Liveaboards at the gate

[boat driver]

The conflict of liveaboards has been around for years but as waterfront is developed the available locations are being reduced. But more so, the liveaboard negative perception is a making by the liveaboard community.

The liveaboard that parks in front of the property tends to present an invasion of personnel space. The average vessel is looking neglected in the maintenance, unappealing to the eye with blue tarps and rusty streaks, and leads to speculation on sewage disposal, trash disposal, liability insurance, and so forth.
The waterfront owner, understanding these issues and being required by law to adhere to these regulations, tends to be a bit defensive at first sight.
This immediately goes negative when any violation is observed and actually harms (spoils) the sanctity of the waterfront owners visual space or riparian rights. Then when a storm appears and the vessel ends up on the owners' property, the owner suddenly may have the financial liability and responsibility to dispose of said vessel.
Look around when cruising the United States- how many derelict vessels are on beaches well after (like years) going ashore? abandoned by the owners, the state must go through multiple years and budgets to get the monies to remove, homeowners insurance does not cover abandon vessels, and the legitimate owner has moved on to another state.

Sorry all, but the vessel conditions tend to reflect the owner's character- and therefore the vehement notification from the waterfront owner to "move on" is a simple response to your pre-arrival reputation.

[Taichungman]

Originally Posted by fxarcher

The way things are shaping up, I actually foresee a possible future where any type of boating/cruising will be outlawed in the name of security.
One does not have to look too far.
I remember when I was building boats in the eighties in Taiwan, any type of sea trial was not allowed due to security concerns. Probably justifiably so. Don't know how it is today.
I'm am not sure how much yachting there is for the average Chinese citizen.
Think about how much simpler it would be to control and secure your territory without having to contend with a part of the public moving around in an uncontrolled manner.
One edict from the top will be all it takes.
In this country, if one 911 equivalent is directly tied to the free movement of pleasure boats, then look out.
In other, already totalitarian countries, it will take much less in the name of expanding already draconian public security laws.
It will be done for the Children of course!
None of this however will stop the ruling class from enjoying their superyachts.

__________________________________________________ ______




So, It sounds like you are suggesting that if a pleasure boat caused a 911 event that all pleasure boats would be outlawed. Do you also think if a 911 event was caused by a car, bicycle, airplane or skateboard that they would be outlawed also?
Also you talk about Taiwan and then connect it to the average Chinese citizen. Taiwanese are not Chinese citizens. And the average citizen of most countries do not have pleasure boats. With that said, There are quite a few Taiwanese that do have pleasure boats and they can sail or motor them without fear in their waters. China on the other hand does have more restrictive rules for just about everything.
On the subject of anchoring, most sailors I've been in contact with over the years are mostly responsible people and know where to anchor or not. Most times there is a choice whether to anchor out or pay at a marina and that's the boaters choice. Some people like the solitude of an anchorage and others like the marina for convenience. There are a few bad apples in every barrel; they shouldn't rule anyone's life..
Taxes. People who own real estate pay property taxes to support public schools. People who rent do not pay school tax and the landlord can't charge more rent each time a renter has a newborn.. Some renters have one child and some have three but the rent is the same. Older people who own real estate and have no children in school still have to pay school taxes. Property tax is a bad subject with me; that's all I got to say about it and I'm sticking to it.

[Happ]

Originally Posted by Elleroo

Live aboards don't have sewers, don't have garbage collection, don't have any utilities.


So, should they pay property taxes?

I have to disagree. When we are on our boat we bring our garbage ashore and put it in a trash receptacle. We do pump out our holding tanks where in many places it is free. We do use public roads to buy groceries, go out to eat, got to the hardware store etc. We still pay income tax and property tax on our boats.

So the argument really comes down to this. The guy on shore has paid a lot of money for his view. We paid less and we can change our view whenever we want.

[flightlead404]

Originally Posted by Taichungman

Also you talk about Taiwan and then connect it to the average Chinese citizen. Taiwanese are not Chinese citizens.

<rant>
hear hear! Taiwan is an independent sovereign nation with all the rights and obligations pertaining thereto.

Not only am I sick to the gills of the bare faced lies coming from China, but the pure hypocrisy and total lack of spine from other nations who claim to support the right of a people to govern themselves (isn't that a founding tenet of the US for ex?) but won't even let Taiwan represent themselves at the Olympics let alone open an embassy.

I'm waiting for China to claim that new island that popped up near Japan as "historically Chinese"

</rant>

Originally Posted by Taichungman

And the average citizen of most countries do not have pleasure boats. With that said, There are quite a few Taiwanese that do have pleasure boats and they can sail or motor them without fear in their waters. China on the other hand does have more restrictive rules for just about everything.

I love Taiwan, but the rules there are very restrictive compared to many countries. Where can I find pleasure sailing in TW? Have not seen any real activity from Kenting to Kaohsiung and north. If TW would let me fly a privately owned experimental aircraft and drive my hotrod I'd move there in a heartbeat. TW unfortunately has a very "roped off sea" mentality. Apparently I can't even scuba in many (all?) of their lakes.

Originally Posted by Taichungman

Taxes. People who own real estate pay property taxes to support public schools. People who rent do not pay school tax and the landlord can't charge more rent each time a renter has a newborn.. Some renters have one child and some have three but the rent is the same. Older people who own real estate and have no children in school still have to pay school taxes. Property tax is a bad subject with me; that's all I got to say about it and I'm sticking to it.

but the landlord pays property taxes and that is part of the cost that's passed on to the renter. So, the renter is paying taxes, albeit indirectly.

you think property tax is bad, lets not even talk about inheritance/death taxes!

[dm567]

From what I have read above many people with boats are not that smart. It our legal right to anchor where it's legal to anchor whether we are near poor people or rich people or no people.

If someone complains while your legally anchored so be it. They have a right to complain.

So to BCguy, you did the right thing in going below and reading a book.

BTW, I do not live on my boat but respect the rights of people that do.

[SaltireJock]

The fact is, no-one is entitled to a view. Not on land, not on the coast!

Temporary structures can be erected without planning permission and can stand for twenty years right in the way of your precious view without any obligation to those whose view is encumbered by the obstruction.

If you don't like the fact that a boat has moored up at the city waterfront where you live, that's just tough, as YOU chose to buy a waterfront property... a place that is DESIGNED for all manner of vessel that can access it.

So, before you bemoan the liveaboard, ask yourself if the oil rig that might replace it is a better option.

You might PAY for a view, but you don't OWN it. No-one owns photons!

[Souzag818]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

My interpretation of our friend's perspective is that he believes private ownership of waterways (and maybe everything) is immoral. That's the only way any of it makes sense.

Some people just like to argue for arguments sake. They have a lot of rules about not having any rules...

[foreverfreedom]

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...

This seems to be particularly a US (wealth?) problem. We cruised from Iceland to Norway and south to Malaysia 2000-2016 and never had a problem. You use a marina; you pay the fees. You anchor off a marina and land at the marina, you pay a fee for landing, and additional for garbage disposal, use of toilets etc. You anchor off a beach where there are swimmers, you stay outside the buoy line or in depths of more than 20m. You anchor off a beach/facility which is obviously private, you anchor outside the 20m line and do not go ashore unless invited. You do not discharge any grey or black water inside the 3nm limit. Have I missed anything?

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by dm567

From what I have read above many people with boats are not that smart. It our legal right to anchor where it's legal to anchor whether we are near poor people or rich people or no people.

If someone complains while your legally anchored so be it. They have a right to complain.

So to BCguy, you did the right thing in going below and reading a book.

BTW, I do not live on my boat but respect the rights of people that do.

It may vary a bit from country to country but generally, anchoring is allowed as it relates to the ability to safely navigate the waterways. As long as you aren't causing problems, you generally won't be hassled even if you stay a bit longer than is strictly needed for safe navigation.

While there is the rare snooty rich guy who wants to chase everyone off, it's extremely rare. 99% of the time, it's the derelict homeless semi-floating wrecks that are in place for months or years that are at issue and most of the time there is no pretense that they are in the process of navigating.

At best it could be claimed that they are using a loophole...but abusing a loophole, don't be shocked when someone closes the loophole and other much more reasonable uses of the waterways are affected by the new rules...far better to focus attention on the real issue.

[JBP]

Originally Posted by Leighpilot

If you’re benefiting from tax payer funded infrastructure, you need to pay taxes.

Absolutely. People get upset about billionaires not paying taxes because that's a huge amount of money the rest of us are covering. Live aboards are a pretty small population with minimal income, so not a lot of money, so not a lot of people are upset. Many states have taxes applied to boats, either in personal property taxes, or in PA we have massive fuel taxes which are proportioned to boating facilities, but then again PA has winter as a pretty big deterrent to live aboards.

