POLL - Anchor-outs vs Cruisers - should permanent anchor-outs be restricted in ICW/AICW anchorages?

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

Florida - should longterm/permanent anchor-outs in one spot be restricted?

  • Yes, A 30-60 day limit (out of 180) is a reasonable compromise for cruisers and neighbors alike.

    Votes: 22 84.6%

  • No, It's public water - anyone should be able to use it anytime for as long as they want

    Votes: 4 15.4%
  • Total voters
    26
  • This poll will close: .
Captain_Michael said:
When grants don't come to remove abandoned boats, guess where it comes from? Taxes.
Click to expand...
Where do you think the grants come from? Different pot of taxes (state or federal vs community). Our town (Madeira Beach FL) had a dozen boats removed earlier this year - mostly 30-35 footers, a few smaller, one or two larger. Worked out to just under $20k/each.
 
psneeld said:
From Florida FWC.......

Florida boat registration funds support various programs, including the Florida Boating Improvement Program (FBIP), which funds local projects for boating-related infrastructure such as channel markings, public boat ramps, and derelict vessel removal.
Click to expand...

.......and their budget comes from the Florida State General Fund and other grants.

Budget

Budget
myfwc.com myfwc.com

1726776466386.png
 
Captain_Michael said:
I'm with Hippocampus. We have a huge problem with abandoned boats, most of which went through the process of being a live aboard, then a run down live aboard, then a derelcit, and finally abandoned. Often the owners are from out of state or cannot be traced, thus the wreck ends up a liability. Even if onwers can be traced, unless they are local a supoena cannot be enforced to make them do anything unless the vessel obstructs navigagtion. Most do not. One township got a $150,000 grant to dispose of abandoned boats. Went as far as removing 10. 10! most were 25-30 foot vessels. $15K a pop to have them hauled onto a barge and taken to a place where they could be chain-sawed, then hauled to the landfill.

When grants don't come to remove abandoned boats, guess where it comes from? Taxes.
Click to expand...
Agreed, but grants are just other peoples’ taxes, so we still foot the bill for bad actors.
 
mvweebles said:
.......and their budget comes from the Florida State General Fund and other grants.

Budget

Budget
myfwc.com myfwc.com

View attachment 158348
Click to expand...
I had heard somewhere that $1 dollar or similar out of every registration goes to at least some of the derelict boat removal. Sure if it all goes into one pot it's hard to tell..... but if they take a certain percentage of registration money and ear market for derelict removal........
 
Last edited:
psneeld said:
I had heard somewhere that $1 dollar or similar out of every registration goes to at least some of the derelict boat removal. Sure if it all goes into one pot it's hard to tell..... but if they take a certain percentage of registration money and ear market for derelict removal........
Click to expand...

I think you're right. Or there was a proposal to do that. Sort of sucks that the good actors pay for the bad actors, but at least the people who enjoy the water are paying to clean it up.

Peter
 
There is an important difference between spending a few months at anchor in a warm and beautiful place and squatting on public land. Are not virtually all of the "eyesore" types squatting with no intention of moving on or keeping up their vessel?

Right or wrong, virtually all public land has some limit on how long you can stay. BLM, National Forest, National and State Parks all have limits. Why would water be any different?
 
I agree something has to be done, and to me some sort of time limit seems most reasonable.

BUT... I don't like to see the waste disposal issue used as a false "cause" in itself. That problem can be addressed simply by enforcing existing laws. Going down that path reminds me of NIMBYs who suddenly get concerned about environmental issues or native burying grounds or whatever when someone proposes building something which they don't want in their sight lines.

Let's be real about the core problem: People staking out a permanent claim on a patch of water which should be managed by the state for the benefit of all citizens.
 
CaptTom said:
I agree something has to be done, and to me some sort of time limit seems most reasonable.

BUT... I don't like to see the waste disposal issue used as a false "cause" in itself. That problem can be addressed simply by enforcing existing laws. Going down that path reminds me of NIMBYs who suddenly get concerned about environmental issues or native burying grounds or whatever when someone proposes building something which they don't want in their sight lines.

Let's be real about the core problem: People staking out a permanent claim on a patch of water which should be managed by the state for the benefit of all citizens.
Click to expand...

I agree - the waste issue is a false flag argument. The rich condo owners didn't give a damn about water quality until they bought an expensive place and saw PoS boats out there. And they don't care what happens 500 yards up or down, only the "waste" from the boats they see.

I'm probably closer to this issue than most. I still don't fully understand why it's okay for people to squat on public lands. If I tried to do this in a national forest, I'd be forcibly removed. But we live in a world where small threats of lawsuits can constipate small governments. Believe it or not, those squatters may not have much, but they have enough to hire an attorney.

I hope y'all have expressed yourselves in the poll that started this thread. I obviously have my opinion. But I respect others. Please make your voice heard.

Peter
 
The carrot and the stick.

In Carolina Beach, they have a very nice protected mooring field. In addition to nice bath houses at one dock, dinghy docks in another area to go to the grocery store and restaurants, they also have a dock for pumpouts and filling water tanks. From memory (which can be faulty), this dock is for pump and water only with a significant penalty for anything else. While it's theoretically for the mooring field occupants, I'm sure those anchoring out aren't prevented from using it (no attendant and a very reasonable harbor master).

It seems to me, that there are areas of Florida that could have a pumpout dock with water and dumpsters. Lots of pluses to this for those living on the minimum who can appreciate the generosity. For those unwilling to be civilized and follow the basic rules of a civilized society, crush them like a cockroach.

Ted
 
The BLM lands I looked at on the RV trip I am currently on...3.5 months from Fl to Seattle area to Yellowstone to FL all had 2 week stary limits.

The sanitation issue is actually a good tool for state, county and local LE officials as it is probable cause at the federal level/law. Where and how they apply it can get involved....but it is a lead in to action.

As far as squatting on "water" or using a public resource...that's not a simple subject. One can argue that commercial fishing is the profit from a public resource (overly simplified I know).

I would be OK if the same time limits and fees applied to anchoring that the Governments (after they divide up the waterways) charge people using Gov't lands. Enforcement will be a trick though in many areas. The crowded anchorages and town anchorages full of derelicts...not so much if the laws had teeth and didn't drive LE departments crazy.
 
I'm sure a free public pump out dock would be a boon to low income folks.

But not if their boat don't run and can't make it to the dock.
 
O C Diver said:
The carrot and the stick.

In Carolina Beach, they have a very nice protected mooring field. In addition to nice bath houses at one dock, dinghy docks in another area to go to the grocery store and restaurants, they also have a dock for pumpouts and filling water tanks. From memory (which can be faulty), this dock is for pump and water only with a significant penalty for anything else. While it's theoretically for the mooring field occupants, I'm sure those anchoring out aren't prevented from using it (no attendant and a very reasonable harbor master).

It seems to me, that there are areas of Florida that could have a pumpout dock with water and dumpsters. Lots of pluses to this for those living on the minimum who can appreciate the generosity. For those unwilling to be civilized and follow the basic rules of a civilized society, crush them like a cockroach.

Ted
Click to expand...
I agree 100% - incentives and displacement. My town - Madeira Beach - happens to have a municipal marina so has the business infrastructure to do a bunch of things. There's plenty of room for a sizeable mooring field of probably 25-40 moorings. And there's already a good place for a town dinghy dock that would be an easy walk to many restaurants and a trolley that runs along Gulf Blvd, the 25-mile beach road that connects Clearwater Beach (north) to Pass-a-Grille (south). And there's now an express bus to downtown St Petersburg - for around $3/person, you could be at the Dali Museum in downtown St Pete in 45-mins. Town has no interest.

I don't know why there are so few mooring fields on the ICW. They seem to work well along the Atlantic seaboard area and New England of course.

Peter
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom