Florida Anchoring limits heating up

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Larry M said:
I do agree that derelict vessels are a big problem no matter where you live. But lets control them and not restrict legitimate boaters and there anchoring access. :)
Click to expand...
Exactly. There are already laws in place that allow for the control of derelict vessels. They are not being enforced, because it involves the city and their police actually doing some documentation and real work. Oh my! So much easier to just outlaw all anchoring.

This is the bottom line whenever anyone tells you that these anchoring restrictions have anything at all to do with derelict vessels. It is nothing more than a way for them to be lazy.
 
We have to be careful with this issue to always differentiate real cruisers from the derelict/homesteader/squatter crowd. Terms like "liveaboard" lumps us all together.
 
denverd0n said:
Exactly. There are already laws in place that allow for the control of derelict vessels. They are not being enforced, because it involves the city and their police actually doing some documentation and real work. Oh my! So much easier to just outlaw all anchoring.

This is the bottom line whenever anyone tells you that these anchoring restrictions have anything at all to do with derelict vessels. It is nothing more than a way for them to be lazy.
Click to expand...
I agree totally. Let me list a few laws currently on the books that if rigorously enforced would eliminate the "Derelict" problem. 1. PUBLIC INTOXICATION! 2.MARINE SANITATION 3. SAFTY INSPECTION 4.ANCHOR LIGHT 5.NOISE ORDANANCE 6.DISTURBING THE PEACE Having abided in a few long term anchorage areas in Florida and the Caribbean I feel confident that when these laws are uniformly and rigorously enforced the derelict boats and boaters disappear as if by magic. But the Waterfront Property Owner is using the Derelict as whipping boy in the slow but steady march towards eliminating anchoring rights for all.
 
denverd0n said:
Exactly. There are already laws in place that allow for the control of derelict vessels. They are not being enforced, because it involves the city and their police actually doing some documentation and real work. Oh my! So much easier to just outlaw all anchoring.

This is the bottom line whenever anyone tells you that these anchoring restrictions have anything at all to do with derelict vessels. It is nothing more than a way for them to be lazy.
Click to expand...

Actually that's not true in most areas. The laws related to derelict vessels are lacking and removal of such vessels is very time consuming. It's not just anchoring however. Many vessels get left at marinas but those marinas have no easy means of getting rid of them and become responsible for them. The state of Washington has a somewhat more effective process for those and periodically removes and crushes vessels.

Now, that said, I consider derelict vessels and regular anchoring restrictions to be too different issues that now are too often combined into one. I live in an area where there are the few crusaders wanting anchoring reduced or eliminated but they are so very much in the minority. Most of us are surrounded by boats, surrounded by anchorages, and love it as part of the ambiance of where we live. When we're at home we can wake in the morning and look out and see the beautiful site of boats anchored nearby.

The extremists will continue to make proposals which will continue to be voted down. The extremists on the other side will continue to oppose any regulations even those for derelict boats and those other regulations that are minimal. Ultimately there will be answers found somewhere in between. And there will be renegade cities going further. In fact that's the reason the state of Florida started trying to address the problem, to limit what municipalities in the state could do.

I do believe we will be debating anchoring rules throughout the country for decades just as we will discharge rules. But I also believe moderation will win in the vast majority of situations. There will be those few locales who are more extreme.
 
Billyfeet said:
I agree totally. Let me list a few laws currently on the books that if rigorously enforced would eliminate the "Derelict" problem. 1. PUBLIC INTOXICATION! 2.MARINE SANITATION 3. SAFTY INSPECTION 4.ANCHOR LIGHT 5.NOISE ORDANANCE 6.DISTURBING THE PEACE Having abided in a few long term anchorage areas in Florida and the Caribbean I feel confident that when these laws are uniformly and rigorously enforced the derelict boats and boaters disappear as if by magic. But the Waterfront Property Owner is using the Derelict as whipping boy in the slow but steady march towards eliminating anchoring rights for all.
Click to expand...

Those laws all serve some purpose but they don't provide for means of removing the derelict vessel. The situation Oriental NC faced is an excellent example too of how a small problem can grow. And the biggest single impact it created was not on the landowners but on cruisers who normally would anchor there.

Yes some property owners are using that problem for more, but that doesn't mean the derelict problem doesn't need addressing still. And I do not believe in spite of the few who might like it that we're moving toward eliminating all anchoring rights. I do believe ultimately there will be some regulations but nothing like the 300' numbers proposed. Just enough to not create hazards at marinas and public launches and some very minimal distances from docks and docked boats. Funniest thing is that so much is blamed on waterfront property owners and yet the leading advocate for the laws in Fort Lauderdale does not live on the water.
 
denverd0n said:
Exactly. There are already laws in place that allow for the control of derelict vessels. They are not being enforced, because it involves the city and their police actually doing some documentation and real work. Oh my! So much easier to just outlaw all anchoring.

This is the bottom line whenever anyone tells you that these anchoring restrictions have anything at all to do with derelict vessels. It is nothing more than a way for them to be lazy.
Click to expand...

My understanding is the legal processes to remove these derelict boats can take 12-18 months. Hopefully, there have been or will be changes in the law lighten the burden on the taxpayer. It is not a matter of documentation and real work and laziness. The emphasis in law enforcement is on criminal matters over civil matters and rightfully so.
 
No offense B&B but if you don't think that there are towns and waterfront property owners in Florida that are just waiting for the time when the current ban on municipality anchorage regulation lapses to eliminate anchoring you missed the last few decades of the 20th Century when North Palm Beach and Riviera Beach attempted to PROHIBIT ANCHORING A VESSEL OVERNIGHT!!!! Or this nice little attempt to eliminate the anchorage at the north end of Lake Worth by 'making seagrass beds" and restricting access to the are in the name of protecting marine animals. This is my back yard and I have watched it for 50 years! Jack Nicklaus lives in a MCMansion on the water where this fiasco is brewing. It is well known that he and a few other landowners that abut this great anchorage are working to get it cleared out! Full Text of Public Notice to Fill and Plant Sea Grass in Northern Lake Worth | Cruisers' Net GOOGLE 1300 US 1 North Palm Beach and look at the map. This is a very popular anchorage. It is well protected from North wind during the winter, there is a public access to the road at the north end that is walking distance to a Publix supermarket, CVS Pharmacy and a long walk to a giant West Marine! The holding is in sand/mud at 17' depth. The bad news is that as mentioned in the proposal to fill this "dredge hole" in with sand to "enhance the aquatic environment" and "signage for sea grass protection" it will effective eliminate the anchorage area. Also what is not mentioned is that the reason that there is a "Dredge Hole" this large is that all that nice bulk headed property surrounding this "hole" was filled from soil taken out of the hole! And Old Port Cove Marina and Condominiums, Portage Landing where Jack Nicklaus lives and Lost Tree Village are where the push for this "Enhanced Aquatic Environment" nonsense is coming from! Typical Palm Beach County circle jerk! A developer mines fill from public bottomland, builds and bulkheads his property, and then 60 years down the road had the county re-fill his hole and get's public acces limited so that Jack doesn't have to see me enjoying my coffee in the AM while anchored on "Public Trust" land!
 
