# Beaufort South Carolina no longer a free anchor



## ltgoshen (Jan 5, 2009)

The city will be Installing 16 professionally-managed moorings for transient boats in a 300 year old mooring field in the Beaufort River. The new moorings will replace the approximately 12 randomly placed anchoring and also will involve removal of what they call, dilapidated boats, which will "improve water quality" they say. This mooring field that has belonged to local citizens for over 300 years will be confiscated by the city as a means of revenue. Visiting sailors cruisers and yachtsmen of all type, will no longer be able to visit the city of Beaufort from the water without paying for a mooring. In years past as many as 500 to 1000 visitors come to the fine city of Beaufort South Carolina. They come for the charm of a small seaside village and the simplicity. They come because its quaint and has that non-commercial touristy cost feel of days gone by. they don't want to come were there are high cost usually associated with most waterside cities like Hilton head, Daytona, and Panama City Beach. They clam “This grant will help make our marina, and downtown Beaufort, a better choice for boaters as they travel the Intracoastal Waterway. If you have been following the new rules down in Florida then you will know how the boating community really feels about having to pay for city mandated "for your own good" improvements that the end user have to pay for.. The want an option to use your equipment and pay your fees, not a mandate. Us, sailors and cruisers are a tight-knit community and word spreads fast about marinas with good, or bad, service. It, like the parking meters in the downtown area of Beaufort, will show the City its mistakes by nickel and dime-ing the public to the point of going elsewhere, all in the name of profit generation. Great job guys. For the rest of you reading this, If you want to save the city from the hands of capitalist revenue mongers. Now is the time.


----------



## Minnesail (Feb 19, 2013)

I'm sorry to hear that. I had a nice vacation in Beaufort once. We rented one of the cabins in Hunting Island State Park and then made day trips around the area. Beautiful scenery and very friendly people. 

I remember our first night, we had driven all day and were exhausted. We stopped at some little joint right by the entrance to the state park. We were famished and thirsty, but the kitchen was closed! The manager said "Oh, I can round you up a little something though." And that little something turned out to be a fish stew with fish his buddy caught that morning, salads, fresh bread, and I think some pie. He told us stories about the area while we drank and ate. That's hospitality!


----------



## Ajax_MD (Nov 24, 2009)

Yep, sounds like they are reading deeply into Florida's playbook.
Sorry to hear that.


----------



## CaptainForce (Jan 1, 2006)

I am a strong advocate of achoring rights; however, there are complex considerations. I used to enjoy anchoring in St. Augustine in the 1970's and '80's, but by the '90's I quit visiting as we cruised by because of the crowded high risk anchorage with dragging derelict boats. After the mooring field was developed I began returning to and enjoying St. Augustine. I'll agree that Beaufort, SC is not as crowded as St. Augustine just before the mooring field, but that is limited space near the dinghy landing for transient cruisers. When we anchor in Beaufort, now, we normally travel down to the cut between the two marshy shoals to the south and enter here from the south and there's also a lot of anchoring space further to the west toward the red marker. I assume that Beaufort's 16 moorings would take the best places that are closest to the dinghy dock. Some of us full time cruisers might find this worthwhile. For those that are not on the hook in one place for months at a time, there's little chance to come in an find a spot. I know that I had lost access to St. Augustine for many years because of the glut of derelict boats that never cruised and I've seen a number of these in Beaufort for many years. 

So, there's my "devil's advocate" statement. Now, should the city make the mooring field larger than the need to accomodate an expected use by transient cruisers? Absolutely not! Any more moorings than needed to allow some transients to find a space is wrong! If the moorings are used for the purpose of blocking free anchoring it's an injustice! I don't think that there is a demand for more than eight to ten transient moorings. The town could consider fewer moorings with a limit of a three or four day low cost stay.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

There used to be a restaurant just up the path from the marina that sold a "Bourbon Burger" ... beef marinated in bourbon with a bourbon/molasses sauce - heaven on earth ! In 2006 we went two days out of our way to get another bourbon burger ... no longer on the menu ! We haven't gone back since.

Back to the point. The entire Intra-Coastal Waterway is disappearing very quickly in fact we now call it the Intra-Condo Waterway. Enjoy what's left of it while you can.


----------



## CapnChuck (Apr 4, 2013)

There will still be sufficient anchorage space on the Beaufort River, it will just be a bit longer dinghy ride. Having said that, Factory Creek has always been our preferred anchorage for decades. It is much closer to groceries, hardware, pharmacy and supplies. It's only a short walk across the bridge to downtown. Lady's Island Marina on Factory Creek is a great place with better protection and cheaper rates than downtown and they are very friendly to boats anchored out. Chuck


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

The problem is, that once the condo commandos get the mooring field idea in their head, in a particular place, we boaters are doomed. 

They can go to the well over and over again, no matter how many times they lose, until they get what they want. Once they get the mooring fields in a location, it will be impossible to get rid of them, through.

And, with so many cities and counties going broke, it just makes it an easier sale for them.


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

its all over the world...well manyparts...doing the same thing

a hotel plops up and they wont let you anchor...condos worse...morring balls are astronomical even nearby etc...

its all $$$ politics so enjoy while you can

down here the same soon they will charge 50 to anchor just like they charge $5 at therestaurant to park every day...even if you eat there etc...

its idiots with no sense of tourism that are in control so you get abuses of power...

bummer about south carolina...


----------



## newhaul (Feb 19, 2010)

They tried that here in Washington in eagle harbor didn't work was in violation of the state department of natural resources and revised codes which are the state laws the best they were able to do was limit the anchoring out free to three days then you either go five miles or pay for their mooring for three days then move on min of five miles it did help to get rid of derelict vessels there were in the neighborhood of twenty that were deemed unsafe by the coastguard a couple off those were sailboats that had had their lead ballast removed by someone years before check into your local states laws the DNR usually has control of intertidal zones


----------



## Minnesail (Feb 19, 2013)

newhaul said:


> ...derelict vessels there were in the neighborhood of twenty that were deemed unsafe by the coastguard a couple off those were sailboats that had had their lead ballast removed by someone years before


Wait, what? I realize this doesn't really relate to the thread, but people take the lead keel off a boat, then re-float it?!?


----------



## guitarguy56 (Oct 10, 2012)

Living in Savannah... I can only surmise Savannah and the county will be looking favorably at what Beaufort is doing and will undoubtly try to implement the same rules and conditions on transients coming to Savannah and charge them for moorage and anchoring... we have many anchorages along the waterways here in the multitude of coves and hammocks... won't be long... just as in Beaufort many beautiful places to sail and many cruisers come into the areas hoping to do tourism and trade... it will hurt the businesses that depend on the seasonal arrivals of these boaters. The governments have no idea of the damage till it is too late, they are trying as best they can to get revenue but not looking in the right direction.


----------



## newhaul (Feb 19, 2010)

Minnesail said:


> Wait, what? I realize this doesn't really relate to the thread, but people take the lead keel off a boat, then it?!?


I know sounds weird but a friend of mine was homeless and a guy gave him a 27ft buccaneer that had its 2500 lb lead taken out for salvage then they gave away the boat so they didn't have to pay disposal fees kinda Scarry to me .
Does relate to this thread insofar as unsafe derelict vessels being removed


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

Well, that's easily fixed. We all move to Beaufort, register to vote, and then liberate the mooring field in perpetuity. Then we can all leave town again.

Apparently the current owners _have _either been stabbed in the back, or they've _voted in favor of this?_


----------



## ltgoshen (Jan 5, 2009)

CapnChuck said:


> There will still be sufficient anchorage space on the Beaufort River,


That,s where there moving all the old worn-out boats to. So don't think you will find a spot there your next trip thru. They are taking them there and down by the battery creek by west of the dockside restaurant. you can still find a spot to anchor, Sure but not close to down tow..
Cheers


----------



## ltgoshen (Jan 5, 2009)

hellosailor said:


> Well, that's easily fixed. We all move to Beaufort, register to vote, and then liberate the mooring field in perpetuity. Then we can all leave town again.
> 
> Apparently the current owners _have _either been stabbed in the back, or they've _voted in favor of this?_


HAHAHA I love this Idea


----------



## Vasco (Sep 24, 2006)

Never found the anchorage in front of the town very pleasant. Too many boats, not enough swing room. We used to continue down the river and anchor between The South Beaufort Sandbar and the East Bank. A nice quiet spot and a short dink ride over to town. On weekends the local power boaters all hang out there (in the summer) and party. But it is sad that it's going the mooring field way.


