Florida Anchoring limits heating up

TONTOROSS said:

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.

Click to expand...

Last century there was a landowner in CO trying to prevent paddle boats off his river/land. He owned the land under the water and did not like the constant trespassing on his land. Not sure whatever happened to his case but it does seems like after many years it was decided. I just can't remember the decision.

We own land and while we do not have frequent trespass issues we do have problems every year or so. Some $%^&*( piece of %^&*( just dumped some trash near our gate. The %^&* lazy, good for nothing %^&*( threw the trash into down slope into the woods. He did this on a Friday and I did not see the trash until Monday morning when it started to ran for a few days. By the time I could clear a trail to the trash, it had been at least 5 days so the garbage was rather ripe. If the ^&*( son of a ^%&*( had just left the garbage at the gate it would have been easier since I was going to the dump on Monday morning when I saw his waste. If the trash had not been so ripe I as going to go through the trash and return it to sender.

The $%^&*() guy that did this was most likely working on a neighbors house. However, in the past we have had "neighbors" dump yard waste and used cat scat on our land. One twit dumped trash on the land behind us which took more effort than taking the trash to the dump where he could have dumped for FREE. The dump is right behind the only two grocery stores for 20 miles so the ^%&*()_ lazy ^&*() could easily have taken the trash to the dump when getting groceries instead of spending all of the time he did to dump in the woods.

There are ^&*()&*()^%$$% on land and they don't change when they get a boat.

The abandoned boat problem can easily be solved if the state wants too. There are laws in place to deal with abandoned cars and the same legal process could be used with derelict boats. Given how much FLA makes off of boat registration and the boat use tax, the state can afford to remove derelict boats.

The derelict boat issue is just a red herring to prohibit boats from anchoring.

Later,
Dan

skidgear said:

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.

Click to expand...

Vote accordingly? You kidding me? Both parties candidates are owned by these billionaires and/or corporations. No matter who wins-THEY still win. Nothing but an illusion of a difference. The corporate owned media pooh poohs 3rd party or independent candidates if they acknowledge them at all! Look what happened to Ron Paul.
Here in Florida where this topic is about, we have Governor elections coming up. The incumbent runs ads of total bs, about how bad his challenger is without (of course) any mention that he WAS a Republican too when he was last Governor. They just change hats when convenient. Now there IS a great 3rd party candidate running, who IS for us citizens, who isn't a puppet of Big Sugar (ruined Everglades and Indian River Lagoon), developers who will gladly pave over paradise, and against the plan to totally devastate the East Coast with plans to run 52 trains a day on 100 year old tracks through cities, communities, State Parks, Nature Preserves to haul freight for China. But you'll never hear that name. Your given the choice between two Governors, one a Republican now, and the other a Republican then.
yeah voting makes a difference. Dynamite makes a difference!

I can assure you that It is not the nice condition transients that people objet to, they actually add to the look of an area. It is the bums who permanently anchor derelict boats in virtually every sheltered area.

In my west FL area we had four wonderful anchorages that eventually became over run with derelicts. Law makes it difficult to establish ownership and remove them.
The mooring fields laws have greatly improved these still well used anchorages and cleaned them up.

Anyone remember the Boot Key anchorage that was like a sewer pond ? Or the junk boats off Dinner Key Miami?

cappy208 said:

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?

Click to expand...

I am not a lawyer but to best of my knowledge, there is no common definition of riparian rights. Riparian rights mostly evolved from common law but because of the history of the US, deeds and property rights were originally granted by European governments for most of the east and southeast coasts. State governments also ended up granting property rights with various grants of riparian rights. What you will find is riparian rights vary all over the place depending locality even within a state or a county.

FL and probably other states claimed all submerged land not specifically deeded to someone. Most submerged land in the state is now owned by the state.

Donsan said:

I am not a lawyer but to best of my knowledge, there is no common definition of riparian rights. Riparian rights mostly evolved from common law but because of the history of the US, deeds and property rights were originally granted by European governments for most of the east and southeast coasts. State governments also ended up granting property rights with various grants of riparian rights. What you will find is riparian rights vary all over the place depending locality even within a state or a county.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately...I think this is accurate....

