New Florida Anchoring Restrictions

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by Shanachie

The idea that there were 580 derelict vessels in the state is laughable. Depending on the definition, it's way more than that. If you count immovable boats being used as shelter, it's into the many thousands.

I can see there really only being 580 boats that are in a condition needing to be removed. I even can see that number being high. I have say there there are less boats needing removal between Jacksonville and Lake Worth this past April than there was same time last year. But I have also been to the Keys 5 times the last few years and know the number is concentrated down there.

This number is not the same number as derelict boats as there are lots of those sad lonely boats around that no one has visited in years. Cruisers mostly are annoyed by those because so many are right in the middle of a good anchoring spot we would have liked to have used.

[Statistical]

Originally Posted by GreenWave

The cost to remove would be som much lower if they were done BEFORE the boat has sunk and disintegrated.

Yup and that is a the big problem. There is really nothing to prevent abandoned or rundown squatter boats from eventually sinking. Then once they sink they cost an utter fortune to get rid of.

Of course this annoys all the locals who are the ones who get stuck with the cost or watching an eyesore half sunk boat slowly fall apart for the next decade. They then consider all boaters the same.

You don't need any insurance, maintenance budget, or inspection to "operate" a boat on public waters. That means any shantytown boat that can limp its way into some anchorage is legal until it sinks at which point the owner is gone.

To anyone thinking this doesn't affect them because they properly maintain their boats it absolutely does. As locals gets pissed off they push for regulations making it tougher on all boaters even those who properly maintain their boats.

[Nautes]

I suspect that they mean to eliminate many boats.

[flightlead404]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

I can see there really only being 580 boats that are in a condition needing to be removed. I even can see that number being high. I have say there there are less boats needing removal between Jacksonville and Lake Worth this past April than there was same time last year. But I have also been to the Keys 5 times the last few years and know the number is concentrated down there.

This number is not the same number as derelict boats as there are lots of those sad lonely boats around that no one has visited in years. Cruisers mostly are annoyed by those because so many are right in the middle of a good anchoring spot we would have liked to have used.

This sounds right to me. I also observed fewer derelict boats particularly around places like the Harris Saxon Bridge, Halifax river around Daytona (although some were obviously now up on the shore rather than floating). There were a couple less in some of the smaller ones, but a couple more in say the anchorage just south of the Fort Pierce North Bridge. In fact one derelict that Ian probably put on the shore is now back floating, damaged, and full of crap.

I just hope it continues. Heck if they just get rid of the true derelicts, without doing anything about the long term moored boats with people living on them, I'd be happy. Oh, and the boats that landowners moor in the middle of the anchorage solely with the intent to prevent cruisers anchoring there (that really steams my oysters!).

[Shanachie]

You have to understand the size of Florida before estimating how many derelict and neglected boats there are.


Our coastline is 1,350 miles long, with hundreds of potential anchorages large and small along the ICW, rivers and bays. Most of them have one, several or many derelict/neglected boats.


If 1 percent on Florida's 1 million registered vessels are derelict, that's 10,000 vessels.

[BG305]

Here are a few that can be seen from US1 on your way into the keys.

[sailorboy1]

Yes the sunk and on shore boats will end up orange stickered and on the removal list, in time.

But in those pictures are a number of derelict boats that will not be on the list. Even though no one is on them or maintaining them. Since they are legally anchored and derelict they will sit there till they sink or break loose of the anchor that has been twisting for years. - These boats are the real problem.

[motion30]

a law passed several years ago that gave the FWC power to demand a propulsion test on any boat they deemed at risk. In my observation it has been rarely requested to demonstrate propulsion. That would take care of all these derelicts, but this has not been enforced . I have little faith that they are able to enforce the new anchoring law

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by motion30

a law passed several years ago that gave the FWC power to demand a propulsion test on any boat they deemed at risk. In my observation it has been rarely requested to demonstrate propulsion. That would take care of all these derelicts, but this has not been enforced . I have little faith that they are able to enforce the new anchoring law

How do you do that if no one is on the boat to get the "demand"? This is in the new law also and will only really be a "thing" in a few locations.

[motion30]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

How do you do that if no one is on the boat to get the "demand"? This is in the new law also and will only really be a "thing" in a few locations.

I don't really know the answer to that but I would imagine after several attempts and no one is present it could be tagged and abandoned boat. Or they leave a notice on the boat saying call this number and schedule your test. If no response then again an abandoned boat

[Statistical]

Originally Posted by motion30

I don't really know the answer to that but I would imagine after several attempts and no one is present it could be tagged and abandoned boat. Or they leave a notice on the boat saying call this number and schedule your test. If no response then again an abandoned boat

Did the previously law say they could just declare it an abandoned boat and tow it away.

That is largely what the new law is trying to ensure. Abandoned boats that are still floating and can be towed are relatively cheap. Declare it abandoned because it hasn't moved, tow it, haul it out, put it in a boat graveway. If the owner ever shows up charge them costs involved. If they don't it never sunk which is a good think. Any boats with economic value auction then off after declared abandoned. The ones that don't strip and crush them.

Once a boat sinks the costs increase by a magnitude or more and the owner who is just gone with the wind. We will see how well it works but the goal needs to be to get abandoned and un seaworthy boats out of the water before they sink and end up costing tens of thousands of dollars each to remove.

[GreenWave]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

Yes the sunk and on shore boats will end up orange stickered and on the removal list, in time.

But in those pictures are a number of derelict boats that will not be on the list. Even though no one is on them or maintaining them. Since they are legally anchored and derelict they will sit there till they sink or break loose of the anchor that has been twisting for years. - These boats are the real problem.

I just dont get this since if you leave your car parked in the freeway for more than a few days they won’t at it and then tow it.

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by GreenWave

I just dont get this since if you leave your car parked in the freeway for more than a few days they won’t at it and then tow it.

I bet that is mostly because when a car gets towed there is a place to take it to and after a while when no one comes to pay the tow and storage bill it is worth something as scrap. Meanwhile where do you tow a boat to??? I rarely see a Florida derelict boat with a current registration sticker on it, so probably no one even knows who owns it to issue a ticket etc. to.

[Statistical]

Originally Posted by GreenWave

I just dont get this since if you leave your car parked in the freeway for more than a few days they won’t at it and then tow it.

The big difference is you are allowed to park a boat in public water for an extended period of time. Once it sinks though it costs an absolute fortune to remove. If towing a derilict car costs $10K to $50K+ we would see a lot junkers littering the highway.

Laws need to ensure the boat can be removed before it sinks. In the past they largely relied on personal responsibility but with in some cases boats being used as zero maintenance one step above homeless camp residence that isn't going to work. The boat will eventually sink and then it will cost taxpayers a fortune to remove it.

That is the bulk of the problem. There is no requirement to have insurance, there is no requirement to have a maintenance budget, there is no requirement to have inspections or proof of any maintenance or that the vessel is even seaworthy. There is no requirement of even having an engine. So people float a boat on its last legs to a spot, never move, eventually it sinks, they disapear and the taxpayer is looking at $10k+ to remove the derelict. No multiply that by thousands of boats and hundreds more sinking every year.

[CaptTom]

Originally Posted by Statistical

The big difference is you are allowed to park a boat in public water for an extended period of time...

This is why I reluctantly have to agree that some sort of anchoring time limit is inevitable. I know I'll get some push-back on this. I also know that in some places, living permanently at anchor is an accepted way of life. I would hope some accommodation can be made in those places. Maybe a permitting process with some equitable way of assigning long-term moorings.

A time limit makes some sense if you argue that anchoring is part of the protected right of navigation. Setting up permanent residence at anchor isn't navigating, hence, no intrinsic right to do so. Especially if it interferes with people legitimately navigating.

As romantic as the Bohemian lifestyle of the permanent live-aboard anchorage seems, it's not practical anywhere that anchorage space is a limited resource. It quickly becomes a "tragedy of the commons" issue.