[sailorladd]

As I have always understood it, NOBODY, not even the richest guy on earth can buy any property BELOW the high water mark on any given beach or ocean front.

As a boat owner, I have seen this argument played out over and over again, and the greedy land grabber who thinks he/she/we, can order off anybody seaward of the high water mark might be very embarrassed in court of law.

If the land happens to be a private island, a stranger or sailor may not LAND on the private beach/waterfront, but he is entitled to anchor off seward of this mark...

Perhaps sometime in the future, we the earth dwellers, may evolve into a "civilized" society, where land belongs not to the rich, or the greedy, or the strong or the powerful, but..... for everyday use by all of us... but that is a long way off as I see it....

[sailjumanji]

Originally Posted by Nicholson58

Does the home owner own the land under the water? If he claims so his taxable estate just grew by a few acres. Will he be maintaining the navigation marks, dredging?

Yep, we own it. Our subdivision of canals and marina/boat basin was dredged out of privately-owned land. If you look on the County records, we own the submerged land that extends 30 ft from our bulkhead. Some own 25 ft, some development units own 60 ft. And we pay taxes on our lot, including what is submerged. For that, we also get to build docks, slip boats, etc. in our owned space.

Beyond the 30 ft behind our house, is another 100 ft or so that is owned by the Homeowners association. For that privilege of egress, the property owners all get assessed for dredging. (Which is about to happen at the tune of $1.4 MM to be split among 300 lot owners.) Beyond the 100 ft is several hundred feet width of boat basin, occupied by a private-owned (albeit available to the public) marina. So it's all private-owned, submerged land from bulkhead to bulkhead.

It is obviously free to be navigated by anyone, but the submerged land is private. So as I understand it, once you drop the anchor, you are trespassing. And every boat that I have seen anchored in the basin, is asked to leave by either the Coast Guard or Fish and Wildlife within a matter of hours.

[sailjumanji]

Originally Posted by lestersails

This may be true for you, but not for all. Our property taxes pay for municipal trash collection and a gigantic 'waste transfer station' where county residents can (after showing a driver's license with a county address) can get rid of just about anything free of charge (up to about 1,000 pounds or so), including hazardous waste, electronics, metal for recycling, glass, paper, yard waste, building materials, it goes on and on.
I recognize that there are different philosophies about whether this should be a public or private enterprise activity. I previously lived in a place where it was private and everywhere we drove we could see trash and other refuse dumped in ravines and gullies - by those who didn't want to pay.
I'll avoid saying which approach I think is best - but either way you go there are consequences to the larger public.

Our for-fee trash service is similar, however I don't think there is a weight limit. Also have recycling. Don't have trash dumping issue. Mostly just the problem of small items tossed out the vehicle windows. Or tourists leaving their crap on the beach. (Yeah, the locals don't do that.)

[SeaRags]

Originally Posted by capn_billl

Neither is the druggie living in a tent in a children's park. technically.

Are you seriously comparing someone anchoring out to a druggie living in a tent in a park? Wow, this thread was an eye opener. So many elitists in the sailing community. I think Wingssail has the best perspective I've seen. There are a few rules you can put in place to prevent the types of worse case scenarios that the elitists use to try to proclaim themselves as the only ones of worthy of enjoying the sailing life. It seems that that person anchored out there has the smaller carbon footprint as they create their own water, electricity, often gathering a portion of their own food and barely producing any waste at all. Seems they have earned their rights to enjoy any beach they choose to grace imho.

[lestersails]

Originally Posted by SeaRags

Are you seriously comparing someone anchoring out to a druggie living in a tent in a park? Wow, this thread was an eye opener. So many elitists in the sailing community. I think Wingssail has the best perspective I've seen. There are a few rules you can put in place to prevent the types of worse case scenarios that the elitists use to try to proclaim themselves as the only ones of worthy of enjoying the sailing life. It seems that that person anchored out there has the smaller carbon footprint as they create their own water, electricity, often gathering a portion of their own food and barely producing any waste at all. Seems they have earned their rights to enjoy any beach they choose to grace imho.

I appreciate the underlying sentiment of your post, but am afraid it is not quite so simple. The polemics in this post are quite remarkable. The critics of lives-boards cite well-justified examples of derelict liveaboards that are fouling the water and appalling for all to see. The liveaboards cite their good behavior as exemplars of how reasonable they are and that the landowners are rich, selfish jerks. Both are true and you can find examples of each. The problem is really a hard one - how do you separate these and address them appropriately?