swing radius) is pretty much of an estimate to begin with since the chain is not marked at each ft, the depth varies (i.e., scope changes) with the rise and fall of the tide, and the bottom is not usually level, etc. Probably the critical thing here is that the guy DID NOT DISPUTE w/me that he was parked inside my [estimated] radius. It was as clear to him as it was to me that there was a potential issue. His solution was not to move, but to have me deploy a stern anchor. The next day when we picked up the anchor it was obvious to us that he was even deeper into my radius than I had originally thought [as depicted in my figure.]

 

[Kings Gambit]

Stu,

Love both you and KG, but I think you're wrong here.

I've anchored/moored/slipped all over the world, and the FIRST thing I do before I enter is find out how the locals do it. Because they do it that way for a reason. If I cannot find out, and someone local comes and tells me 'that's not how it's done here', I change, pronto.

In particular in tight popular places, being the first one there does not give you the right to take the whole damn place. Up here we have lots of great spots that if the first person dropped in the middle and swung through 250 feet, they would monopolize the whole anchorage. It's wrong, and that not how the game is supposed to be played.

That guy KG ran into could have done that a lot better; talking before setting up etc, but still.

I figure by the time that I have to quote Admiralty Law in a boating discussion, if I'm not driving a Bulk Carrier I've lost.

Well, it's nice to be loved! I can't help thinking that the central issue here (as I see it) continues to slip from view periodically. If you enter an unfamiliar anchorage and ask for advice, or are willing to accept it if offered in good faith by locals who know the area, I think that's fine. I'd probably do that myself; and actually have. But if there is no one in there when you arrive, then what? Someone comes in later to tell you that you've done it all wrong and should, for example, tie a 300-ft stern line (which you may or may not have aboard) to a tree on shore b/c "that's the way we do it here"--and "you need to make room for my buddies who may show up tomorrow or the next day." OK.

In this case, he only thought I was out of area b/c of the hailing port on my stern. I've anchored there in Little Scorpion many times both with and w/o a stern anchor deployed, and my yacht is slipped less than 18 n.mi. away for more than a year now. For all intents and purposes, I am a "local" (not that that matters for the principle here) whether I agree or not with the "culture", and I frankly did not need advice on how to anchor in that spot at that anchorage from someone who's only interest was in usurping my "sweet spot" b/c it would prove less than perfect for him to be somewhere other than up in front of me!! As I said, he was using the "culture" argument to justify his taking of my spot!

 

[Jackdaw]

In this case, he only thought I was out of area b/c of the hailing port on my stern. I've anchored there in Little Scorpion many times both with and w/o a stern anchor deployed, and my yacht is slipped less than 18 n.mi. away for more than a year now. For all intents and purposes, I am a "local" (not that matters for the principle here) whether I agree or not with the "culture", and I frankly did not need advice on how to anchor in that spot at that anchorage from someone who's only interest was in usurping my "sweet spot" b/c it would prove less than perfect for him to be somewhere other than up in front of me!! As I said, he was using the "culture" argument to justify his taking of my spot!

Gotcha. Thx for the clarification!

 

[Stu Jackson]

Thanks, Jack

Gotcha. Thx for the clarification!

Jack,

Thanks for the love, too!

KG's explanation is very, very good and does cover all the bases.

"How the locals do it" always works and is a proper approach to a crowded anchorage. Actually, any anchorage.

However, and here's my "but" (or "butt"???:dance again: Whether KG knew or didn't know, whether he'd been there 238 times before - in differing conditions or only a nice west wind, and he knew it blew from the east in the mornings -- like it does here, too --- , whether he came from Timbuktu or Florida:

He was there first and anchored responsibly for the conditions that particular day with no one else there.

Mr. Bozo came in after KG.

Since KG was acting responsibly, discussion should be complete.

Again, I'm only pointing this out for those who may not be familiar with anchoring etiquette, which is what began this very useful and helpful discussion.

And, while KG's subsequent posts have provided a LOT more illumination of his personal experiences, both sailing and anchoring, as well as anchoring in THAT particular spot, it simply doesn't change the original dynamic.

Jack, your observations should also be taken into account by all those new to anchoring.

Thanks again.

Stu