FWC Derelict Enforcement Marathon

[rwidman]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

I'll raise my hand...

So the four boats dragged during the last hurricane. It's a shame that happen. If that happened to my boat It would be nice if folks helped get the boat refloated rather then bitch about the indignity of having to see someone else poor luck. But that's just me.

You read something in my post that I did not write. The boats have been there for months, perhaps years. No owners or occupants have been seen. For all intents, they were abandoned because disposing of them properly costs money.

A fifth boat that I did not mention is used occasionally and when it drifted because of the storm, someone came and put it back where it was.

[rwidman]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

............ No one wakes up and says gee I think I'll be a derelict, it sounds like fun.

But many folks wake up and say "I'm too tired to go look for a job today."

[rwidman]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

..................... People who want to live where they want as they want should be free to do as they please.

We are talking about people establishing a residence on public property (the waterways). Again, should people be allowed to park a trailer in the public park or square? The White House lawn?

[LakeSuperior]

FWIW, up here in the Great Lakes year around derelict live-aboards are rare to non-existent. Expecting 2 to 3 feet of ice and between 200 - 400 inches of lake effect snow this winter.

[Delancey]

43.8 million people in the US suffer from some form of mental illness. That's 1 in 5 people. Did ever occur to anyone that maybe some of the people in question deserve our sympathy rather than our scorn?

[18Bravo]

Follow the link for an excellent article that details the cost of a particular derelict vessel removal (M/Y RENATA) in Fort Lauderdale. For those that don't care to follow the link, the cost to taxpayers for the removal of RENATA was $44,957.77. Paid for by the city of Ft Lauderdale in June 2013.

SAGA OF THE RENATA Part III: How much did it cost & who pays for it - Lauderdale Isles Water Management District

FWC maintains a GIS map of "at risk" and derelict vessels. Link to it below. The interface is quirky, but you can search by county, region, etc.

https://public.myfwc.com/LE/ArrestNe...VesselMap.aspx

[Scout 30]

Originally Posted by Island Time O25

I first visited KW about 25 years ago precisely because it was cheap and funky. Now I visit every few years during the Fest. Wish I'd known about it in the 90s. And may be 2-3 times a year more when crewing on friends' boats either around Florida or on FL-New England deliveries with a friend who is a snowbird anchoring liveaboard in KW from Nov to April. So I am quite familiar with the local issues.

But IMO the discussion here lumps together 3 or 4 types of "derelicts". One type are the truly abandoned vessels which are just bobbing there waiting to either sink or cause damage to someone else's property. I don't think there is any argument among us as to what to do with those - haul them away to a land fill, sink them for reef making, burn them or wherever. There may be an argument who should pay for this but let's leave that argument for another time.

The second category are liveaboards who also commit various crimes against other persons or other persons' property. I do not think we are arguing to allow those people to stay put and certainly law enforcement should take appropriate steps to address these crimes and the perpetrators. But that is not "an anchoring issue" but a law enforcement one just as a criminal who happens to be driving RV is not an "RV issue".

Third category are liveaboards who are not visually pleasant to many (most?) but do not commit any crimes against persons or property although from time to time may be in technical violation of certain administrative rules and regs, some of which rules are being specifically designed to pressure those people out of the anchorages. These people and their situations I believe are and should be a part of CF discussion.

Fourth category would also be liveaboards with unappealing looking boats who do not commit any crimes and who do not receive any violation stickers, etc. And their only "crime" is that they do not look or act as some here think a proper boat and its owner should look and act.

Some here mix all four categories into one heap and argue against all four by producing examples from the first and second category. Others argue for a hands off attitude toward all four by giving examples from the fourth category. The truth lies somewhere in between. Certainly 1 and 2 should be swiftly dealt with by LEOs and other applicable local authorities. #3 - it depends and common sense should prevail on a case by case basis. And #4 definitely should be left alone and not bothered AT ALL as beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. And unlike a house owner, who is stuck with a junkyard neighbor next door and therefore this presumably mitigates the harshness and unfreedom of some of the zoning laws, a boat owner who is offended by the 60s hippie's boat and that boat owner's personal looks can (and should) simply move on and should not have a right to subject the "offending" party to move.

The most reasonable post so far. As far as I'm concerned if groups 1 & 2 are addressed the problem is solved.

[SURV69]

for sure, this was a big boat ... I'm sure there's a number of these.

But, my impression is that we're generally not talk such substantial boats, but rather, relatively small boats in the 30 feet range or so.

Another thing to ponder is the lack of action until after this boat had actually sank ... greatly increasing costs.

Derelict boats=poor owners=no available money=people who want to hide from authority ... if they weren't poor or mental, it's highly unlikely that the boats would either be there at all, or that the boats would be in such dis-repair.

I would say it's fair that a boat should be captained and that a "captain"(owner), should generally have full, or nearly full-time control of his/her boat. A short way of saying that there's an identifiable person who's responsible(rich or poor). This is the same as saying a boat should be able to serve it's captain sufficiently.

The biggest problem I see here, is not the issue of just rich or poor, but the issue of identifying an owner or person of responsibility ... a person who can be approached about legal issues with the boat. Otherwise the administrative issues slow to the crawl of a dead snail ... NOTHING can be done.

Another problem is if a boat costs $400 ... $500, or almost a $1000 dollar a foot to deal with ... SUNK, then wouldn't it be better to give an indigent person, who has no use for his boat, cannot fix his(or her), boat, and cannot pay associated fine, a $50 McDonald's card for signing the boat over to the state of Florida. The "invisible", owners might more freely show themselves if un-payable fines or threat of jail wasn't part of the bargain.

At the least then, the boat issue can be addressed and with an increase of action on truly derelict boats, a smoother running system can be set up, that might actually reduce the costs of settling the bulk of this problem.

FORGET trying to chase down indigent people to pay bills they can't afford ... forget jail time(at least, in many cases). MAYBE these indigent persons can be enticed to live in dormatories ... on site, where these boats finally meet their intended doom.

It's "pie in the sky", but if such a thing could work, we'd be 2 birds with one stone ... at least to a certain degree.

[SV Bacchus]

I have a friend in a supervisory position with FWC in SWFL and spoke with him about some of these issues.

'Most' FWC officers are really good people but as in any organization of this size there are some bad apples. They respect all peoples rights as citizens and tend to work with people and don't "get their jolly's" throwing people in jail. However, there are two areas in which they are adamant about enforcing: boater safety and conservation of Florida's natural resources.

A lot of vessels in the Keys are registered to someone 4 or 5 owners previous and they, FWC, simply can't locate who is now responsible. After a big hurricane, such as Wilma, the cost to the State, i.e. taxpayers, was in the millions for abandoned/sunk vessel cleanup, far more than in the budget from the slice out of registration fees. The present 'owner' simply walks away and sticks the State with the cleanup.

My friend also pointed out that there are a number of these 'owners' are in the Keys on "the lamb" (running from authority due to warrants) and don't want to speak with law enforcement. They are more concerned with arrest and being transported back to the jurisdiction issuing the warrant than they are a $250.00 fine.

So, let's talk about poor and mentally ill.

My friend said there are resources available for both categories of people and his officers have the appropriate contact information. If they don't, their dispatcher does. So poor you have no fuel to move your boat? Resources available to get you some (not much but enough to move to safety), can't eat? Resources are available to get you assistance with purchasing food. Are these resources abused by some? You betcha but for the folks who really need them they will try to help you get them.

Mentally wacked out to the point you shouldn't be on the boat? Yes, there are services available for those people as well and his officers help people access those services.

Do his officers harass boaters because their boat is ugly and doesn't fit the picture the rich and famous want? No, at least not to his knowledge and he better not (for the officer's sake) find out one does.

The majority of FWC officers are honest, good, hard-working people doing their job with a passion. They are there to help and assist as well take enforcement action. They are not the bad guys in the Florida derelict boat scenario.

Some will try to blast me for this post and that is OK, we can agree to disagree. I won't (most likely) respond as we all know you can never win a battle on the Net.

[18Bravo]

Originally Posted by SURV69

for sure, this was a big boat ... I'm sure there's a number of these.

But, my impression is that we're generally not talk such substantial boats, but rather, relatively small boats in the 30 feet range or so.

:

The majority of the vessels in the FWC derelict database are less than the 57' of RENATA, however, there are a number of larger vessels such as old shrimp/fish boats on the west coast of FL.

I don't want to get into "size matters" ;-) but sometimes it does, and sometimes in doesn't...when applied to derelicts that is. Towing a 45' floating hull to a disposal area is a much easier job than removing a partially beached 25' footer that is in pieces and full of sand. If you look at the RENATA case, you will see the salvage/tow fees are dwarfed by the disposal fees. Either way, it can get expensive quickly.

By the way, the RENATA case was not an FWC derelict vessel. It was handled by the city based on local ordinances and FL derelict regs. I replied to this thread because we are dealing with a RENATA situation at my dock. It involves a 42' sv that sank and was eventually refloated. It meets the FL derelict vessel definition. The vessel owner is out of state and being evasive. My landlord has been put in the loop of the penalty and payment process, and that will end up affecting all of us who rent docks here.

So aside from potential costs to taxpayers, I guarantee you that this particular derelict will ultimately cost each of us who rent docks here, either in new rules, new fees, or whatever. I can venture to say that the property owner is considering a termination of all dock rentals due to the derelict.

Ugly and/or dirty boats really don't bother me - abandoned derelicts do.

[brownoarsman]

Originally Posted by LakeSuperior

FWIW, up here in the Great Lakes year around derelict live-aboards are rare to non-existent. Expecting 2 to 3 feet of ice and between 200 - 400 inches of lake effect snow this winter.

Also keeps the tick problem down, I imagine!

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[tomfl]

Several other posts have noted that lots of folks commenting here have never been to BKH.

Anyone with BKH experience knows come 15 Nov (more or less) every ball will be taken. The waiting list will keep getting longer for a few months and then maybe around March some balls will be empty. Starting about July the local marinas will be offering dock space at reduced rates and maybe 1/3 of the balls will have boats on them.

Growing up in Miami in the 1950s/1960s I can remember places where you never saw a boat anchored that are so crowded it shocks me. This is the elephant in the room no one wants to talk about. There are simply way too many boats. Rich man's boats, normal man's boats, poor man's boats, and boats that by most folks idea should be scrapped.

I remember when an H28 was my dream boat. Why would a marina say a live aboard has to be 35 feet instead of only 30 (and soon it may be 40). Because they can charge for five or ten more feet. To make matters worse not only are the anchorages filled to the brim, so are marinas. Many marinas have a long waiting list for slips; if there is even a list you can get on.

Places that use to be marinas in South Florida are now being turned into hi rise condos. Even some of those rich persons mansions are being torn down to make way for high rise condos.

You can make up any funny name for it you want but the bottom line is there are simply too many people, and too many people with boats in Florida. When demand exceeds supply friction increases. This friction is in the form of increased prices and more government rules to reduce demand.

You can't violate the law of supply and demand.

[captain58sailin]

Actually, I was a vagrant except for the part about begging for income, I worked in fish plants and on charter boats, both in Alaska and Florida, I never asked for nor received a hand out from a private individual or from the government.

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by uncle stinkybob

another victim player? HA HA HA HA, if I don't agree with you, pull the victim card? must be out of poor cards?

I guess you weren't addressing it at me? Those two cards I don't play. Nether apply.

[SURV69]

Owners who allow renters with derelicts or who suffer from an unauthorized derelict are similar to people who buy property, only to find that the property is an old dump or old manufacturing plant that needs to be neutralized. The cost is bore by the land-owner and the land-owner hopes to recover from the person that actually caused the problem.

Problem is with derelicts, is that most often, the owner is also, so to speak, a derelict also.

Talk about mentality, laziness, old age, bad health, all mean nothing.

AND ... let me tell you something ... a person who has little money, even with governmental help with food or housing is STILL a person with very little money.

Government aid doesn't turn a poor soul into a rich soul(unless one's into politics), it just makes a poor soul a poor soul with better living conditions.

PLAIN & SIMPLE ... there is not, and for the most part, never will be a way to get someone with nearly nothing to pay for this problem ... YOU CAN'T MAKE IT HAPPEN.