If I live aboard, why shouldn’t I call myself a live-aboard?

If we live on our boat, what’s wrong with referring to ourselves as live-aboards? What’s so special about “full-time cruiser” that it’s now politically correct and the preferred term?

Anybody can be a full time cruiser but you have to pass a test and get a special license to be a live-aboard.

Have you paid the special assessment Live-Aboard Tax?

Seriously, in some states the term liveaboard has a certain status ....more reserved for non-moving water residences.

Google the term as it relates to Florida and Georgia...those I remember having special laws pertaining to them.

It has been suggested if you are truly a cruiser and not just a water rat, you might like cruiser more than liveaboard if authorities ask.

I’m with you...why worry about it?

I'd give a pass on anybody who assigned prestige to a self descriptive title.

It's the tax collectors and government institutions regulating "liveaboards" that I don't want to deal with if their description of me is a full time cruiser.

It's neither ego or esteem or anything, just hassel avoidance.

HopCar said:

Anybody can be a full time cruiser but you have to pass a test and get a special license to be a live-aboard.

Have you paid the special assessment Live-Aboard Tax?

Click to expand...

I thought that being an antique, it was not necessary.

On our waters (Columbia River above Bonneville Dam and the Snake River) liveaboards are not permitted. The waters are "owned" by the Corps of Engineers and they figure that liveaboards have converted public waters to their own personal use, and that's not allowed. So there are no liveaboards. There are some people who spend a LOT of time on their boats but they also keep a shoreside address. I suspect some of those addresses are those companies that provide mail boxes.

In Florida. If you are a live-aboard you may be subject to certain anchor restrictions. If you are a full-time Cruiser you can anchor for as long as you wish. That is how the law is written

Its also an insurance deal. A lot of the insurance carriers wont insure “Liveaboard” but have no issue with the term “full time cruiser’s”.
Go figure.

Woodland Hills said:

If we live on our boat, what’s wrong with referring to ourselves as live-aboards? What’s so special about “full-time cruiser” that it’s now politically correct and the preferred term?

Click to expand...

Wifey B: As others have said, many interpret "live aboard" as rather stationary and many locales and marinas have restrictions. Often those are tied to number of days there, but just using the word subjects you to falling under the "live aboard" laws. Full time cruiser implies just here for a bit. Still subject to live aboard laws but often overlooked or otherwise just allowed leeway.

Better to be a "transient" cruiser than a liveaboard. Here, liveaboards are limited to ten percent of berths, but that does not include transients who can stay for months.

Some areas simply refuse to allow 'Live Aboards' because they are poor quality citizens, not paying taxes or too low taxes and are automatically assumed to be messy or some such excuse.

As a cruiser or transient you are often welcomed as contributing to the local economy.

Yeah, I know, overstated maybe but over the years I have seen people booted out of marinas for calling themselves live aboards and being foolish or careless enough to let on and/or use the marina as their postal address.

They were often better citizens than the land based boat owners. I know several of them , when they heard a noise at night and flipped on a few lights, scared thieves off. No confrontations but just the light was enough to scare the up to no goods away. Not to mention they have helped keep clean the walkways and waterways inside the marina and are often the early warning system in the case of a marina fire.

So go ahead and be a live aboard but be a bit circumspect about who you let on to unless L.A. are actually allowed at your marina.

"It's neither ego or esteem or anything, just hassel avoidance."

"In Florida. If you are a live-aboard you may be subject to certain anchor restrictions. If you are a full-time Cruiser you can anchor for as long as you wish. That is how the law is written.

"Navigation " is a fed protected right . So anchoring is legal in most places , even off fancy FL 18,000 sq ft ego box homes.

Some localities attempt to limit the length of time a vessel can stay anchored in one spot , different courts have had different rulings of "navigation".

Crusty Chief said:

Its also an insurance deal. A lot of the insurance carriers wont insure “Liveaboard” but have no issue with the term “full time cruiser’s”.
Go figure.

Click to expand...

BINGO!!!! My previous insurance company in Seattle would not insure live-aboards. They viewed them as dirty, unreliable insurance risks. If they found out you were a live-aboard they cancel your policy.

