Liveaboards at the gate

[Kd9truck]

Originally Posted by wingssail

People living on vessels junk or otherwise, are not homeless.

I agree, thank you for the correction,like a lot of people (not all) living in tents junk or otherwise are not “homeless” either, not in the traditional sense.

[JPA Cate]

@bcguy:

About 35 years ago, the Seven Seas Cruising Association was engaged in an attempt to allow cruising sailors to anchor in the waterways off canal development type rich people's housing in Florida. An e-mail to them might gain you some information about how this restriction of waterway use was addressed.

***********

This thread is going to be a real challenge for some of us, it does relate to cruising; but it is political in nature. Therefore, it has been made a hot thread. Please make an extra effort to keep posts polite. Thanks.

**************

I have long wondered whether humans only like groups like them. If that is so, liveaboards exemplify a rejection of the values of the land bound, and part of the unwelcomeness extended to liveaboard cruisers may be due to that, as well as simply wanting what they want and rejecting strangers of any stripe. There are some places we are welcome, others, less so. ["Bloody Gypsies!" kind of attitude some places.] I think it is unavoidable, to some extent, and we should try and understand their point of view and reservations.

I had a chat with a woman the other day wherein she agreed that most people live in their houses and keep their boats in marinas. It is not an uncommon view.


Ann

[wingssail]

Trying to suck me in again with your oddball and extreme ideas, huh Sean?

OK I'll bite. Here are my reasonable approaches to the questions you ask. But if you come back with the typical extreme, unworkable, answers I've seen from you before, then I'm out of the discussion.

Originally Posted by seandepagnier

What does "navigable" mean? If this means it moved 5 miles every 30 days then it must apply to all boats in every marina in every month of the year. How can you prove/enforce this? It is wrong discriminate against boats anchored.

Navigable: A boat must meet all Coastguard requirements and have the ability to move itself, whether by power, sail or human powered.

You enforce/prove it on an exception basis. Waterborn enforcement officers (police), like Coast Guard, have the right to stop and inspect vessels or inspect vessels which are suspected of being in violation of the law. This is common in many places.

So if 5 boats are anchored, and 50 boats in a marina, they must inspect 10 boats in the marina for every boat anchored. The owner must prove it can navigate. If the owner is not available, the marina staff can take the boat and move it 5 miles to another marina for 30 days and the owner charged for such service. Even in January, even if it is below freezing. Otherwise we leave the anchored boats alone to be fair.

Marinas are not considered "navigable waterways" and they are subject to permits issued by the state to operate (and of course there are rules). Boats in a marina are not required to be navigable. No marina operator is allowed to move an owner's vessel such as you describe.

Fair? That is a very subjective term. We don't let people who feel infringed upon because they can't do what they want to claim unfairness, life is not fair. Societies live by reasonable rules for the common good. Some will think that they are not "fair". So vote for someone who agrees with you.

What does this mean? It means no internal combustion engines I presume, because these tend to leave an oil slick whenever they pump the bilge. I see this often. How will you enforce it?

I am thinking of all pollution rules, but particularly waste discharge. However there are rules against discharging oil. For automobiles there are rules (limits) about exhaust emissions and some places require emission test. I am not in favor of this for boats.
Enforcement of no oily discharge rules depends on reporting when a slick is seen.

Or do you mean regulations that have little/nothing to do with the environment but raise the barrier making it easier for rich people and harder for everyone else?

Such as, Sean? What regulations are you referring to?

Time is relative. It is immoral to put a time limit on anchoring without the same limit imposed on boats in marinas and moorings.

Navigable waterways are a public resource, to be shared by all. The right to use a navigable waterway is for navigation. Anchoring as a part of navigation is what justifies the right to anchor. As such is is reasonable to set time limits. Otherwise a few people could consume all the available public resource and someone who stays permanently is obviously not navigating. Living aboard in a public space is not navigation nor is it a rightful use for navigable waterways. It may be deemed legal to live aboard in a marina which is subject to its own permitting and environmental rules or on board a vessel while navigating in the public's waterways subject to the rules which are defined. No marina operators are allowed to move a vessel except as defined by the contract signed when one takes a berth in a marina. Fairness and morality are subjective. I see no unfairness or immorality in allowing different rules for marina tenants than for vessels utilizing the public waterways.

If the owner is not available the marina staff can haul the boat and store it on the hard at the owners expense if they exceed the time limit. Or we could not have any time limits which is also fair.

As long as no marina is built in a place where boats previously used to anchor, and no moorings put in any place market all moorings must be removed.

I agree to the complaint that locations which used to be available to the public have become private property. This is a problem which should be addressed by public hearings during the permitting process but probably won't be solved. Money usually wins out.

Water is a basic right. It is immoral to charge for it unless it is in excess of 10 liters per day per person. Unless there is a water shortage and no one has access to water regardless of wealth.

Water which falls from the sky or which is taken from the ground (your well as permitted) is basically free. But water which is collected nd distributed is not free, the infrastructure to do that must be paid for. I collect rain water but dock water I expect to pay for.

Charging for garbage is a bad idea because it encourages people to dump the trash which is really easy to get away with. Making it free ensures most people will attempt to dispose of it responsibly.

This is arguable

It makes more sense to charge grocery stores and all other stores a tax for each product based on the weight of the item to cover disposal fees. For example mushrooms wrapped in shrink wrap would have to pay for the weight of the plastic wrap, not the weight of the mushroom, but a plastic box would be charged based on total weight. This tax (collected alongside sales tax) would cover garbage collection and apply to all products bought.

My views on plastic and other products have been expressed. I believe the manufacturer of plastic, and virtually everything else, should be responsible for its ultimate, proper, recycling or disposal, which can be passed on in the price, making it a consumer's choice to buy it and pay the extra price or to buy something which is not packaged in plastic.

[Chris Cringle]

It is a world-wide problem. I remember tourists in tropical "paradises" becoming absolutely apoplectic when we would come ashore near their resort and answer their question of "How much does it cost you to anchor here?" with a simple, " Nothing".

[seandepagnier]

Originally Posted by capn_billl

Marinas DEFINATELY enforce the "must be navigable" rule where I'm at. If the dock master hasn't seen your boat leave the marina in a couple months, he can demand you start the engines, or be in violation of lease.

A couple of months? So anchor limit would also be "a couple of months"? I am fine with this, if every boat in the marina is under the same rule as every boat at anchor.

Starting an engine in no way proves a boat is navigable. The boat must actually navigate to prove anything.

"no internal combustion engines", Don't give them any ideas. We are already required to not have any oil in bilge. An oil absorbent pad must be used anytime engine bilge is run, and any oil leaking into the bilge requires the bilge pump to be disabled until the oil leak is fixed, and any remaining oil removed. producing an oil slick from the bilge can result in a hefty fine.

Then why do I routinely see oil slicks in harbors? Why are marine engines completely exempt from emissions requirements?

It may/should be illegal but it is not enforced. I know a case of someone who registered their boat in Jamaica because the engine they used cause so much emissions it cannot be coast guard documented. The boat cannot legally be in the US more than 12 months if registered there, but lack of enforcement allows it to remain. How would you enforce ensuring all boats are navigable?

Quote:[*]Time limits can be applied for anchoring
Time is relative.

I just hope you have the same lackadaisical attitude when I park a semi blocking your driveway indefinitely.

Consider a boat anchored does not block anyone, so I find this analog flawed.

Marinas, and mooring DO require leases, and have strict time limits you PAY for.

This is strange because I see the same boat in the same marina for years. A lot of boats also never move from marina for years. It seems like there is no time limit for most marinas, and to be fair also no time limit for anchoring.

A mooring field provides a safe place to tie up with anchored boats evenly spaced, and no danger of dragging into neighbors.

Actually moorings have danger of breaking loose. In storms they can fail but more often the operator uses a line that breaks. More people using moorings are careless leaving the boat for longer periods without inspecting the lines.

As for "evenly spaced" the distance greatly varies based on boat size. With anchoring you can pack the boats according to their size and draft. With moorings in practice, most fields are designed for very large boats of 55ft with a very high fee and no consideration for smaller boats which more can be packed in on smaller cheaper moorings. Anchoring is more adaptable.

Sure it is, feel free to fill up your bucket from ANY public water source. OH you want it purified, sanitized, chlorinated, and piped in a sanitary fashion to your boat in a convenient fashion. THAT'S not free. PIPES cost money, so do water treatment plants.

You want to drink from a creek? GO for it. Want purified water from a city, or Marina system? You are either paying, or you are STEALING what someone ELSE paid for.

You are wrong. It is impossible to steal water for drinking/cooking from a public source with abundance of water. It is not a theft. Look up the definition of "stealing" This is to "deprive the original owner" In the case of filling a small container of a few gallons you deprive no one because there is still enough water for everyone.

Drink from a creek

In the past it was safe. Today most are polluted from generations of environmental abuser who didn't pay the real cost of their actions. The same thing is happening today by people who use combustion engines. They are not paying the real cost of their actions, and in the future there will be no coral reefs (among other problems)

It is deplorable to deprive anyone of minimal amounts of water in situations where water is abundant when water is also a basic human right:

https://www.un.org/waterforlifedecad...edia_brief.pdf

TRY to get free water in the BAHAMAS, or ANY other third world country, or most countries for that matter. In some places clean sanitized water costs more than fuel.

I have been to 30 countries and found free water in every one of them. In more developed areas of some countries, water was not always free, but the price for example 8 cents per gallon in the philippines for 5 stage filter and UV treatment.

The only places where water is a real issue for sailors is in developed rich countries where plenty of water is available, and people are hosing their boats down in a marina but want deprive anyone else of a few liters worth. They aren't willing to sell the water for a fair price or any price for that matter. It has nothing to do with the "cost" of the water which is irrelevant because it is minuscule but is used as a form of oppression. Fortunately most people are not so selfish and do not mind if you fill water at a marina. After all it is not stealing or a crime in any way.

Charging for garbage is a bad idea, I can agree with this. Adding a deposit to ALL non biodegradable products like plastics works for me. Until then it costs the dumpster owner money to haul it to the dump, so picking up part of this cost is basic adulting.

we agree on one thing

[Emmalina]

On the flip side are people paying silly prices for apartments that overlook marinas so they can see boats from there windows LOL

[Boatyarddog]

Originally Posted by bcguy

"Bloody free loaders, you are not welcome here sparked the shouting swear fest last night between an anchored boat and some shore folk." Privatization of ocean front by and for an infinitesimally small fraction of the local population is greed grab freeloading on its ultimate, I thought as my musings drifted along. Closed up the hatches, stoked the wood stove, pulled out a book and dozed off. This morning I thought this divide will only get worse everywhere, continually. Where is this going? So, I thought I would learn as much as I could about this conflict. This forum has many inciteful, intelligent people. (I have been here a long time). In this effort to be more fully educated I am hoping to obtain and would appreciate some references regarding this issue....articles, postings, threads ...etc (a book?). Thanks in advance...

Really IMHO NOT your business what others do, unless they try to board your boat!
Then by all means, show your weapon.
SV Cloud Duster

[Dsanduril]

Originally Posted by seandepagnier

...Why are marine engines completely exempt from emissions requirements?...

They’re not. Just try importing a boat that has non-EPA approved engines into the US. Witness the recall of 5 years’ worth of Volvo D1 and D2 engines in multiple jurisdictions including the US, India, and several others all over emissions. Or operating a large ship on high sulfur fuel in most coastal waters.

In some respects emissions are controlled by the flag state, which is one of many reasons that flags of convenience exist, and these then leave a loophole for some people, but both the US and IMO have emissions regulations that apply to vessels small and large. They may not be sufficient, but that’s different from “exempt”.

[Simi 60]

Originally Posted by Emmalina

On the flip side are people paying silly prices for apartments that overlook marinas so they can see boats from there windows LOL

And then bitch and moan when the wind whistles through rigging

I am reminded of the fools who buy units in the city near live music venues and pubs but then complain about the noise.

[Boatyarddog]

Originally Posted by JPA Cate

@bcguy:

About 35 years ago, the Seven Seas Cruising Association was engaged in an attempt to allow cruising sailors to anchor in the waterways off canal development type rich people's housing in Florida. An e-mail to them might gain you some information about how this restriction of waterway use was addressed.

***********

This thread is going to be a real challenge for some of us, it does relate to cruising; but it is political in nature. Therefore, it has been made a hot thread. Please make an extra effort to keep posts polite. Thanks.

**************

I have long wondered whether humans only like groups like them. If that is so, liveaboards exemplify a rejection of the values of the land bound, and part of the unwelcomeness extended to liveaboard cruisers may be due to that, as well as simply wanting what they want and rejecting strangers of any stripe. There are some places we are welcome, others, less so. ["Bloody Gypsies!" kind of attitude some places.] I think it is unavoidable, to some extent, and we should try and understand their point of view and reservations.

I had a chat with a woman the other day wherein she agreed that most people live in their houses and keep their boats in marinas. It is not an uncommon view.


Ann

Same with the land bound,by choices or other.
Hate, and violence doesn't work.
UNDERSTANDING!And tolerance, maybe.
SV Cloud Duster

[Simi 60]

Originally Posted by bcguy

"Bloody free loaders, you are not welcome here sparked the shouting swear fest last night between an anchored boat and some shore folk." ...

North of where we are is a place called Mooloolaba which is a pleasant place to stop to break the 90nm passage north to the wide bay bar.
Dirt people there have been moving boats on for decades
I had the water police arrive once within 20 minutes on a previous vessel
Haven't been there since, now do all nighters to the next spot.

[seandepagnier]

"The average water bill in the United States is $72.93 a month for a family of four using 100 gallons of water per day per person."
https://www.moving.com/tips/how-much...ter-bill-cost/

This is 12,000 gallons per month. This < 1 cent per gallon.

"FY21 Customer proposed wholesale rate: $3.04 per 1,000 gallons of treated water (no increase from FY20)"
https://www.ntmwd.com/water-rates/

Also well below 1 cent per gallon

Those who post about the "cost of water" it seem ridiculous to me because this cost is immaterial for anyone carrying water by dingy filling a few gallons. Go ahead, charge what it really costs and I doubt anyone would take issue paying it. Marina owners do not have the right to deny water or charge excessive fees for it. That would be immoral because water is a right and this would infringe on that right.

The issue is people with a lot of money trying to manipulate society to their taste. Don't forget that the more money you have, the more pollution you cause in any economy powered by oil, and therefore the greater debt you owe. Afford to keep a boat in a marina? You owe much more than a few cents of water to anyone anchored.

The "richest" people have the greatest debt in this world.

[seandepagnier]

Originally Posted by Dsanduril

They’re not. Just try importing a boat that has non-EPA approved engines into the US. Witness the recall of 5 years’ worth of Volvo D1 and D2 engines in multiple jurisdictions including the US, India, and several others all over emissions. Or operating a large ship on high sulfur fuel in most coastal waters.

In some respects emissions are controlled by the flag state, which is one of many reasons that flags of convenience exist, and these then leave a loophole for some people, but both the US and IMO have emissions regulations that apply to vessels small and large. They may not be sufficient, but that’s different from “exempt”.

I said can/should.. For the most part boats do not require catalytic converters which would be a very simple thing to require.

I know of someone who registered in Jamaica because they could not register the boat legally here because of the engine used. They then keep the boat illegally past 12 months but there is no enforcement which. There is also no way to enforce that all boats are "navigable" in an affordable way that does not discriminate.

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by Simi 60

North of where we are is a place called Mooloolaba which is a pleasant place to stop to break the 90nm passage north to the wide bay bar.
Dirt people there have been moving boats on for decades
I had the water police arrive once within 20 minutes on a previous vessel
Haven't been there since, now do all nighters to the next spot.

We found that there were suitable places to anchor in Mooloolaba which were allowed and the water police did not chase you out of. As I recall there were time limits. Moololaba was one of our favorite stops and the rules there didn't seem like an imposition, but I could image it might get crowded.

Mooloolaba was where I first learned was a "Chook" was (rotisserie chicken) and I loved them.

But Mooloolaba had a tricky entrance.

[rslifkin]

Originally Posted by seandepagnier

I said can/should.. For the most part boats do not require catalytic converters which would be a very simple thing to require.

I know of someone who registered in Jamaica because they could not register the boat legally here because of the engine used. They then keep the boat illegally past 12 months but there is no enforcement which. There is also no way to enforce that all boats are "navigable" in an affordable way that does not discriminate.

At least in the US, modern gas powered boats typically do have cats. It's been required for a few years now.