----------



## CaptainForce (Jan 1, 2006)

The first time Nancie and I stopped in Beaufort, SC was in the summer of 1972. Nobody was anchored out and there were no moorings. There were a few of us tied to a face dock and the dockmasters office was the cinder block building that is now the men's shower. The rate was either five or ten cents per foot/day and that was the common fee from the Chesapeake to Florida. There's more people everrywhere and the costs have risen with inflation. Some places are so expensive and crowded that we will not return, like Nantucket!, but we will likely continue stopping at Beaufort, SC. We've anchored in Factory Creek, the marshes to the south, by the dinghy dock and stayed at the Downtown Marina to use their free courtesy car for a grocery run. Maybe we'll have an option for a mooring in the future. ....'maybe we'll just buy more groceries in Georgetown or Charleston.


----------



## blowinstink (Sep 3, 2007)

Is the town dock there still $1 a foot or less? If so, I suppose the moorings will be cheap $5-10 a night. They were already charging for use of the town facilities. In that case It shouldn't be the end of the world (but it is still not my preference). If they try to charge $20 a night and raise the marina rates . . . well, good luck to them. Does anyone know how far you'd need to go for the next practical anchorage?


----------



## marianclaire (Feb 4, 2010)

ltgoshen said:


> That,s where there moving all the old worn-out boats to. So don't think you will find a spot there your next trip thru. They are taking them there and down by the battery creek by west of the dockside restaurant. you can still find a spot to anchor, Sure but not close to down tow..
> Cheers


That's what I have observed in St Augustine. The nice anchorage south of St A was full of the "displaced" boats my last time thru.
Dan S/V Marian Claire


----------



## benesailor (Dec 27, 2012)

I agree with you completely, but.....



> If you want to save the city from the hands of capitalist revenue mongers.


You mean socialist revenue mongers? Capitailism and revenue mongers don't genrally go hand in hand. I don'y know of to many wall streeters that enjoy paying taxes.

For those that would like to REALLY make thier voices heard..... write a letter, e-mail or phone to below.

City Council - City of Beaufort, South Carolina


----------



## RichH (Jul 10, 2000)

blowinstink said:


> . . . well, good luck to them. Does anyone know how far you'd need to go for the next practical anchorage?


Battery Creek at Port Royal just off of Paris Island Marine Base ... about 1-1/2 miles south of Beaufort. Bottom is mixed mud, sand and shells, so you need a 'modern' anchor to stay put in a blow.


----------



## Dfok (Apr 11, 2010)

benesailor said:


> I agree with you completely, but.....
> 
> You mean socialist revenue mongers? Capitailism and revenue mongers don't genrally go hand in hand. I don'y know of to many wall streeters that enjoy paying taxes.
> 
> ...


Good luck with that - please post all replies from the cityofbeaufort.org/citycouncil here, just for laughs.
The City of Beaufort is imposing a tax on sailors mooring in their city. They are calling it a "fee" because they cannot tax those without property or income in Beaufort.
Because we have no property or income in Beaufort we have no voice in the matter. Us sailors are what Beaufort or any city would embrace - a "mark - a stooge - a fool" to be taken for all they can get before you pass their borders. Call or write the city council all you want, they will not answer because your interests do not align with theirs. 
Beaufort is following the quick money - the absolute definition of capitalism.


----------



## xort (Aug 4, 2006)

Any news on the daily fee?


----------



## paulk (Jun 2, 2000)

"ALEC" doesn't only focus on gun laws and minimum wages. Florida, and now Beaufort, wants to have people with money to spend stop, and perhaps spend more in town than people who don't. It's capitalism. If you don't like it, vote against it when you get the chance. As posted above, however, it's difficult to vote against if you don't live there. It's like the hotel room taxes that are used in many cities to pay for sports stadiums. The people who need hotel rooms aren't voters in those cities. Taxation without representation... where have I heard THAT before?


----------



## ltgoshen (Jan 5, 2009)

benesailor said:


> I agree with you completely, but.....
> 
> You mean socialist revenue mongers? Capitailism and revenue mongers don't genrally go hand in hand. I don'y know of to many wall streeters that enjoy paying taxes.
> 
> ...


Agree and stand corrected.


----------



## benesailor (Dec 27, 2012)

> "ALEC" doesn't only focus on gun laws and minimum wages. Florida, and now Beaufort, wants to have people with money to spend stop, and perhaps spend more in town than people who don't. It's capitalism. If you don't like it, vote against it when you get the chance. As posted above, however, it's difficult to vote against if you don't live there. It's like the hotel room taxes that are used in many cities to pay for sports stadiums. The people who need hotel rooms aren't voters in those cities. Taxation without representation... where have I heard THAT before?


That's called the redistribution of wealth.

Unfortunately your right. If your local why would you care? Doesn't effect your bottom line; for now. If you own a boat your rich right? What's a few dollars here and there?