C lectric said:

Some areas simply refuse to allow 'Live Aboards' because they are poor quality citizens, not paying taxes or too low taxes and are automatically assumed to be messy or some such excuse.

As a cruiser or transient you are often welcomed as contributing to the local economy.

.

Click to expand...

In the Portland OR area a "transient" better describes a class of homeless folks where their boats barley float. Sausalito Bay CA has the same issue. They show up on public docks stealing items off of boats, not clean aka they smell, near pump out etc.........

markpierce said:

Better to be a "transient" cruiser than a liveaboard. Here, liveaboards are limited to ten percent of berths, but that does not include transients who can stay for months.

Click to expand...

For some reason within the past 5 years or so Live aboard are viewed as undesirables.....

FF said:

"Navigation " is a fed protected right . So anchoring is legal in most places , even off fancy FL 18,000 sq ft ego box homes.

Some localities attempt to limit the length of time a vessel can stay anchored in one spot , different courts have had different rulings of "navigation".

Click to expand...

It would be interesting to see this challenged in a "real" court on the terms of navigation. For instance, the Columbia River in the PNW. The State of Washington claims ownership to the middle of the river and Oregon has the same. They claim the dirt under the river belongs to the people. Yet the river is a federal navigable water way.

Even more interesting are municipalities have enacted laws that forbid a boat to anchor in a certain area, mostly high dollar properties. Again Sausalito CA and Florida comes to mind.

As a discloser I am a full time cruiser...

Interesting subject.

The liveaboard next to me at my prior marina used to throw all his metal food tins in the water and other things too. Metal will eventually rust away. It was shocking to see at a super low tide one day what was littered around that sailboat. I pulled up an old battery from there, I doubt it accidently fell in. I took it home was going to recycle it, they are worth $10, but someone stole it from my driveway.

FF said:

"It's neither ego or esteem or anything, just hassel avoidance."

"In Florida. If you are a live-aboard you may be subject to certain anchor restrictions. If you are a full-time Cruiser you can anchor for as long as you wish. That is how the law is written.

"Navigation " is a fed protected right . So anchoring is legal in most places , even off fancy FL 18,000 sq ft ego box homes.

Some localities attempt to limit the length of time a vessel can stay anchored in one spot , different courts have had different rulings of "navigation".

Click to expand...

This is an interesting subject, so I will start a new thread on this, so it doesn't hijack the Live Aboard subject.

http://www.trawlerforum.com/forums/s58/anchorage-restrictions-41723.html

Woodland Hills said:

If we live on our boat, what’s wrong with referring to ourselves as liveaboards? What’s so special about “full-time cruiser” that it’s now politically correct and the preferred term?

Click to expand...

Here's the difference between full time cruisers and liveaboards. If I may channel Jeff Foxworthy here...

If you have a deck covered in house plants, you MAY be a live-aboard.

If you leave your boat everyday to go to work, you MAY be a live-aboard.

If your anchor chain has 4 inches of weed on it, you MAY be a live-aboard.

If it would take you over an hour to get underway just to secure loose items, you MAY be a live-aboard.

If your engine hasn't been run in over 6 months, you MAY be a live-aboard.

If your permanent home address matches where your boat is, you MAY be a live-aboard.

If there is ice forming on your deck and you haven't moved south yet, you MAY be a live-aboard.

If your bottom has not been cleaned in over a year, you MAY be a live-aboard.

And finally, If the F*!@ing State of Florida comes knocking on your hull to collect their pound of flesh cause you've been there for 3 months and you still have your home state's registration displayed, you MAY be a live-aboard.

WayneDana said:

And finally, If the F*!@ing State of Florida comes knocking on your hull to collect their pound of flesh cause you've been there for 3 months and you still have your home state's registration displayed, you MAY be a live-aboard.

Click to expand...

And why do we get so upset at them enforcing a well known law which is not different than nearly every other state, except some states allow only 60 days? GA, SC and others have the same law and do the same thing. We curse a state for enforcing registration requirements? FL registration is inexpensive too.