Anchor Wars come to Georgia

[RT Firefly]

Greetings,
Mr. 99. Campaign contributions? Payola? Say it isn't so!

 

[JohnP]

Guess they got what they wanted from me. My take for GA is get through it as quickly as possible and if in doubt overnight at a Marina.

 

[FlyWright]

Mod note: Similar threads merged into one thread.

 

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

Oh that is what happened.... Thanks Mod..

 

[Group9]

Campaign contributions are probably what started these regulations, and those with money (power) encouraged candidates to go their way and regulate the waterways as they have. I suspect that what out-of state boaters spend in Georgia probably are nowhere near what the contributions would amount to...

Without a doubt. I worked for a public corruption unit in our state attorney general's office for several years.

I don't know how bad a cynic I was before I heard the undercover recording of a public official who was asked how you bring up bribery to a public official to get some legislation passed, saying, "Never say the word, 'bribe'. As long as we all call it 'campaign contributions', all of the time, we're fine. They can't do nothing. But, calling it a bribe will get people locked up.", but it was pretty bad after that.

 

[Njlarry]

Any abandoned piling is a man made structure and a marine leo is the most literal Leo. Don't people from Georgia ever cruise and anchor?

 

[BandB]

Any abandoned piling is a man made structure and a marine leo is the most literal Leo. Don't people from Georgia ever cruise and anchor?

Georgia is like many other states that one must keep in mind, the legislature meets in Atlanta, far from any coast. The vast majority of residents and of legislators are not on a coast and know nothing about cruising.

Even the Commissioner of Natural Resources is in Atlanta.

Similarly in FL, laws and rules come from Tallahassee, nearly 500 miles from South Florida and with no similarities whatsoever.

So, no, the vast majority of people in GA never cruise or anchor. Coastal boating is not a big industry in the state either by comparison.

 

[menzies]

Here you go, and there is a link to an interactive map at the bottom. Interestingly that link is "Liveaboards," indicating the target rather than active cruiser community (and yes, I know there is a cross over).

If you click on the Camden County map and the Cumberland Island anchorage it is indicated as not affected - though there are three docks - the ranger dock, ferry dock and the dock for Greyfield Inn.

https://coastalgadnr.org/new-coastal-boating-laws-take-effect-georgia

https://coastalgadnr.org/sites/default/files/crd/pdf/Liveaboards/Camden.pdf

 

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

Here you go, and there is a link to an interactive map at the bottom. Interestingly that link is "Liveaboards," indicating the target rather than active cruiser community (and yes, I know there is a cross over).

If you click on the Camden County map and the Cumberland Island anchorage it is indicated as not affected - though there are three docks - the ranger dock, ferry dock and the dock for Greyfield Inn.

https://coastalgadnr.org/new-coastal-boating-laws-take-effect-georgia

https://coastalgadnr.org/sites/default/files/crd/pdf/Liveaboards/Camden.pdf

Thanks for posting. Two items:

1. Purchase a range finder. They are cheap and you can mark the 1000 feet.

2. I see how the State DNR has skirted the issue of a No Dump Zone. They recognize that the State does not have the authority to establish NDZ in federally recognized waterways. The way around this is to make sure you are required to disable the boat's waste systems. The only one allowed is a pump-out.

Question: By reading the plain language each boat owner in GA is no longer allowed to have a 3-way valves or macerater overboard pumps, just a pump-out port.

 

[menzies]

Thanks for posting. Two items:

1. Purchase a range finder. They are cheap and you can mark the 1000 feet.

2. I see how the State DNR has skirted the issue of a No Dump Zone. They recognize that the State does not have the authority to establish NDZ in federally recognized waterways. The way around this is to make sure you are required to disable the boat's waste systems. The only one allowed is a pump-out.

Question: By reading the plain language each boat owner in GA is no longer allowed to have a 3-way valves or macerater overboard pumps, just a pump-out port.

No, they have basically reiterated the existing federal/CG rule that the through hull has to be disabled - by removing the handle, a lock, or a non-removable cable tie. They also state that you can go offshore past three miles and pump out - again existing rules.