Last edited:
Billyfeet said:
No offense B&B but if you don't think that there are towns and waterfront property owners in Florida that are just waiting for the time when the current ban on municipality anchorage regulation lapses to eliminate ahchoring you missed the last few decades of the 20th Century when North Palm Beach and Riviera Beach attempted to PROHIBIT ANCHORING A VESSEL OVERNIGHT!!!! Or this nice little attempt to eliminate the anchorage at the north end of Lake Worth by 'making seagrass beds" and restricting access to the are in the name of protecting marine animals. This is my back yard and I have watched it for 50 years! Jack Nicklaus lives in a MCMansion on the water where this fiasco is brewing. It is well known that he and a few other landowners that abut this great anchorage are working to get it cleared out! Full Text of Public Notice to Fill and Plant Sea Grass in Northern Lake Worth | Cruisers' Net GOOGLE 1300 US 1 North Palm Beach and look at the map. This is a very popular anchorage. It is well protected from North wind during the winter, there is a public access to the road at the north end that is walking distance to a Publix supermarket, CVS Pharmacy and a long walk to a giant West Marine! The holding is in sand/mud at 17" depth. The bad news is that as mentioned in the proposal to fill this "dredge hole" in with sand to "enhance the aquatic environment" and "signage for sea grass protection" it will effective eliminate the anchorage area. Also what is not mentioned is that the reason that there is a "Dredge Hole" this large is that all that nice bulk headed property surrounding this "hole" was filled from soil taken out of the hole! And Old Port Cove Marina and Condominiums, Portage Landing where Jack Nicklaus lives and Lost Tree Village are where the push for this "Enhanced Aquatic Environment" nonsense is coming from! Typical Palm Beach County circle jerk! A developer mines fill from public bottomland, builds and bulkheads his property, and then 60 years down the road had the county re-fill his hole and get's public acces limited so that Jack doesn't have to see me enjoying my coffee in the AM while anchored on "Public Trust" land!
Click to expand...

You are accurate in that I missed those decades of the 20th century. I'm in the 21st century. Have been for 14 years. We weren't in FL in the 20th. In fact I wasn't even 21 years old until the last decade and my wife wasn't until this century. So now that we've gotten that out of the way.

I don't doubt there is a push by some people in some areas still for eliminating anchoring, but I do not think the state will relinquish the power and stop restricting the cities. I think municipalities will be limited in what they can do. I feel very certain of that.

Far less certain is what those limitations will be. That's the real question and debate. What restrictions will local governments in the state of Florida be allowed to put on anchoring? So far the state has been very slow to allow local restrictions. They've run a pilot program in a few areas. Now the debate is what are the maximum restrictions a municipality will be allowed to place. I believe they will be moderate. Not as far or as limited as either side of the equation wants. Florida is one state that has stepped in and said we are not going to allow cities to go off on their own tangents.

Now I have no idea what the limits will be nor how many times they will change. I'm personally for a real clampdown on abandoned derelict boats (notice I inserted the word "abandoned") and for very much limiting the limits to be placed on anchoring. I am hoping those limits will just be what most would do naturally based on common sense and courtesy. 300' from homes is ridiculous and I do not see it happening. Ultimately, I believe there will be some form of reasonable compromise.

You refer to matters proposed in the last few decades of the last century. They didn't pass, didn't happen. You refer to an application made in January, 2012. It wasn't approved and enacted. There are people trying to make a name for themselves who propose insane things every day. Fortunately they don't often get their way.
 
There are two issues which I concede to the landowners:

Derelict boats. There are a couple of approaches which could be taken which would insure the boats would be removed before they sink and create a hazard. Basically, a bond would have to be put up before you could operate any boat valued at less than 50,000 US. This could be part of an insurance policy or a separate bond with a third party. Details would have to be worked out.

Residence boats. Municipalities are of course leery of boats used as residences by those working in the town or worse for the town, sending their children to school. In either case the boat should be subject to a real estate tax equivalent.

I have no sympathy for the waterside property owner who doesn't want boats anchored in front of his property, too bad, the boats were there first and there are non-waterfront houses galore to choose from.
 
B&B, just to clarify. Riviera Beach was in the process of towing anchored boats to the city marina, locking the boat to the dock, and then confiscating the boat for marina "charges". The law was on the books, they enforced it, and lost a fortune when owners of confiscated vessels sued the city successfully! And the Turtle Cove Restoration scam was still active as of June 2013. I have not been able to determine the current status. But this type of thing tends to come back again and again in Florida. So this was not a dream that I had, it happened, and could happen again. I hope that the State will hold on hard to the concept that uniform laws governing the waters of Florida is the way to go. I was astounded when the whole mooring field test case idea was approved and executed by a few towns. I worked with Riviera Beach and Palm Beach County in the '90s when all the trouble was happening here. I had a presentation showing the success of mooring fields in Newport,RI, Nantucket,MA and Martha's Vinyard, MA. I had a plan identical to the one in Boot Key for restrooms, showers, pump out and garbage facilities. THey looked at me like I was crazy and proceeded to spend a couple of million on lost lawsuits! Here is one example of the depth of stupidity.Supreme Court: Floating Home Still A Man's Castle : NPR
 
