Florida anchoring legislation

[Rick Sylvester]

Okay, I'll give it a go one last time.

"The other purpose is to force boaters into anchorages that don't offend the wealthy shoreside homeowners in places like Miami Beach, Sarasota and Naples."

If you're referring to those 'boaters' who live in (or have abandoned) barely floating eye-sores, who pump overboard and cause the majority of problems for most responsible boaters then you can count me as offended also. I'm more offended with them than the entities who are trying to do something about it. So, you're defending their 'right' to do these things? Somebody behaves like an ass and you're concerned with the authorities?

"...not having been there in several years, I'm not going to comment on conditions there as I don't have current knowledge."

And yet you do anyway.

"...just who has the right, beyond asking for some reasonable standards regarding aesthetics and health standards, to tell anyone else how to live? If someone chooses to live on a boat, as opposed to in a house or apartment, isn't that their right?"

Sorta. But that's not really the issue is it? Plenty of people live aboard in Florida without a bit of trouble. I have for over eleven years. Being respectful of those around you and mindful of the impact you may have on those living around you trumps any 'right' to do whatever you want. On water OR land.

"it's an enforcement problem"

No. It's a money problem. Calling it an enforcement problem and leaving it at that is woefully shortsighted.

"There are laws, on the books right now, that permit Florida municipalities to deal with every single issue that the PP purports to deal with"

Of course some of the new laws aren't needed. They're called unfunded mandates. We get it.

What YOU apparently don't understand is that there's a big difference between 'permitting' something and actually paying for it. Of course they're making new laws. It's the only thing they can do. It happens in education all the time. It isn't helping but neither does misguided hysteria (regardless of how many times BoatUS calls you.)

"Huh? Tell me again what the problem here is?"

Really? You don't know? You don't live here, haven't been here in several years, don't understand what current conditions are, give us your resume' presumably to go to bat for us and you have to ask? I know that's taking your statement a bit out of context but given your assumptions and inaccuracies I think it's a fair question.

Rick W. Dude, you're too funny. Stop by and have a cold one. You'll fit right in around here. We'll anchor in front of a high-rise and throw our empties in the water.

Okay. I'm done now.

 

[Steve Dion]

How are they going to stop derlict boats. All someone needs to do is remove the engine & grind off the ID# and the boat belongs to no one. The state/county/cities will stilll need to remove them and figure out how they charge the owners for the salvage operations.

This is a great idea, but another regulation that cannot be enforced.

 

[CanuckSailor]

Rick, perhaps I haven't been clear - when you say

If you're referring to those 'boaters' who live in (or have abandoned) barely floating eye-sores, who pump overboard and cause the majority of problems for most responsible boaters

that's not what I meant. I meant you - me - responsible boaters with decent looking vessels. Not the problem boats, not at all. They DO have to be dealt with. I specifically do not disagree with you on that issue. I want those boats off the water as much as you do, and I don't agree that these people should be permitted to act like 'asses' to quote you. How you took that from what I have written is beyond me.
You misread my comments about 'not going to comment' - my following remark was general, not specific to Sarasota.

No, it IS an enforcement problem. The money is there to deal with the problem, that's been demonstrated and the facts I got were from Phil Horning, who runs the Derelict Vessel program for the FWC. If DVs are not being dealt with when the solution is more than funded, as it is in Monroe County and as appears to be in Sarasota from what I'm reading and seeing, it's an enforcement problem.
I last left FL in June, having spent several months there after returning from Cuba. I spent most of the winter previous in Florida, and at least one to three months - or more - per year in the ten years prior to that. I fully understand the current situation, having followed it closely for some time now.
And the question, 'what's the problem', was rhetorical - a usage of English intended to highlight the previous remarks in an ironic way. Perhaps you don't care if your right to anchor in the state is restricted, but I do.

 

[CanuckSailor]

Steve, you're exactly right. Monroe County now charges a fee above and beyond the standard boat registration fee, and that money in part is for the removal of derelicts. That seems to be the only solution - every boater pays a bit more so that we can deal with the problems of the few - which, by the way, is 0.2 percent of all of Florida's registered boats. Yea, you heard that right - two boats out of every thousand.

