caltexflanc
Guru
To my way of thinking, the presence of a sign is irrelevant. When the person bought the land and what they do with it is irrelevant. What one thinks of the person that owns the land is irrelvant. It doesn't matter who was "there first." There was no law preventing the person from buying and developing the land in the way that they did, so one's own opnion about what they did or didn't do is also irrlevalt.
The only thing that's relevant is the effect the passage of one's boat will have on the people or property around it. If the desired operation of the boat is potentially damaging or dangerous, then don't operate the boat that way.
If the land owner was smart and put up bulkheads and whatnot in anticipation of what the boat wakes might do, great. But if the land owner wasn't that smart, that doesn't give one the right to deliberately damage his stuff.
As I said earlier, it's called common sense and responsibility. It continues to amaze me how many so-called experienced boaters don't have either one of them.
As someone who has transited the entire AICW, a good part of the GICW, and virtually all of the California Delta, I disagree with this. If you put your property in harms way on , in many cases on the ICW, IN, a public thorofare you need to take some responsibility. Common sense and courtesy work both ways. I consider us to be very respectful boaters, to a fault often times, but some of this stuff people do with "their property" is just ridiculous. The land owners that do get it, citizenship-wise, build the proper bulkheads and put their boats on lifts.