Are Liveaboards Unwanted? Disliked? All over Everywhere?

[Wrong]

Originally Posted by Blue Crab

We don't need no more stinkin laws. Enforcement of existing regs for specific cases would do the job.

You haven't said where you're located or if your a liveaboard. So, knowing which 'existing regs for specific cases' you're referring to isn't possible.

I can say without a doubt 'existing regs' supposedly affecting Sausalito, whether federal, state or local ordinances, are ineffective. Consequently Richardson Bay is an anarchists dream, with a handfull folks primarily interested in self enrichment at the expense of equal public access and use. They want things to remain unchanged so they can sell dollar boats and inappropriately sized boats like runabouts rather than dingies to newcomers, many of whom will abandon the boat after experiencing their first winter storm. At least one diver has installed illegal moorings over the years, either for sale or rent. Others rent boats to the newcomers. There is no justification for continuing a situation where 3/4 of boats in the bay are simply stored or abandoned in various states of disrepair.

Where are you and which existing regs are you referring to?

[Terra Nova]

It would be better if do-gooder's minded their own business. We have more than enough laws, now. And way more enforcement than we know how to use effectively.

[Wrong]

Originally Posted by Terra Nova

It would be better if do-gooder's minded their own business.

What's a "do-gooder" and how does their business differ from yours?

We have more than enough laws, now.

Specifically please. Which laws are you referring to?

And way more enforcement than we know how to use effectively.

This may be the case in your location, but insufficient funding for enforcement of existing Sausalito ordinances is a major source of the problem here. Obviously, enforcement is going to be an important component for consideration and funding here in Sausalito as plans to build a mooring field go forward.

[oldragbaggers]

Originally Posted by sailnow2011

An easy solution would be to not allow boats with a value of less then $2000 to anchor, anywhere. Sorry day sailors, get a trailer

That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. And how do we establish this arbitrary $2000 value? Would everyone be required to carry a copy of a recent survey or appraisal at all times? There are 20' boats that are worth well in excess of that, and there are 40' boats that aren't worth the dynamite it would take to blow them out of the water. So now we would need a whole new layer of government officials charged with keeping track of the value of everything that floats and imposing another expense and hardship on every boat owner for some process they would need to go through (and pay for) for the purpose of establishing the value of their boat.

And who are big boat owners to think that their right to anchor is any more valid than that of a guy with an 18 footer that wants to go drop the hook and enjoy a peaceful weekend?

Good grief almighty. Does it never end?

[Group9]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

Oh I agree, we have too many laws. Live and let live works for me.

Yep, but there is a large contingent, who is absolutely sure, that we are always just one law away from nirvana!

[Wrong]

Originally Posted by oldragbaggers

That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. And how do we establish this arbitrary $2000 value? Would everyone be required to carry a copy of a recent survey or appraisal at all times? There are 20' boats that are worth well in excess of that, and there are 40' boats that aren't worth the dynamite it would take to blow them out of the water. So now we would need a whole new layer of government officials charged with keeping track of the value of everything that floats and imposing another expense and hardship on every boat owner for some process they would need to go through (and pay for) for the purpose of establishing the value of their boat.

And who are big boat owners to think that their right to anchor is any more valid than that of a guy with an 18 footer that wants to go drop the hook and enjoy a peaceful weekend?

Good grief almighty. Does it never end?

Absolutely correct.

At one time in America you had to be a landowner in order to vote.

While applying boat value as a standard against which boaters are permitted or prohibited from access to anchorages is unworkable, minimum length rules used by marinas indirectly discriminate in the same way.

I believe requiring boaters to actually own the boat they live on before being allowed on municipally installed and maintained moorings or anchorages is a good thing. I prevents anyone motivated by the lure of profit from renting boats to others. The downside of a rental agreement is neither the owner or renter has any real incentive to keep the boat in good repair. There is also a high probability unrented boats will simply clog bays, such as is the case in Sausalito. It takes very little $ to obtain a boat one intends to rent, and very little commitment toward upkeep and repair.

[Hudson Force]

Originally Posted by Wrong

You haven't said where you're located or if your a liveaboard. So, knowing which 'existing regs for specific cases' you're referring to isn't possible. ....................

This location issue seems to be very important and not just in the US. I've seen posts here speaking of the regulations limiting living aboard in Sydney.

It seems like the US has four completely different regions where liveaboard regulations are strikingly different.

The Northeast US seems to have little regulation or opportunity because of the harsh winters. People are not attempting to live on marginal boats for low income housing. Some marinas provide for year 'round living aboard, but not many.

The Southeast US has huge areas of easy protected anchoring and plenty of marinas accepting liveaboards. Georgia has regulated living aboard, but there is a permitting procedure. Florida has experimented with controlling anchoring in a few areas, but anchoring and liveaboard slips are easy to find.

I know least about the Pacific Northwest, but we have had many posting here that seem to be living aboard there without difficulty.

California seems to be the most difficult area for living aboard. Not only does most of the coast have little protection, but regulations seem to come from all levels of government affecting where, how long a term, how long the boat, in what condition and in what percentage concentration liveaboards are allowed.

Some have suggested that livingaboard is more highly regulated in the US than other countries, but I think this is only from the view of California.

[Wrong]

Originally Posted by Hudson Force

This location issue seems to be very important and not just in the US. I've seen posts here speaking of the regulations limiting living aboard in Sydney.

It seems like the US has four completely different regions where liveaboard regulations are strikingly different.

The Northeast US seems to have little regulation or opportunity because of the harsh winters. People are not attempting to live on marginal boats for low income housing. Some marinas provide for year 'round living aboard, but not many.

The Southeast US has huge areas of easy protected anchoring and plenty of marinas accepting liveaboards. Georgia has regulated living aboard, but there is a permitting procedure. Florida has experimented with controlling anchoring in a few areas, but anchoring and liveaboard slips are easy to find.

Your understanding of the liveaboard/anchoring situation in the U.S. is pretty accurate. I'd add though that seasonally occuring hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico area contribute to the character of relationships between boaters, marinas and the authorities. Many marinas in recent years have closed permanently following substantial damage from hurricanes. This is particularly true along the South Gulf coast which includes Texas, Louisiana, Mississipi, Alabama and Florida's panhandle areas. Economic recovery from the 'canes, compounded by the most recent world wide economic meltdown has been slow. Consequently marina charges have remained relatively low. Anchorages, where they occur along this coast are rarely convenient to services, so do not attract many liveaboards. Finally, if you've ever heard anything about law enforcement and 'the good 'ol boy system in this area, you'd be right to assume any effort on their part to discourage living aboard at anchor is going to be effective, mostly low key and rarely attract the attention of the press.

I know least about the Pacific Northwest, but we have had many posting here that seem to be living aboard there without difficulty.

Winter conditions invariably discourage the development of liveaboard 'communities' comprised of boats at anchor. Marinas often have years long waiting lists for people wanting a slip. If their intention is to live aboard they must apply for permission but only after they have a slip. Then it's another multiple years wait in a long que of folks wanting the same thing. Percentage of liveaboards to slips applies here too. I've done both up there. Lived aboard moving between anchorages as weather required during the warm months. Sneak aboarded in a marina for more than a year before being called out and can tell you living aboard in the winter up there is not easy.

California seems to be the most difficult area for living aboard. Not only does most of the coast have little protection, but regulations seem to come from all levels of government affecting where, how long a term, how long the boat, in what condition and in what percentage concentration liveaboards are allowed.

Some have suggested that livingaboard is more highly regulated in the US than other countries, but I think this is only from the view of California.

California is the most problematic because it has everything and too many people competing for limited ground. Anchorages are only able to safely and comfortably hold so many boats. Toss in the homeless folks taking refuge on poorly maintained dollar boats and the brew becomes toxic. In steps the authorities trying to bring some semblance of order, and the corresponding push back has led to closings and anchoring restrictions. It is truly a sad state of affairs in California for those of us who remember when...

[arsenelupiga]

Originally Posted by Wrong

California is the most problematic because it has everything and too many people competing for limited ground. Anchorages are only able to safely and comfortably hold so many boats. Toss in the homeless folks taking refuge on poorly maintained dollar boats and the brew becomes toxic. In steps the authorities trying to bring some semblance of order, and the corresponding push back has led to closings and anchoring restrictions. It is truly a sad state of affairs in California for those of us who remember when...

California is the most problematic because the whole state is on government support. In return they are asked to create jobs, to ease burden. They create jobs with regulation, regulation,regulation. One of these is to not allow people living on boats, to force them to borrow and buy property to create jobs.

not going to change for better.

[sailorchic34]

Originally Posted by Wrong

There is no justification for continuing a situation where 3/4 of boats in the bay are simply stored or abandoned in various states of disrepair.

Hum. Gee it seems that about 1/2 the boats have someone living on them. I know two people who are out there, both good people on good well kept boats. Yes 20-30% are abandoned or junky. But I've never had an issue finding a place to drop the hook for a few days. Sausalito is just a bit to busy/noisy for my tastes.

BTW passed your boat on the mooring near the fuel dock a few times over the last few months. I did not see you on it...

[Wrong]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

Hum. Gee it seems that about 1/2 the boats have someone living on them. I know two people who are out there, both good people on good well kept boats. Yes 20-30% are abandoned or junky. But I've never had an issue finding a place to drop the hook for a few days. Sausalito is just a bit to busy/noisy for my tastes.

BTW passed your boat on the mooring near the fuel dock a few times over the last few months. I did not see you on it...

My source for the 75% figure is the RBRA, so you may wish to enlighten them with your superior knowledge.

You know two 'good' people 'out there' on good, well kept boats? My guess is there are more than just two. And my concern is not with people 'on boats', which I presume you mean are living on the boats. My concern is for those boats of questionable origin, ownership, varying conditions of disrepair and with nobody living aboard. They are just there, taking up space until 'rescued' by the Coast Guard after dragging in a storm or they sink.

Insofar as anchoring opportunities in Sausalito are concerned, you can take whatever level of risk you wish. My experience and expectations of what constitutes a safe, unencumbered anchorage may not coincide with yours. In fact, probably not.

If you are implying I do not live on my boat because you have not seen me on board "a few times" over the course of a couple of months, try before 05:00 and after 16:00 any time. Maybe we can chew on this over a cup of java...

[Hudson Force]

Originally Posted by Wrong

................
..................... Finally, if you've ever heard anything about law enforcement and 'the good 'ol boy system in this area, you'd be right to assume any effort on their part to discourage living aboard at anchor is going to be effective, mostly low key and rarely attract the attention of the press. ........................

I like your added and accurate information about the economic impact of the severe hurricanes in the Gulf area; however, I would put forth that this characterization of the "good ol' boy" law enforcement in the South is a total myth. I am not saying that it isn't true, but it's not exclusive. It's everywhere,- take a look at the history of Chicago politics. The political favoritism of those with a better standing in the community is universal. If you want to call it "the good ol' boy" system, it's true in Iceland, tribal Amazonia and California.

[sailorchic34]

Originally Posted by Wrong

My source for the 75% figure is the RBRA, so you may wish to enlighten them with your superior knowledge.

Gee doesn't the RBRA think all anchored/moored boats are infill and need to go. Thing is they are counting the boats empty when they go by during the day, when the boat folks are off to land for work or whatever. So your boat would be counted as empty too. That was the point I was making.

Most folks on the shore think all the anchored boats need to go and that I disagree with. There have always been a lot of boat anchored off Sausalito, Since Sausalito was founded. They have been cleaning up some of the really bad boats as a see a few going year after year. Though I've seen many that are in the same location as eight years ago too.

I figured you were there, Just pulling your leg a bit.

Myself I only go there a few times a year to get fuel or drop off or pick up somebody, or get flares at WM.

[Wrong]

Originally Posted by Hudson Force

I like your added and accurate information about the economic impact of the severe hurricanes in the Gulf area; however, I would put forth that this characterization of the "good ol' boy" law enforcement in the South is a total myth. I am not saying that it isn't true, but it's not exclusive. It's everywhere,- take a look at the history of Chicago politics. The political favoritism of those with a better standing in the community is universal. If you want to call it "the good ol' boy" system, it's true in Iceland, tribal Amazonia and California.

You are of course correct regarding the 'good 'ol boy system being almost universal. But I've got first hand experience in being 'dealt with' by the anything but mythical southern 'good 'ol boy system. A comprehensive report was not my objective...

[Wrong]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

Gee doesn't the RBRA think all anchored/moored boats are infill and need to go. Thing is they are counting the boats empty when they go by during the day, when the boat folks are off to land for work or whatever. So your boat would be counted as empty too. That was the point I was making.

Over the last year or so the RBRA has been invoved in an effort to objectify which boats are abandoned or for a variety of reasons not claimed by their owners. The objective has been to encourage owners to bring boat registration current. Those boats with expired registration, and I mean registration that expired four or more years ago are subject to seizure and disposal if owners do not respond. Some boat owners simply do not transfer ownership and register boats obtained primarily for resale. There's a thriving business in this arena. In some cases you'll see boats rafted alongside one another for the same purpose. So, it's a kind of cat & mouse game with these people always trying to keep one step ahead of RBRA. And, how much have they to lose having spent only $1 each on the boats? But there's movement afoot to greatly decrease the time from 'months' to 30 days necessary to provide notice to miscreant owners and dispose of these boats.

I don't believe the RBRA really cares if anyone is on a boat or not. So, there's been no attempt to determine if they're lived upon. There are boats - as you say - that have been in the same location for eight years. How many of those are obviously not being cared for, are most likely abandoned or of questionable origin and ownership?

The real question is how to stem the flow of boats into Richardson Bay, protect people like your friends who live on good boats and eliminate the omnipresent problems dragging boats cause in Sausalito and surrounding communities.

You may not agree, but there is an ongoing process to implement changes around which the centerpiece is a port constructed and maintained mooring field. There will also be a managed anchorage, with controls necessary to prevent the proliferation of illegally installed moorings. Lots more.

Most folks on the shore think all the anchored boats need to go and that I disagree with.

Some folks. But if you were in attendance at the last two RBRA meetings, you'd begin to think otherwise.

There have always been a lot of boat anchored off Sausalito, Since Sausalito was founded. They have been cleaning up some of the really bad boats as a see a few going year after year. Though I've seen many that are in the same location as eight years ago too.

An often mentioned point in recent RBRA meetings is that Richardson Bay anchor outs are part of Sausalito tradition. And something they see worth preserving.

I figured you were there, Just pulling your leg a bit.

No worry.

Myself I only go there a few times a year to get fuel or drop off or pick up somebody, or get flares at WM.