 

[RichH]

The mooring fees should most clearly should have covered their eventual replacement/repair ... if not then the fees from moorings were only going/diverted into a general fund 'cookie jar', ... less wages, etc. for the municipal marina. Any drastic increase in mooring charges will only cause 'the problem' to migrate to 'other places'.

 

[CanuckSailor]

But they haven't. Watch closely - Boat US is about to suggest that mooring fields warrant that their equipment has been checked and found up to standard in the past 12 months as a condition of offering a mooring.
They aren't going to like that at all....it leads towards a little word called 'liability'...

 

[RichH]

Florida is the 'land of lawyers' and probably has 3 lawyers for every actual human being there. The simplicity of 'getting around' such is simply to enforce a 'signed waiver' that provides complete and explicit immunity for municipal entities re: usage of moorings. "Dont sign the waiver, no mooring ... now try find yourself a place to anchor, ha ha".

 

[CanuckSailor]

"Dont sign the waiver, no mooring ... now try find yourself a place to anchor, ha ha".

Good point, but right now, the game is political and the cities, if they want to be seen to be reasonable, will have to fall in line with this. That doesn't mean they'll like it tho. And it's not unreasonable to insist that the moorings are checked annually.

 

[CanuckSailor]

Here's the FL statute authorizing any law officer to remove an abandoned or derelict vessel, thus rendering redundant any further legislation -
FS 823.11(3)(a) states:“The Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and its officers and all law enforcement officers as specified in s. 327.70 are authorized and empowered to remove or cause to be removed any abandoned or derelict vessel from public waters in any instance when the same obstructs or threatens to obstruct navigation or in any way constitutes a danger to the environment.”
The pilot program is a scam, that's my judgement.

 

[RichH]

Here's the FL statute authorizing any law officer to remove an abandoned or derelict vessel, thus rendering redundant any further legislation -
FS 823.11(3)(a) states:“The Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and its officers and all law enforcement officers as specified in s. 327.70 are authorized and empowered to remove or cause to be removed any abandoned or derelict vessel from public waters in any instance when the same obstructs or threatens to obstruct navigation or in any way constitutes a danger to the environment.”
The pilot program is a scam, that's my judgement.

This is the USA where LAWS/rules are solely for the benefit and retention of the 'rulers' .... Unfortunately there is NO requirement in most written US law that they *must* be 'enforced'.

Its simply too costly for the municipalities to enforce the laws and evict the bums ... its doesnt cost much to conduct more public meetings 'to solve' the problem.

 

[CanuckSailor]

Here's an interesting fact - Monroe County has a surcharge on boat registrations that last year brought in $664,144, earmarked in part for the removal of derelict vessels. Therefore, the money is available to enforce this law - what needs to happen and I don't believe that people such as Rick Sylvester get it - is that we, the public and responsible boat owners, need to demand that these laws be enforced, that we are not the problem.
Additionally, a lot of the people on these boats would, if living on land, be living in the back seat of a car or under a bridge. These are a social welfare problem and need to be treated as such - penalizing boaters for this is not going to make that problem go away, and it's not fair to these people who need help for their mental or addiction problems.
One, in St. Augustine, was an impoverished vet, Korean War I believe - no money, sick, no place to go and too proud to ask for help.
Is this how we want to treat these people? I don't think so.

 

[CanuckSailor]

except for a pilot program in 5 cities with experimental test restrictions around mooring fields.

That is what the Pilot Program says - however, Monroe County is putting in a managed anchorage with ordinances that is 45 miles from the nearest mooring field. That's right - 45 miles. That's cutting a pretty wide swath I would say.
Anyone who doesn't think this program will restrict anchoring in the state of Florida is living in a dream world. It's happening now. The FWC is in the process of taking your rights away from you and some of you are NOT paying the attention you need to.