Billyfeet said:
No offense B&B but if you don't think that there are towns and waterfront property owners in Florida that are just waiting for the time when the current ban on municipality anchorage regulation lapses to eliminate anchoring you missed the last few decades of the 20th Century when North Palm Beach and Riviera Beach attempted to PROHIBIT ANCHORING A VESSEL OVERNIGHT!!!! Or this nice little attempt to eliminate the anchorage at the north end of Lake Worth by 'making seagrass beds" and restricting access to the are in the name of protecting marine animals. This is my back yard and I have watched it for 50 years! Jack Nicklaus lives in a MCMansion on the water where this fiasco is brewing. It is well known that he and a few other landowners that abut this great anchorage are working to get it cleared out! Full Text of Public Notice to Fill and Plant Sea Grass in Northern Lake Worth | Cruisers' Net GOOGLE 1300 US 1 North Palm Beach and look at the map. This is a very popular anchorage. It is well protected from North wind during the winter, there is a public access to the road at the north end that is walking distance to a Publix supermarket, CVS Pharmacy and a long walk to a giant West Marine! The holding is in sand/mud at 17' depth. The bad news is that as mentioned in the proposal to fill this "dredge hole" in with sand to "enhance the aquatic environment" and "signage for sea grass protection" it will effective eliminate the anchorage area. Also what is not mentioned is that the reason that there is a "Dredge Hole" this large is that all that nice bulk headed property surrounding this "hole" was filled from soil taken out of the hole! And Old Port Cove Marina and Condominiums, Portage Landing where Jack Nicklaus lives and Lost Tree Village are where the push for this "Enhanced Aquatic Environment" nonsense is coming from! Typical Palm Beach County circle jerk! A developer mines fill from public bottomland, builds and bulkheads his property, and then 60 years down the road had the county re-fill his hole and get's public acces limited so that Jack doesn't have to see me enjoying my coffee in the AM while anchored on "Public Trust" land!
Click to expand...

This sort of environmental development activity is ultimately backed and partially funded by federal programs. If you don't like the current trend...vote accordingly.
 
In the 1920's Love Field was built in Dallas. Now 4 generations later 30 something's are buying houses next to the airport and bitching about noise...go figger.
 
As a long time ICW resident I can say the objection to boats is not the transients, It is the bums who anchor their semi derelict boats forever and come ashore to panhandle and cause problems.

The anchoring restrictions are coming about for the same reason park benches and restrooms have been removed from all your cities; a few a$$ holes ruin everything for decent people.
 
Mule said:
In the 1920's Love Field was built in Dallas. Now 4 generations later 30 something's are buying houses next to the airport and bitching about noise...go figger.
Click to expand...

That raises a very important point. I don't know how many of you have or plan to have waterfront residences, but here in Florida, the Realtors forget to mention that your waterfront is on a legally navigable waterway. Lord forbid that the public should know anything that may compromise "price". Buyers and renters of waterfront property need to be aware of the rights and risks concerning anything that borders their property, water as well as land.

Billyfeet, I embrace your point fully. If anyone doubts the ability of local and State governments to enforce unconstitutional, whimsical law or ordinances upon legally acting citizens, just take a look at the decades of abuse by the State of Virginia in confiscation of Radar detectors. But the senseless legal costs you point out are a part of the checks and balances that require the more sensible to battle the senseless. What I would like to see is that the legal costs become the burden of those that bring frivolous suits to clog our courts.
 
Our local basin in FL was converted from an open anchorage to a mooring field.

The result is that what formerly was an anchorage basin with eternally unattended deteorating boats and several sunk derelicts is now a popular transient mooring field with city maintained moorings, pump out boat service, dingy dock, access to shore side showers restrooms and laundry facilities all for $15 per night.

The bums are gone and responsible boaters are welcome, works for me.
 