Larry M said:

George you're right. Try anchoring within the Seattle City Limits on Lake Union, Lake Washington or the water front. San Diego also has major anchoring restrictions. It's not just an East Coast and Florida issue.

Click to expand...

mmm never realized this. Good point. So how can Seattle legally restrict a navigable water way? So long as I am not anchored in a shipping lane, I should be allowed to anchor anywhere I see fit. Derelicts should be dealt with and I agree we shouldn’t legislate instead of enforcing current laws.

But then again I have seen Richardson Bay just inside the Golden Gate bridge and wonder how some of thoise boats float.

There are legitimate reasons to limit anchoring in areas...

Anchoring your boat behind someones house and destroying their view is NOT one of them.

I can only hope reasonable people prevail in these cases.

The lawyer who overturned the Marco Island rule worked for free. The Krogen 42 owner who forced the issue by anchoring off Marco Island and refusing to leave, knew he would be liable for the fine if the case was lost.

Many individuals and lawyers have put themselves at risk to test certain laws. I salute them.

Amen!

Bay Pelican said:

The lawyer who overturned the Marco Island rule worked for free. The Krogen 42 owner who forced the issue by anchoring off Marco Island and refusing to leave, knew he would be liable for the fine if the case was lost.

Many individuals and lawyers have put themselves at risk to test certain laws. I salute them.

Click to expand...

The KK 42 owner was also a Marco Island land resident.

pilothouse king said:

Vote accordingly? You kidding me? Both parties candidates are owned by these billionaires and/or corporations. No matter who wins-THEY still win. Nothing but an illusion of a difference. The corporate owned media pooh poohs 3rd party or independent candidates if they acknowledge them at all! Look what happened to Ron Paul.
Here in Florida where this topic is about, we have Governor elections coming up. The incumbent runs ads of total bs, about how bad his challenger is without (of course) any mention that he WAS a Republican too when he was last Governor. They just change hats when convenient. Now there IS a great 3rd party candidate running, who IS for us citizens, who isn't a puppet of Big Sugar (ruined Everglades and Indian River Lagoon), developers who will gladly pave over paradise, and against the plan to totally devastate the East Coast with plans to run 52 trains a day on 100 year old tracks through cities, communities, State Parks, Nature Preserves to haul freight for China. But you'll never hear that name. Your given the choice between two Governors, one a Republican now, and the other a Republican then.
yeah voting makes a difference. Dynamite makes a difference!

Click to expand...

So I guess you're in favor of filling in a previously dredged area, seeding the bottom with grass, and closing a popular anchorage...

Greetings,
Mr. sg. "So I guess you're in favor..." How did you get THAT out of Mr. pk's post? What I understood him to say was no matter who you voted for, of the TWO (corrupt?) choices, paradise would still be paved over.

RT My original post was aimed at Federal elections as that is where the funding for most environmental marine projects originate. My latest question was of the be careful what you ask for variety. I'm familiar with current half billion dollar bird sanctuary project on lower Green Bay that is a very nice home for sea gulls and cormorants...which are eating the fish in the Great Lakes faster than they can be replentished (at taxpayer expense).

RT Firefly said:

Greetings,
Mr. sg. "So I guess you're in favor..." How did you get THAT out of Mr. pk's post? What I understood him to say was no matter who you voted for, of the TWO (corrupt?) choices, paradise would still be paved over.

Click to expand...

I think his point was basically that we've got two choices....one guy with a tan and one without a tan.

healhustler said:

I think his point was basically that we've got two choices....one guy with a tan and one without a tan.

Click to expand...

Hell a choice, a self serving slick Politican or a thieving, un indited criminal.

RT Firefly said:

Greetings,
Mr. sg. "So I guess you're in favor..." How did you get THAT out of Mr. pk's post? What I understood him to say was no matter who you voted for, of the TWO (corrupt?) choices, paradise would still be paved over.

Click to expand...

Greetings, Mr. RT. I am sorry to inform you but paradise was paved over a long time ago. But I do confess, the paving marches on.