 

[psneeld]

Not sure how that will work out for GA.... mandating that boat systems be changed that are legal in federal law.

 

[twistedtree]

Not sure how that will work out for GA.... mandating that boat systems be changed that are legal in federal law.

It will be interesting. Vermont and New York have done similarly WRT lake Champlain and I think it is a blatant contradiction of federal law. But until someone challenges it.....

 

[Dougcole]

Georgia is like many other states that one must keep in mind, the legislature meets in Atlanta, far from any coast. The vast majority of residents and of legislators are not on a coast and know nothing about cruising.

Even the Commissioner of Natural Resources is in Atlanta.

Similarly in FL, laws and rules come from Tallahassee, nearly 500 miles from South Florida and with no similarities whatsoever.

So, no, the vast majority of people in GA never cruise or anchor. Coastal boating is not a big industry in the state either by comparison.

Yeah but the people who make the decisions about the laws come from all over the state, many of them from South Florida. They just meet in Tallahassee for part of the year to generally make decisions that are good for them personally but bad for the rest of us. It's not like the people of Tallahassee get to make all the decisions for the rest of the state. If it was that way, given all the trouble you South Floridians cause, we would kick all of y'all out of our state.



Just kidding.

 

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

No, they have basically reiterated the existing federal/CG rule that the through hull has to be disabled - by removing the handle, a lock, or a non-removable cable tie. They also state that you can go offshore past three miles and pump out - again existing rules.

Existing federal/USCG rules state a lock, removal of the handle etc is ONLY for federal waters that are NDZ. See post # 135

To clarify I am talking about the establishment of a NDZ. The State can apply for a NDZ through the EPA for federal waters. Once the EPA agrees, then (Like Puget Sound) can mandate all boats have a holding tank when operating within the NDZ.

Not sure how that will work out for GA.... mandating that boat systems be changed that are legal in federal law.

Happened in Puget Sound....

 

[mcboatface]

Georgia is like many other states that one must keep in mind, the legislature meets in Atlanta, far from any coast. The vast majority of residents and of legislators are not on a coast and know nothing about cruising.



Even the Commissioner of Natural Resources is in Atlanta.



Similarly in FL, laws and rules come from Tallahassee, nearly 500 miles from South Florida and with no similarities whatsoever.



So, no, the vast majority of people in GA never cruise or anchor. Coastal boating is not a big industry in the state either by comparison.

Right, except in this case, our very own state rep, Don Hogan, was a primary sponsor of this turd of a bill. Don lives here on St Simons, so no excuse of being Atlanta centric for him.

When I called him to discuss this delightful piece of “legislation” he told me many things, including the tidbit that he had been a boater for 25 years.

It was an interesting conversation that I will post more about when not trying to type on my iPad. Suffice it to say, the lack of common sense, or of a single iota of intelligence in the drafting of HB 201 was beyond astonishing. There are many days I am convinced that the entire Georgia legislature couldn’t solve a third grade math problem.

 

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

Right, except in this case, our very own state rep, Don Hogan, was a primary sponsor of this turd of a bill. Don lives here on St Simons, so no excuse of being Atlanta centric for him.

When I called him to discuss this delightful piece of “legislation” he told me many things, including the tidbit that he had been a boater for 25 years.

It was an interesting conversation that I will post more about when not trying to type on my iPad. Suffice it to say, the lack of common sense, or of a single iota of intelligence in the drafting of HB 201 was beyond astonishing. There are many days I am convinced that the entire Georgia legislature couldn’t solve a third grade math problem.

Well who in GA will test the new law in Court?

 

[catalinajack]

And this tells me no amount of protest and letter writing and e-mailing will get these regulations changed. Obviously, this guy was legislating for his own benefit. Here is what needs to be done given that the State of Georgia is infringing on Federal law with respect to regulating navigable waters.

A suit should be filed in a U.S. District Court seeking a temporary injunction against implementing the regulations pending a hearing and ruling whether the State may regulate Federal waters without the express permission of Uncle Sam combined with a request for a permanent injunction.