Bayview, I just got off the phone with the Palm Beach County official who managed the Turtle Cove fill proposal. A very well informed and pleasant man. The project has been put on indefinite hold. Then I asked him about possibility of a mooring field with facilities like Boot Key, Stuart, Vero and your area. He was totally unaware of the current Florida State laws, the Mooring Field test period that has been extended, or that there was a time that the possibility to get on the list for a organized mooring field plan was offered. A missed opportunity for this area! I'm glad to hear that things have worked out well in your area.
 
bayview said:
Our local basin in FL was converted from an open anchorage to a mooring field.

The result is that what formerly was an anchorage basin with eternally unattended deteorating boats and several sunk derelicts is now a popular transient mooring field with city maintained moorings, pump out boat service, dingy dock, access to shore side showers restrooms and laundry facilities all for $15 per night.

The bums are gone and responsible boaters are welcome, works for me.
Click to expand...

Same in St, Augustine. If you are a Florida resident, you can be a live-aboard at the Salt Run Field, on a St Augustine Municipal Mooring for $1,663.20 per year (non-live aboard is $1,164.24). A non resident live-aboard is only ~$1,100 more per year. Since the mooring fields were established, the number of derelict boats has decreased and the water quality has improved with the free pump outs which are also free to the anchor outs if they ask. What a great deal IMHO.
 
Last edited:
Yikes. Our very nice mooring field in Nantucket Harbor does tend to keep out the derelicts... but at ~ $70/night for a 50' boat it isn't hard to imagine why!:eek: $15 bucks... what a bargain!

Dave
 
bayview said:
Our local basin in FL was converted from an open anchorage to a mooring field.

The result is that what formerly was an anchorage basin with eternally unattended deteorating boats and several sunk derelicts is now a popular transient mooring field with city maintained moorings, pump out boat service, dingy dock, access to shore side showers restrooms and laundry facilities all for $15 per night.

The bums are gone and responsible boaters are welcome, works for me.
Click to expand...

Look, maybe I am just tight, but $15 a night w/o a monthly, weekly is very, very high. I am in one of the best middle tier Marinas on the coast and including live aboard fee of $100 I am at $420 for a 40 foot slip. $15x30= $450. No docks, finger piers, land to buy. Just a heavy weight, some cable and a float + some public facilities and the laundry is self supporting by coin operated.
 
Mule said:
Look, maybe I am just tight, but $15 a night w/o a monthly, weekly is very, very high. I am in one of the best middle tier Marinas on the coast and including live aboard fee of $100 I am at $420 for a 40 foot slip. $15x30= $450. No docks, finger piers, land to buy. Just a heavy weight, some cable and a float + some public facilities and the laundry is self supporting by coin operated.
Click to expand...
But what does your marina charge per night for a transient slip?
 
Mule said:
Look, maybe I am just tight, but $15 a night w/o a monthly, weekly is very, very high. I am in one of the best middle tier Marinas on the coast and including live aboard fee of $100 I am at $420 for a 40 foot slip. $15x30= $450. No docks, finger piers, land to buy. Just a heavy weight, some cable and a float + some public facilities and the laundry is self supporting by coin operated.
Click to expand...

Obviously there is a significant difference between the rates and size of the various fields with St. Augustine being the lowest price and having annual rates and that becomes an important item the state does need to address in evaluating the pilot program. I haven't used the fields but I do consider the $450 per month to be high too. $15 a day is reasonable but then I translate that to something like $80/wk, $200/month, and $1800 per year. St. Augustine is less than that for residents and more for non-residents but not greatly out of line. Clearly St. Augustine is encouraging long term use while some others are only encouraging short term.
 
While mooring fields in the middle of prime territory downtown etc...are slightly palatable....

...having to pay to anchor for up to a week or so in a town's city limits seems to be outrageous in any shape or form.

Now...if the town provides amenities that you plan on taking advantage of...then pay as you go as long as it's a fair price.

We all have our thoughts on what anchoring to take a break and visit an area is...for some it may be as little as 2-3 nights...others it may be 30 gays or so. Either way...where does a town get off saying what it is right/wrong?

If you send a kid to school in a town and aren't paying property taxes one way or another...well...figure it out...don't just make anchoring illegal.

This issue is WAY smaller than some of the outrageous dipsy you know whats are making it...all everyone with a reasonable attitude can do is get involved wherever you can.
 
Ocean or river, the rules are the same. We own over a mile of the Jefferson River, here in SW Montana. Our deed is a homestead dating back to 1864. We pay the taxes for the hard ground UNDER the river, but of course not the water. There are are times that "drifters" coming down the river think the beaches along our part are public property. Some are so insistent, that I now carry a gun most of the time up here. My wife & I came across a couple that just wanted a rest & to eat lunch. We let them stay. I think one needs to play the hand dealt at the time. You cannot stop people from use public water. I don't think we should.
 
psneeld said:
...having to pay to anchor for up to a week or so in a town's city limits seems to be outrageous in any shape or form.
Click to expand...


There is an easy fix for that. Find other, less prime, accommodations. I think mooring fields are a very good compromise.
 
Tom.B said:
There is an easy fix for that. Find other, less prime, accommodations. I think mooring fields are a very good compromise.
Click to expand...

My first sentence explained that..I was just talking about anyplace nearby that dingy travel is possible but not outrageous....not prime but doable anchoring.

I would love for every nice little town to put in a safe mooring field for $15 bucks a night...not everyone can afford that but I can. If they did...then it wouldn't be such a struggle to go places and have to gamble there would be room. If there were tens of thousands of moorings available...maybe there wouldn't be such a problem.
 
I have no problem with $15 a night on a per night basis. The issue I have weekly, monthly.
 
Mule said:
I have no problem with $15 a night on a per night basis. The issue I have weekly, monthly.
Click to expand...

Move along. Move along.
 
The question is not the price of the city mooring , it is weather the city prohibits anchoring Outside the mooring field.

If the rest of the anchorage is open to transiting folks ,its no big deal to charge the lazy or inexperienced for convienance.
 
When we were in St Augustine this spring, there were boats anchored out beyond the mooring field. They still had access to the dinghy dock (I'm not sure if there was a fee involved or not). I do know that they had free pump outs it they asked.

We also anchored out in front of Fernandina Harbor Marina, which is a great anchorage. The dinghy dock was $3/day, with showers was $7/day and with the Captain's Lounge, $10/day. When went to pay just for the dinghy dock, they said, "Don't worry about it. Enjoy the town."

We also had a similar experience at Titusville. There are still friendly harbormasters and good deals out there. It's not all bad. :)
 
With due regards to the resident 'esquires' amongst us; It appears the issue is about landowners who have the money and 'influence' to buy votes in cities hall to try to enact this type of legislation. An unscrupulous Lawyer will take any case, as long as deep pockets pay the retainer!

It happened when I lived in Fla in the early 80's. (and was beaten down) It has happened several times on Cape Cod in the 90s and recently.

It does appear, even when the regulations are enacted, they eventually get thrown out, when they go to appeals court. But.... it costs $$$$$ Beaucoup Bucks to do this.

Someone earlier said: if a wealthy boat owner tallies up the money, it can be fought and won.

I have heard many arguments about 'Riparian Rights' with arguments trying to be made for both sides defense. Since I'm not a lawyer I cant say what is what. There seems to be a valid part about 'being able to 'use' the water in front of privately owned property.' But the blanket restrictions on others use is hard to pin down. Does anyone know a federal definition of Riparian rights?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

4
Hydraulic Anchor winch versus windlass
Replies
4
Views
902
4dfishing
4
O C Diver
2002 Cherubini Independence 45, Fort Myers, FL $350K
Replies
15
Views
3K
rslifkin
R
aviator7836
Mainship 34 Pilot - Anchor Suggestions
Replies
13
Views
2K
Warnercons
Warnercons
M
Heavy Weather - GB42
2 3
Replies
80
Views
7K
crowleykirk
C
mvweebles
For Rent: 36’ ICW Slip + Apt St Pete Beach FL. Nov-Jan. $3500/mo
Replies
3
Views
707
Barking Sands
Barking Sands

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom