Help 100 Live Aboard Sailors Keep Their Homes By Offering Feedback on Mooring Field

[CanuckSailorguy]

I left CF years ago because of people like you. Snarky, unpleasant people who jump to unsubstantiated conclusions make me sick to my stomach.
You might not think I'm credible, but there are a lot of people who do, and who listen to what I have to say. The difference is, they listen, ask questions, and debate intelligently.
You might learn something from them.

Originally Posted by BlueH2Obound

CSG, I have read this thread, as well as your other 30 posts. 27 of those posts were on two threads dealing with the same identical issue.

I am a details kind of guy.

When I read someone posts, and they state things like the first quote above in red, but your profile states you joined in June of 2022 . . . . less than two years ago . . It brings up doubts . . . . . Maybe you were a member previously? Makes me wonder if you got booted off the forum . . . and why?. . . .

And when called out on whether or not you started this thread, and you were wrong . . . . ,

And you keep bringing up unrelated items to defend your position . . . .
Your credibility isn't too great to the casual observer.

I checked your profile under the heading "Friends", and it states "CanuckSailorguy has not made any friends yet" . . . . Hmmmm, makes you think, doesn't it?

[CanuckSailorguy]

The idea of dropping anchor was how the maritime world operated before marinas became a thing. It's still quite common in Britain and other parts of the world.
And in S Florida, where there are thousands more boats than slips, it's how it has to be.

Originally Posted by TPG

I think you're right on the money with this.

I'm still trying to figure out when public waterways became "my free private anchorage" that I neither paid for nor hold have any formal claim to.

The idea that I can just drop an anchor somewhere and plan on staying in that same spot indefinitely, goes against the original intent of anchoring in public waterways.

[CanuckSailorguy]

Excellent point about Jensen Beach. I believe several boats were destroyed because of that policy. And it's a crappy anchorage in any event, way too open.

Originally Posted by mikeod

For those who think a 45 day limit every 6 months is ok. What about boats stored on moorings should it be the same to open up space for others? In the northeast most harbors have a 10 yr plus waiting list to place a private mooring. My point is if you can store a boat for 6 months out of the year on a mooring why not the same for all. Including liveaboards. Also Florida has no system for placing a private mooring like most other places. This year Jensen Beach was kicking people off moorings and telling them to go anchor because 40 plus mph winds were forecast.

[CanuckSailorguy]

You get it. Thanks!

Originally Posted by Richardldavis

I have been cruising the Gulf Coast, Florida Keys, and the Atlantic Coast of Florida for a little over 3 years now.
What the "cruisers" that are supporting the Miami mooring filed don't seem to realize is that Miami doesn't want you either.
They closed a PUBLIC dock. They didn't close the dock to people living on derelict boats, they closed it for EVERY boater. If you're cruising in or through the waters of Miami they don't want, YOU there. To them they own it and you are just a trespasser that they can't regulate out of there environment. When public services are removed from the boating community every boater suffers.
Key Largo did the same thing in Tapon Bay. They closed a county built public dock in an effort to remove "permanent boaters(read derelict in their minds". Did it work, NO. They only thing it accomplished is that no boaters can use the dock paid for by county taxes.
Miami Beach is not proposing a mooring field to benefit any boater. They are zoning a morning field so that they can make their own rules against boaters.
Don't think that this is about removing derelict boats from the water. There are already laws against that in Florida and almost every other coastal state that specifically address that.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by CaptTom

Welcome!

I, too, frequent a few forums, and I've been involved in this sort of thing since the days of Compuserve and AOL.

This is one of the more friendly forums I've seen, and a big part of why I've hung around so long.

But, like any place people gather, we get some who want to share, some who want to learn and a few who just want to convince others to join their cause.

The OP was the latter. And that's fine, we all do what we can to support good causes.
.........

Thanks CaptTom.

Let's have a short break and consider the following -

The moderators work hard at keeping CF friendly and rant free but we can only do it with everyone's help.

Some boating issues are polarising and worthy of discussion but at the end of the day, the various points of view must be made respectfully. If you feel you must resort to personal attacks, then this is not the forum for you. Several threads about this issue have already been shut down due to the 'unkindness' demonstrated in the posts by some members.

While we strive to keep all threads alive that affect cruising sailors, we will not tolerate any rudeness. This thread is now on the borderline of being shut down and perhaps deleted completely. You all must do you part if you wish to continue to discuss the issue.

See https://www.cruisersforum.com/forums...ork&page=rules

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by CanuckSailorguy

First of all, the majority of people living aboard are not "squatters". Most of them have jobs, many have property ashore, but they prefer to live aboard ...

There are numerous, competing issues, that confuse my opinion[s], on this subject.

However, having a job, or property ashore, doesn’t preclude one from being a ‘squatter’, which is a person who settles in, or occupies, a piece of property, with no legal claim [title, right, or lease] to the property.
In the United States, squatting is illegal, and squatters can be evicted, for ‘trespassing’.
I don’t know what ‘sqatter’s rights’ [adverse possession] Florida’s current legislation offers; but it [almost certainly] contain some ‘continuous occupation’ clause[s].

Generally, our [negative] right to noninterference, in exercising our ‘preferences’ is limited, by it’s effect on others.
As Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes [or someone like him] may have said, describing the principle of the limitation of individual liberty:
“The right to swing my fist, ends, where the other man’s nose begins.”

[mvweebles]

Originally Posted by CanuckSailorguy

You don't know what you're talking about. The process to remove a boat in FL is much simpler than what you have described and as of this July 1, will become simpler still with the passage of HB 487.
Your community of Madeira Beach was breaking the law about local anchoring ordinances for the longest time. I put a stop to that, I'm pleased to tell you.
And like most of the complainers here, you have NO clue what the laws are in Florida, including not knowing what the legal definition of a liveaboard is.
There are laws to deal with unregistered boats, including their removal. If your community and local law enforcement don't understand them, that's not the boat's, or boaters', fault.
And if someone wants to live on their boat, that's NO business of yours. You don't own the water. It's there for all to use.
You might own a boat, but I'm certainly glad you don't use it anywhere near where I am.

This is rich - I have owned property and boated along the Gulf coast islands for almost 20 years, including being politically aware within my community. And a Canadian on the other side of the state tells me what I don't know?

The piece you most certainly do not have right is you believe you're so smart that anyone who disagrees with you is the enemy. You believe so strongly that anyone - including foreigners such as yourself - can use public resources for their own purpose that you simply cannot imagine there are limits. That tone deafness has slowly swung support away from your cause - 10-20 years ago, there was much more sympathy for anchor outs but the chronic lack of respect has turned off all support the anchor outs once had.

In short, what was once viewed as a Bohemian lifestyle is now viewed as squatters.

[CaptTom]

Canuck, I do understand that we struck a nerve, and I appreciate you taking the time to rebut may of our points. I agree with the mods that this discussion can be civil if we work at it.

My first observation is in response to a point you made to another poster:

Originally Posted by CanuckSailorguy

...Like way too many Floridians, you have your piece of paradise, everyone else can just F off as far as you're concerned...

I totally agree that homeowners can get a "holier than thou" attitude. If they buy a home near the water, then try to drive away boats legitimately using that water, they'll get no sympathy from me. Did you ever notice that there are more "manatee zones" near wealthy neighborhoods than poorer ones? I wonder how the manatees know?

Where your analogy fails is that these homeowners bought and paid for the patch of ground their home is sitting on. They also pay property taxes and are subject to all kinds of regulations regarding the use and maintenance of that property.

Originally Posted by CanuckSailorguy

...As for you're constant commenting on moving every few months - long term liveaboards set up multiple anchoring systems at great cost in both time and money...

I think you're making my primary point. These aren't boaters engaged in navigation, or even "taking a break." They have gone to great effort to stake out a piece of (submerged) land for their exclusive, long-term residential use. They have not paid for that land, nor followed the local regulations for establishing a private mooring.

Originally Posted by CanuckSailorguy

First of all, the majority of people living aboard are not "squatters". Most of them have jobs, many have property ashore, but they prefer to live aboard.
Very few are actually, to quote you, dealing with "homelessness, drug addiction and mental illness".
Most of the ones I know are cruisers taking a break, or working to earn money to go cruising again.
But it must be very nice to be so wealthy and so sanctimonious, which is what I take from your comments. I would try it but for my gag reflex.

I'm sorry if I came across as sanctimonious, and I can assure you I've never been accused of being wealthy. And if the comment about a gag reflex was supposed to be an insult, you should know that I've received far worse.

That said, I stand on my characterization of long-term live-aboards as squatters. Gord said it much better than I:

Originally Posted by GordMay

...However, having a job, or property ashore, doesn’t preclude one from being a ‘squatter’, which is a person who settles in, or occupies, a piece of property, with no legal claim [title, right, or lease] to the property...

I have witnessed the sad cases of homelessness, drug addiction and mental health challenges in various squatter communities, including those on the water. I don't believe I said, and didn't mean to imply, that this is the source of the problem, nor that it represented a majority of live-aboards.

But it is, indeed, one dimension of the problem. Probably the more important one to solve, from a humanitarian perspective. Whether they're living in a carboard box under a bridge, or at anchor on a derelict boat, the problems are the same. Unfortunately the solution to these problems is far outside the scope of this forum. And not really relevant to this discussion. I apologize for even mentioning it.

[CanuckSailorguy]

You know, I did notice that about the manatees. Such an odd co-incidence!
Now, to quote someone... "where YOUR analogy fails..."
The homeowners own the land to the property line. Beyond that, they have no more rights than anyone else. The water is a public trust, to be managed for the benefit of those using it. That is a significant issue here - and one the homeowners in Miami Beach, who are incredibly entitled people - refuse to accept.
Next - the boaters at anchor are NOT averse to paying for a mooring field, which would in effect be a "property tax". Where you are going wrong is in presuming that these people are all druggies and alkies living on derelict boats.
That's not the case here, although I agree, it might be in other places. Out of 80 people living aboard, there are three professional yacht captains, a data scientist who works for the US Navy, a guy who owns a construction firm, a woman who works in the fire department, a professional actor... in fact, out of about 80 people living aboard there, more than 70 are working. Several are fully retired and a couple are transients, also retired or taking a seabattical.
That I am aware of, there are no regulations permitting the establishment of a permanent mooring in Florida. That being said, the boaters have offered to install and pay for their own moorings, and done so more than once. The city refuses to address that offer.
Lastly - there is no law against living on a boat. Sometimes I wonder if a lot of the objection is from people who look at their tax bills and actually envy the boaters.
Seriously - although I am a full time cruiser who typically spends less than a month at any one anchorage, all of us wake up to have coffee with dolphins playing around our boats, to eternally beautiful sunrises and sunsets, to incredibly quiet nights with no sirens or street noise, while living amongst a community of people who are always willing to lend a hand, always watching out for their neighbours.
I simply cannot see me ever returning to land and purchasing a house again. It's too damn good out here.

Originally Posted by CaptTom

Canuck, I do understand that we struck a nerve, and I appreciate you taking the time to rebut may of our points. I agree with the mods that this discussion can be civil if we work at it.

My first observation is in response to a point you made to another poster:



I totally agree that homeowners can get a "holier than thou" attitude. If they buy a home near the water, then try to drive away boats legitimately using that water, they'll get no sympathy from me. Did you ever notice that there are more "manatee zones" near wealthy neighborhoods than poorer ones? I wonder how the manatees know?

Where your analogy fails is that these homeowners bought and paid for the patch of ground their home is sitting on. They also pay property taxes and are subject to all kinds of regulations regarding the use and maintenance of that property.



I think you're making my primary point. These aren't boaters engaged in navigation, or even "taking a break." They have gone to great effort to stake out a piece of (submerged) land for their exclusive, long-term residential use. They have not paid for that land, nor followed the local regulations for establishing a private mooring.



I'm sorry if I came across as sanctimonious, and I can assure you I've never been accused of being wealthy. And if the comment about a gag reflex was supposed to be an insult, you should know that I've received far worse.

That said, I stand on my characterization of long-term live-aboards as squatters. Gord said it much better than I:



I have witnessed the sad cases of homelessness, drug addiction and mental health challenges in various squatter communities, including those on the water. I don't believe I said, and didn't mean to imply, that this is the source of the problem, nor that it represented a majority of live-aboards.

But it is, indeed, one dimension of the problem. Probably the more important one to solve, from a humanitarian perspective. Whether they're living in a carboard box under a bridge, or at anchor on a derelict boat, the problems are the same. Unfortunately the solution to these problems is far outside the scope of this forum. And not really relevant to this discussion. I apologize for even mentioning it.

[Fore and Aft]

It's happening here in Australia as well, where ever it's pleasant to live and there's a free anchorage people move in. Before you know it there's extra cars on the street, overflowing bins at the boat ramp and the docks full of dinghys. How you solve that is anyone's guess. It's a shame but if a dock has to closed then so be it. Just like I learned at school 40 years ago, a few bad apples ruin it for everyone.
It's funny we don't hear Mike on here saying live aboards are a problem in Newfoundland. I don't see why everyone in the bay doesn't move up there and contribute to the economy?
There's a mention of dropping an anchor and that's how it should be. An anchor is totally different to dropping a mooring, which surely an anchor becomes after a period of not being moved?
I don't blame the city for ignoring the mooring request. I can think of some prime waterfront that I would love to squat on and then register as my mooring patch. I know a couple of large derelict house boats that would make an ideal floating weekend cottage.
CanuckSailorguy as you can see in the photo below I don't have your 20+ years of sailing experience as a reference but I have seen some big changes since I got on the water.
Cheers

[CanuckSailorguy]

Gord - in the US, the Public Trust Doctrine states that the waters are held in trust to be managed for the benefit of all. It is an important doctrine and one that is supposed to guide issues such as this.
Homeowners aren't "using" the water, and they have ZERO rights beyond their property lines. They do not, as they like to think (especially in Miami Beach) own the view to the horizon.
Laws on land differ considerably from maritime law. People have lived aboard for hundreds of years. The only time and place it becomes a problem in Florida is when those people are anchored anywhere near a high end neighbourhood.
You don't see the locals complaining in Daytona Beach, or Cocoa (to name two examples) because the anchorage is not proximate to expensive properties.
There are numerous laws, as I noted to Captain Tom, that give adequate control to LEOs to deal with derelict boats, etc., but they are not being used effectively. Instead, cities like Miami Beach demand more laws in an effort to remove the boats entirely. Since there are over 500 boats at anchor in Biscayne Bay and NO available long term slips, you can see the problem. And that problem exists all up and down the coast. Last December, passing through St. Augustine in the north of Florida, there were over 50 boats at anchor and no available slips or moorings. St. A is a much smaller area than Biscayne Bay, so the problems are comparable. Same in central Florida. Same on the west coast. There is no marine infrastructure to deal with all the boats, but the politicians refuse to recognize this in an attempt to pander to wealthy waterfront home and condo owners.
The problem here is that the wealthy homeowners are sticking their noses - to use your analogy - where they don't belong, which is on the water. If their nose is getting smacked, maybe they need to realize that.

Originally Posted by GordMay

There are numerous, competing issues, that confuse my opinion[s], on this subject.

However, having a job, or property ashore, doesn’t preclude one from being a ‘squatter’, which is a person who settles in, or occupies, a piece of property, with no legal claim [title, right, or lease] to the property.
In the United States, squatting is illegal, and squatters can be evicted, for ‘trespassing’.
I don’t know what ‘sqatter’s rights’ [adverse possession] Florida’s current legislation offers; but it [almost certainly] contain some ‘continuous occupation’ clause[s].

Generally, our [negative] right to noninterference, in exercising our ‘preferences’ is limited, by it’s effect on others.
As Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes [or someone like him] may have said, describing the principle of the limitation of individual liberty:
“The right to swing my fist, ends, where the other man’s nose begins.”

[CanuckSailorguy]

The city is not ignoring the mooring request, but they are dealing in bad faith with the boaters who would ultimately benefit from that field. The city is about to face a civil rights lawsuit for their behaviour in fact.
What I'm finding astounding is that here, in a boaters' forum, a liveaboard forum no less, so many of you are struggling with the concept of people ACTUALLY living on a boat.
Something tells me that only a couple of you commenting here actually live aboard full time. Perhaps if y'all did, the responses would be different.
Cute photo btw. I learned to sail 50 years ago, but prior to that, I had a 12 foot aluminum with an outboard. The twenty years reference was to how long I've lived aboard and cruised full time.

Originally Posted by Fore and Aft

It's happening here in Australia as well, where ever it's pleasant to live and there's a free anchorage people move in. Before you know it there's extra cars on the street, overflowing bins at the boat ramp and the docks full of dinghys. How you solve that is anyone's guess. It's a shame but if a dock has to closed then so be it. Just like I learned at school 40 years ago, a few bad apples ruin it for everyone.
It's funny we don't hear Mike on here saying live aboards are a problem in Newfoundland. I don't see why everyone in the bay doesn't move up there and contribute to the economy?
There's a mention of dropping an anchor and that's how it should be. An anchor is totally different to dropping a mooring, which surely an anchor becomes after a period of not being moved?
I don't blame the city for ignoring the mooring request. I can think of some prime waterfront that I would love to squat on and then register as my mooring patch. I know a couple of large derelict house boats that would make an ideal floating weekend cottage.
CanuckSailorguy as you can see in the photo below I don't have your 20+ years of sailing experience as a reference but I have seen some big changes since I got on the water.
Cheers

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Fore and Aft

It's funny we don't hear Mike on here saying live aboards are a problem in Newfoundland. I don't see why everyone in the bay doesn't move up there and contribute to the economy?

Hi F&A, I unsubscribed to this thread some time ago since I'm not in Florida, and have no direct knowledge of the situation. But I have been scanning the thread occasionally, just to keep up on the chat.

I have stated I that this issue seems less a boating one, and more a housing one. Everyone needs to live somewhere, and if people are choosing to live on their boats because that is their best option, then that is the core issue.

I've also stated that anchorages, like other public spaces, are part of the commons. They should be available for all to enjoy. I don't agree that people have the right to permanently occupy the commons, and convert it to private use. This is as true for individual boaters who permanently anchor in one place, as it is for converting an anchorage to private moorings. Both convert a public space to private.

I don't think it's unreasonable to put limits on how public space is used and occupied. However, if there are people with no better housing choices, it seem fundamentally unfair to simply push them out. A better option must be found.

As for inviting everyone up to Newfoundland ... sure . Come on up. There's plenty of space here. No one is pushing anyone out. Of course, the waters and anchorages here are a little more rough and rustic. And the wind and weather are a bit tougher than most souther sun-bunnies can take . Oh, and there's this thing called winter; makes it a little tough to be a full-time anchorer. But some (crazy) people have done it.

So sure... come on up .

[CanuckSailorguy]

I grew up in Sudbury, northern Ontario - I did 47 years of cold and long winters, which is why I'm here in the sunny, warm south during the winter months.
Anchorages and people living aboard have a long history, hundreds of years. Many people CHOOSE to live aboard rather than live ashore. It has nothing to do with poverty or substance abuse, etc.
Why wouldn't you? I wake up to have coffee with dolphins playing around my boat, get to watch fabulous sunsets almost every night, and sleep in incredible quiet without sirens or street noise. I have beautiful views, can change it whenever I choose to, and the neighbours are great people who watch out for you and are always willing to lend a hand if needed.
I do find it funny that a forum thread dedicated to liveaboards does NOT seem to understand this. From what I've seen, there are perhaps three of us here who actually LIVE on boats and cruiser full time.
Addressing Miami Beach in particular, if you're not very wealthy, you cannot afford to get an apartment there. But that doesn't make the boaters poor, or drug abusers. They've made a choice to live in this fashion. Several of them actually have property ashore but prefer to stay on their boats.

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Hi F&A, I unsubscribed to this thread some time ago since I'm not in Florida, and have no direct knowledge of the situation. But I have been scanning the thread occasionally, just to keep up on the chat.

I have stated I that this issue seems less a boating one, and more a housing one. Everyone needs to live somewhere, and if people are choosing to live on their boats because that is their best option, then that is the core issue.

I've also stated that anchorages, like other public spaces, are part of the commons. They should be available for all to enjoy. I don't agree that people have the right to permanently occupy the commons, and convert it to private use. This is as true for individual boaters who permanently anchor in one place, as it is for converting an anchorage to private moorings. Both convert a public space to private.

I don't think it's unreasonable to put limits on how public space is used and occupied. However, if there are people with no better housing choices, it seem fundamentally unfair to simply push them out. A better option must be found.

As for inviting everyone up to Newfoundland ... sure . Come on up. There's plenty of space here. No one is pushing anyone out. Of course, the waters and anchorages here are a little more rough and rustic. And the wind and weather are a bit tougher than most souther sun-bunnies can take . Oh, and there's this thing called winter; makes it a little tough to be a full-time anchorer. But some (crazy) people have done it.

So sure... come on up .

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by CanuckSailorguy

I grew up in Sudbury, northern Ontario - I did 47 years of cold and long winters, which is why I'm here in the sunny, warm south during the winter months.
Anchorages and people living aboard have a long history, hundreds of years. Many people CHOOSE to live aboard rather than live ashore. It has nothing to do with poverty or substance abuse, etc.
Why wouldn't you? I wake up to have coffee with dolphins playing around my boat, get to watch fabulous sunsets almost every night, and sleep in incredible quiet without sirens or street noise. I have beautiful views, can change it whenever I choose to, and the neighbours are great people who watch out for you and are always willing to lend a hand if needed.
I do find it funny that a forum thread dedicated to liveaboards does NOT seem to understand this. From what I've seen, there are perhaps three of us here who actually LIVE on boats and cruiser full time.

Notwithstanding any of this, no one has the right to permanently occupy part of the commons, converting it to their own private space. This seems to be the core of the legal issue here. I fully accept that people can choose to live on the water. I choose to do so for about 1/2 of each year. The other 1/2 I choose other options. But again, my choices cannot simply abrogate other people's rights to enjoy a public space, or in this case, a public anchorage.

If it is, as you say, a choice, then the argument is even simpler. These people are free to make their choice to live on a boat, but they have to do it within the confines of the law that everyone needs to follow. From what I see, this position only strengthens the argument to limit permanent anchoring.

Originally Posted by CanuckSailorguy

Addressing Miami Beach in particular, if you're not very wealthy, you cannot afford to get an apartment there. But that doesn't make the boaters poor, or drug abusers. They've made a choice to live in this fashion. Several of them actually have property ashore but prefer to stay on their boats.

Since poverty is largely a relative concept, then I'd say the boaters you are talking about ARE (financially) poor. I don't find this offensive. Lots of people are poor. I am legally poor, largely by choice.

Besides, you've just said it yourself; you have to be "very wealthy" to live near Miami Beach. This may not be fair, but life isn't fair. The fact is, as a poor person, I can't live wherever I want. I've made the choice to live freely, but at the cost of having limited financial wealth. That's my choice, but there are always consequences to choices, and one of them means I cannot simply live wherever I would like.