I wasn't speaking just about Florida. I was stating that the corporations who own this country, along with the media which many actually believe is reporting news (vs being nothing but big pharma conduits) have done a wonderful job of keeping the illusion of any difference in the two party system alive and well. No matter which of the two candidates they present us, are already chosen-the corporations already own them and its "business as usual" afterwards.

It just so happens that the upcoming Florida Governor elections illustrate this so well because despite the two candidates slinging mud at each other for being different, they're not. One is a Republican now, and one was a Republican when he was last Governor, immediately prior to the current one. I'm a registered Republican, but voted for Ron Paul, and now support his son despite him having a poodlehead haircut. I wanted to be clear about that in case anybody thought I was a Democrat. Where I come from that's now the ultimate insult. "I don't care what you said about my momma, but did you just mouth that to me?!! Just wanted to clear that up, plus they don't buy yachts.

Neither candidates running now give two shits about Florida.
The media pooh poohs independents and they are never given press. There IS a independent running named Adrian Wyllie from Libertarian party who IS exactly who Florida residents need, but like Ron Paul, you are told "don't waste your vote", which is why so many young people don't bother voting.
I said "dynamite can make a change".
I think all those ugly Mcmansions waterfront homes are cancers and blights on the environment and are blocking the views of boaters, not the other way around.

How do you know it's Fall in Florida? The license plates start changing colors..

Greetings,
Mr. D. Oh, I'm well aware of the paving that has occurred and is ongoing. You see this fellow owns a paving company, his brother owns a cement plant, his cousins "import" foreign workers under the table, his nephew is the county sheriff, his sister's husband is a judge and his other brother owns the local prison. His gran'daddy made it big during the war selling cheap goods at inflated prices to the military and his daddy, although he DID spend two weeks in the slammer for embezzlement got to keep ALL the $$ he stole from the county government (Rumor is about $17M).
How can you blame him for complaining when you park in front of his house on his canal and enjoy yourself? After all, he does go to church on Sundays and everything is his.

Blake, you are a grumpier old man than I am. And that is a pretty high bar to hit my friend! You called the current race for Governor spot on. Ask Charlie Crist what he is for and the only honest answer is "Charlie Christ". Always has been and always will be, very consistent on that but nothing else! Rick Scott kicked off his "Florida is Open for Business" term by trying to Privatize Johnathan Dickinson State Park with a golf course and Mega RV Park! The only reason I am here is that I like a warm January.......

Larry M said:

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..

Click to expand...

If you live on your boat and it's moored in Florida wouldn't you be a Florida resident?

Donsan said:

Just for the record, my father bought our ICW lot in 1952 for the paltry sum of $2000 but a nice chunk of change back then. At the time, anchoring on the Indian River lagoon by live aboards was literally unheard of. So were derelict boats. I may have misled about the deed to the property. What it really said is if the water were to recede, we would have ownership of the exposed land to the point it reaches the channel.

Derelict boats are a big issue and it has grown over the years. 99% of what I have seen are not live aboards. They are just people who are abandoning their boats or want free storage. These boats usually get destroyed when a tropical storm comes along and the state has had difficulty tracking down owners, going through legal processes and then collecting payments from the owner....if possible. I have found boats in various conditions aground in my front yard.

Click to expand...

Then the state of Florida needs to deal with the problem and not punish everybody else. There is always that 10% that screws it up for the rest of us.

windmill29130 said:

Then the state of Florida needs to deal with the problem and not punish everybody else.

Click to expand...

Lots of luck with that.

If you don't live in Florida, you can't vote in Florida, all you can do is stay away and not spend your money there. People who take boats to Florida and anchor as opposed to staying in marinas aren't bringing in enough money to make a difference.

I think a time limit is a reasonable response to the problem and I would suggest a week.

Downstream from my marina used to be a beautiful place. Then a sailboat moved in. Then another. Then a couple of POS boats. Now there's one upside down in the marsh and pieces of it are floating and getting caught on the marina docks.

You can't just park your car on public property and leave it for months at a time or live in it. Why is a boat different?

rwidman said:

Lots of luck with that.


You can't just park your car on public property and leave it for months at a time or live in it. Why is a boat different?

Click to expand...

Because it's a lot easier and cheap to tow a car. What are you gonna do with a boat?

rwidman said:

People who take boats to Florida and anchor as opposed to staying in marinas aren't bringing in enough money to make a difference.

I think a time limit is a reasonable response to the problem and I would suggest a week.

Downstream from my marina used to be a beautiful place. Then a sailboat moved in. Then another. Then a couple of POS boats. Now there's one upside down in the marsh and pieces of it are floating and getting caught on the marina docks.

You can't just park your car on public property and leave it for months at a time or live in it. Why is a boat different?

Click to expand...

The scenario you described downstream from your marina is exactly what has happened and continues to happen all over FL.

Most of the anchored boats spend little money other than for food which has no state sales tax, pay no FL property taxes and pay boat registration fees to another state but expect the FL taxpayer to provide dinghy docking, water, law and order, sanitation (we all know they don't dump their holding tanks in the waterways because it is against the law....sarcasm intended) and other services. These issues affect all Floridians and not just waterfront property owners.

Would think fairness dictates these out of state boaters pay a fair share of the costs they impose on the FL taxpayer.

Donsan said:

The scenario you described downstream from your marina is exactly what has happened and continues to happen all over FL.

Most of the anchored boats spend little money other than for food which has no state sales tax, pay no FL property taxes and pay boat registration fees to another state but expect the FL taxpayer to provide dinghy docking, water, law and order, sanitation (we all know they don't dump their holding tanks in the waterways because it is against the law....sarcasm intended) and other services. These issues affect all Floridians and not just waterfront property owners.

Would think fairness dictates these out of state boaters pay a fair share of the costs they impose on the FL taxpayer.

Click to expand...

Be real careful when you say out of state boaters should be more involved with taxes ...for those that cruise though Florida from some states may pay a boatload of federal taxes that go to helping Florida and very little to their home state and boating.

Know much about this legislation???

American Sportfishing Association

Wallop-Breaux monies and fishing license sales revenue account for the majority of funding for state fisheries management and access programs for anglers and boaters. The Wallop-Breaux Fund currently provides approximately $450 million per year for fisheries management and research; fishing and boating access facilities such as docks, piers, and boat ramps; and education and safety programs for anglers and boaters.

If Florida legislators can't figure it out...and build FREE docks for transient boaters to tie up to in FL waters...maybe it's time to get new legislators and not look to others that may be paying more than their fair share except in your interpretation.

psneeld said:

Know much about this legislation???

American Sportfishing Association

Wallop-Breaux monies and fishing license sales revenue account for the majority of funding for state fisheries management and access programs for anglers and boaters. The Wallop-Breaux Fund currently provides approximately $450 million per year for fisheries management and research; fishing and boating access facilities such as docks, piers, and boat ramps; and education and safety programs for anglers and boaters.

If Florida legislators can't figure it out...and build FREE docks for transient boaters to tie up to in FL waters...maybe it's time to get new legislators and not look to others that may be paying more than their fair share except in your interpretation.

Click to expand...

Know nothing about it but from what I can figure out from your link, it is a Federal program which applies to ALL states. And as usual with Federal funding, it seems to come with strings attached at the expense of FL taxpayers. Not quite sure what the point is.

All those anchored boats! A great opportunity for an anchor efficiency survey.

Donsan said:

Know nothing about it but from what I can figure out from your link, it is a Federal program which applies to ALL states. And as usual with Federal funding, it seems to come with strings attached at the expense of FL taxpayers. Not quite sure what the point is.

Click to expand...

Not sure why you think it comes with strings attached to FL residents...my experience is that if a guy from N. Dakota owns a trawler and spends a bazillion dollars on it...a lot of the tax money gets spent where "boating is"...sure the law looks to say it's spread equitably but for the guy who spends a lot in a state that doesn't rate as many dollars...maybe he gets equality back in a place like FL and he gets some bang back from his tax dollars...

I can't say for sure anymore than you can say an anchoring transient is bleeding Fl taxpayers dry.

BruceK said:

All those anchored boats! A great opportunity for an anchor efficiency survey.

Click to expand...

I wonder what type of anchor those boats have that been there 4 or 5 years. I want one of those on my boat.