 

[Bill1565]

No, it IS an enforcement problem. The money is there to deal with the problem, that's been demonstrated and the facts I got were from Phil Horning, who runs the Derelict Vessel program for the FWC. If DVs are not being dealt with when the solution is more than funded, as it is in Monroe County and as appears to be in Sarasota from what I'm reading and seeing, it's an enforcement problem.

In America The states are seperate entities from the counties. The State of Florida does not provide enuff money to adequately fund FWCC staffing much less derelict removal.
Some proactive counties do add a surcharge to boat registration fees to provide county money. This money can be used for artificial reefs, boat ramps and other good things as well as derelict removal, but the money is dedicated to county boating issues, can't be slopped into "general funds', or given to FWC.
Don't have details on Monroe county. Here in Charlotte County, boater registration pays for part of a person, a truck, a trailer and a boat to identify derelict vessels, work with contractors to remove derelicts and supervise proper disposal in land fills. He also works an artifical reef program and to works with county survey types on lat/long of dredging needs. He chases down registered owners and pursues reimbursement by them of removal costs.
Remainder of county funds goes to land aquisition, boat ramp construction and other boating enhancements

 

[Rick Webb]

Here is a Way to Fund the Removal of Derelict Boats

Set up toll booths for any boat headed south. Put a booth on I-75 one on I-95 and the ICW. It need not an onerous tax just say $10 a foot. You get a sticker that says "I Love FL", T shirts and bumper sticker could be offered for additional revenue. Easy to police as any boat without the requisite "I Love FL" or Florida registration sticker would be deemed a derelict and impounded.

Or if you do not like it here or the way things are done here stay away.

 

[soling42]

Since it hasn't been mentioned, here's a link to Southwinds magazine who has taken a commendable stand regarding anchoring rights and boater awareness in Fl. It'll probably be the most current and accurate info.

http://www.southwindsmagazine.com/

I've lived in Sarasota for over 50yrs. My father lived aboard for 30yrs and died aboard his houseboat. We are salty. I know the area and love the town but the anchorage is 30% filled with unfit vessels due to economic issues or otherwise, a few of which regularly end up ashore after every serious blow. The condos they anchor near are 30% filled with narrow minded or easily irritated old folks many of which don't have much to do and focus their energy on the nearby anchorage where a few boaters will do very un-neighborly acts from their boats(it'd rile even tolerant folks).

I agree with the need for a mooring field with shore side support. Why every larger coastal town doesn't offer one as an asset is a mystery to me. The bigger issue is how safe it is(or isn't). I probably won't use ours even if it ever gets done until they remove the few regulars who haunt any unpoliced anchorage pilfering everything valuable.

Sorry for the commentary but it's a great spot that really only needs the current laws properly enforced with level headed water cops. 99% of our coast is easily a hassle free zone.

Mike

 

[Stu Jackson]

Wait, wait!!!

Here in Charlotte County, boater registration pays for part of a person, a truck, a trailer and a boat to identify derelict vessels, work with contractors to remove derelicts and supervise proper disposal in land fills. He also works an artifical reef program and to works with county survey types on lat/long of dredging needs. He chases down registered owners and pursues reimbursement by them of removal costs.
Remainder of county funds goes to land aquisition, boat ramp construction and other boating enhancements

A real VOICE OF REASON in a rapidly deteriorating situation.

How can that possibly be?

Why, oh why, can't the rest of the counties get the idea and just do something like this?

Sorry, too easy?

I am constantly amazed at lawmakers and the "hassle someone-prone" folks, who simply can't see past their own eyes and learn about THINGS THAT WORK, instead of trying to be the gestapo in their own back yards.

 

[CanuckSailor]

Here in Charlotte County, boater registration pays for part of a person, a truck, a trailer and a boat to identify derelict vessels, work with contractors to remove derelicts and supervise proper disposal in land fills.

And all of that without the Pilot Program which will remove our rights to anchor. Re Sarasota - the laws are there to deal with your 'problem' boaters, and the funds, according to a TV broadcast I caught online. Perhaps you should be demanding that your city council step up to the plate. Or - get Marina Jacks to pay the same rate as the Sarasota Sailing Squadron - 8% instead of 3%. That ought to fund some enforcement.