As far as the NDZ goes with respect to treatment systems, I do not have one but, if I did, I would treat and release with impunity. Get boarded. Run down, close the valve, and attach a wire tie. Or, divert to your holding tank while in Georgia. In my case, my through hulls are lockable anyway. The law is pretty much unenforceable in practice anyway. Most of the anchorages we are talking about are relatively remote. Even if a complaint were received from a shore neighbor, what LEO is going to embark on a miles long trip late in the day to make good the complaint only to have to make a long return trip in the dark? Next morning, weigh anchor and be gone.

They want logbook entries for pumpouts? Make one up in a notebook. Done.

Right, except in this case, our very own state rep, Don Hogan, was a primary sponsor of this turd of a bill. Don lives here on St Simons, so no excuse of being Atlanta centric for him.

When I called him to discuss this delightful piece of “legislation” he told me many things, including the tidbit that he had been a boater for 25 years.

It was an interesting conversation that I will post more about when not trying to type on my iPad. Suffice it to say, the lack of common sense, or of a single iota of intelligence in the drafting of HB 201 was beyond astonishing. There are many days I am convinced that the entire Georgia legislature couldn’t solve a third grade math problem.

 

[psneeld]

It will be interesting. Vermont and New York have done similarly WRT lake Champlain and I think it is a blatant contradiction of federal law. But until someone challenges it.....

Pretty sure Lake Chanplain is a designated NDZ...which at that point local legislation can get squirrely.


https://www.epa.gov/vessels-marinas-and-ports/no-discharge-zones-ndzs-state#ny

 

[BandB]

Yeah but the people who make the decisions about the laws come from all over the state, many of them from South Florida. They just meet in Tallahassee for part of the year to generally make decisions that are good for them personally but bad for the rest of us. It's not like the people of Tallahassee get to make all the decisions for the rest of the state. If it was that way, given all the trouble you South Floridians cause, we would kick all of y'all out of our state.



Just kidding.

I wish we could secede from the state. We seldom seem to have influence on laws passed in Tallahassee.

 

[BandB]

Well who in GA will test the new law in Court?

Someone will try and they'll likely lose. If they win, it will only be one narrow part of the law so a quick change and law remains in place. Best chance of changing it is with GA Resources and with the legislature. You politely say, "I realize your intentions were good but I don't think you had the insight needed from coastal boaters, so let's talk."

 

[psneeld]

Someone will try and they'll likely lose. If they win, it will only be one narrow part of the law so a quick change and law remains in place. Best chance of changing it is with GA Resources and with the legislature. You politely say, "I realize your intentions were good but I don't think you had the insight needed from coastal boaters, so let's talk."

Pretty sure that talk came and went last summer.


A coalition of major boating organizations had talks with the interested parties....some things were dropped from the original proposal.


The only real troublesome spots I see is if they proceed with mandatory anchoring zones ....which doesn't sound like what their administrators were saying last summer and the sticky point on treating their waters like a NDZ before a NDZ has been federally approved.

 

[catalinajack]

No boat is required to have a holding tank regardless of operating in a NDZ.

Existing federal/USCG rules state a lock, removal of the handle etc is ONLY for federal waters that are NDZ. See post # 135

To clarify I am talking about the establishment of a NDZ. The State can apply for a NDZ through the EPA for federal waters. Once the EPA agrees, then (Like Puget Sound) can mandate all boats have a holding tank when operating within the NDZ.



Happened in Puget Sound....

 

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

No boat is required to have a holding tank regardless of operating in a NDZ.

No tank, no heads or the heads are required to be locked down. Bottom line no waste overboard

 

[psneeld]

No boat is required to have a holding tank regardless of operating in a NDZ.

It has to have a USCG approved type 1,2 or 3 MSD if the boat has a toilet onboard. 3 being a holding tank (unless the toilet is a self contained porta potty) and 1/2 being treatment devices.


If the overboard discharge is disabled so is the type 1/2 MSD.



"Vessel Operators: No person may operate any Vessel having an installed toilet facility unless it is equipped with an installed and operable MSD of a type approved by the U.S. Coast Guard to meet the requirements of 33 CFR Part 159."


https://www.dco.uscg.mil/Our-Organi...ineering-Division/Mechanical-Engineering/msd/


I guess along with porta potties come composting or incinerator toilets.

 

[localboy]

In Puget Sound we just dump overboard. If stopped, we claim to be homeless junkies. They have impunity up here...

 

[slowgoesit]

It has to have a USCG approved type 1,2 or 3 MSD if the boat has a toilet onboard. 3 being a holding tank (unless the toilet is a self contained porta potty) and 1/2 being treatment devices.


If the overboard discharge is disabled so is the type 1/2 MSD.



"Vessel Operators: No person may operate any Vessel having an installed toilet facility unless it is equipped with an installed and operable MSD of a type approved by the U.S. Coast Guard to meet the requirements of 33 CFR Part 159."


https://www.dco.uscg.mil/Our-Organi...ineering-Division/Mechanical-Engineering/msd/


I guess along with porta potties come composting or incinerator toilets.

Okay, since you brought it up, if we had a composting toilet where does that fit into the law? I don't believe that they are "approved devices", so where does that leave the boater with a composting toilet? In our "boat to be" we envision changing the rear (master's) head to a composting toilet. We would probably leave all the ancillary stuff there (tank/hosing etc) to allow a standard toilet to be added back at a later date if required. The front toilet would be a fresh water flush w/ holding tank. So if we are just using the composting toilet, we lock the Y valve and we're good? And keep a log of when/if we pump out the front tank, correct?

 

[GH41]

Okay, since you brought it up, if we had a composting toilet where does that fit into the law? I don't believe that they are "approved devices", so where does that leave the boater with a composting toilet? In our "boat to be" we envision changing the rear (master's) head to a composting toilet. We would probably leave all the ancillary stuff there (tank/hosing etc) to allow a standard toilet to be added back at a later date if required. The front toilet would be a fresh water flush w/ holding tank. So if we are just using the composting toilet, we lock the Y valve and we're good? And keep a log of when/if we pump out the front tank, correct?

Not trying to be an ass but what kind of person wants a composting toilet? Is it the same person who puts soiled toilet paper in the trashcan by the toilet? Both sound disgusting to me! Maybe do like Greta T's crew... Do it in a bucket and when it gets full pour it into a biodegradable bag and throw it in the ocean. How much sense does that make to a person of average intelligence?

 

[mvweebles]

Okay, since you brought it up, if we had a composting toilet where does that fit into the law? I don't believe that they are "approved devices", so where does that leave the boater with a composting toilet? In our "boat to be" we envision changing the rear (master's) head to a composting toilet. We would probably leave all the ancillary stuff there (tank/hosing etc) to allow a standard toilet to be added back at a later date if required. The front toilet would be a fresh water flush w/ holding tank. So if we are just using the composting toilet, we lock the Y valve and we're good? And keep a log of when/if we pump out the front tank, correct?

From EPA.gov - Composting toilets are a Type 3 MSD (holding tank)

——---------------------

Composting toilets may be considered a Type III marine sanitation device by the U.S. Coast Guard. Type III devices that store sewage and flushwater at ambient air pressure and temperature are not subject to formal certification by the U.S. Coast Guard, as long as the device complies with the following requirement: "Be designed to prevent the overboard discharge of treated or untreated sewage or any waste derived from sewage (Type III)." Please note that most composting toilets have not been examined by the U.S. Coast Guard. Instead, in most cases, the device manufacturer attests that the device meets the aforementioned requirements.

The contents of both the liquid waste container and the compost chamber must be properly disposed of such that no overboard discharge occurs.

 

[psneeld]

Not trying to be an ass but what kind of person wants a composting toilet? Is it the same person who puts soiled toilet paper in the trashcan by the toilet? Both sound disgusting to me! Maybe do like Greta T's crew... Do it in a bucket and when it gets full pour it into a biodegradable bag and throw it in the ocean. How much sense does that make to a person of average intelligence?

My...my....

 

[Steve91T]

Just north of the FL/GA line. Southern part of Cumberland island. Pretty sure this is still a legal Anchorage.

Don’t think this helps this thread at all...just saying we just anchored last night in GA and it was CV awesome and we didn’t get thrown in jail....yet.