This is Capitalism at it's finest........
Free Overnight RV Camping / Walmart Overnight Camping

Camping at walmart; what does this do for their bottom line?


----------



## Dfok (Apr 11, 2010)

paulk said:


> "ALEC" doesn't only focus on gun laws and minimum wages. Florida, and now Beaufort, wants to have people with money to spend stop, and perhaps spend more in town than people who don't. It's capitalism. If you don't like it, vote against it when you get the chance.


Great point, but most have no idea what/who ALEC is or what it means to our lives as citizens or sailors ----


----------



## Rhapsody-NS27 (Apr 8, 2012)

Dfok said:


> Us sailors are what Beaufort or any city would embrace - a "mark - a stooge - a fool" to be taken for all they can get before you pass their borders.


In many people's mind, a boat seems to be considered more of a luxury item and believed that more $$ should be spent as part of this ownership through extra fees, taxes, etc. But at the same time, someone has to pay for some of the services that boaters take advantage of. Unless you live somewhere long enough to be involved with the local politics, cruisers are not going to have any say in the matter. So long as the facilities that are available are taken care of, a modest fee may not be too bad.


----------



## ltgoshen (Jan 5, 2009)

xort said:


> Any news on the daily fee?


Boat owner balks at notice to move vessel from Beaufort River bluff | Local News | The Island Packet
Looks like the harbor master Mr. Griffin "said he will work with any owners who want to pay to use the city's moorings, once they are installed. Charges have not been determined, but he is finding mooring in other locations averages $25 a day and $200 to $250 a month..


----------



## benesailor (Dec 27, 2012)

> In many people's mind, a boat seems to be considered more of a luxury item and believed that more $$ should be spent as part of this ownership through extra fees, taxes, etc. But at the same time, someone has to pay for some of the services that boaters take advantage of. Unless you live somewhere long enough to be involved with the local politics, cruisers are not going to have any say in the matter. So long as the facilities that are available are taken care of, a modest fee may not be too bad.


So true.

I had a conversation yesterday with a co-worker about the similarities and differences between RVing and cruising. They seem to get away with more, at times. A $80k Rv Rig (Truck & Trailer) is viewed as "Average american" and can slip place to place without have to re-register everytime they stop in a new state. Yet we stop in Florida for 3 months(?) and they want us to register and pay taxes. 
Public perception of boaters i guess. I know i get called rich at work. Yet my boss has a week old $60k RV and he is a "******* hillbilly" they say. Hmmm...



> So long as the facilities that are available are taken care of, a modest fee may not be too bad.


$25 is better than $80 at the dock; and, waterfront real estate is VERY expensive. So i guess we get a bargain. It's just the nickel and dimeing that goes on. No money for them if you are securely anchored.
It's just another avenue for municpalities to generate "revenue" (taxes) and the harbor master gets to hire another worker. So actually they will most likely lose money. So.... the locals lose again.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

blowinstink said:


> Is the town dock there still $1 a foot or less? If so, I suppose the moorings will be cheap $5-10 a night.


Dream on...



> Griffith said he will work with any owners who want to pay to use the city's moorings, once they are installed. Charges have not been determined, but he is finding mooring in other locations averages $25 a day and $200 to $250 a month.
> 
> Read more here: Boat owner balks at notice to move vessel from Beaufort River bluff | Local News | The Island Packet


----------



## Dfok (Apr 11, 2010)

Rhapsody-NS27 said:


> In many people's mind, a boat seems to be considered more of a luxury item and believed that more $$ should be spent as part of this ownership through extra fees, taxes, etc. But at the same time, someone has to pay for some of the services that boaters take advantage of
> .


The city will now install and require the use of moorings where free anchorages existed for 300 years. They will now prohibit you from dropping an anchor into "our" mud, requiring you to hook up the "their" mooring. You will not have an option to not use "their" service.(despotism in service of capitalism?). 
I have no issue with requiring payment for service such as a secure dinghy dock, shore taxi service or shower facility. 
Unless the sailing members of the voters in Beaufort vote in a block and prevail this is a done deal -a tax on anyone wishing to anchor or moor in Beaufort, NC. It will be repeated anywhere a boat can anchor that ALEC or short sighted rulers stand.


----------



## benesailor (Dec 27, 2012)

From article


> Beaufort has a $100,000 federal grant for the field, and Griffin, who has a contract with the city to manage the marina, is paying an additional $33,000. The city would kick in about $29,600, according to grant documents provided by the city.
> 
> Read more here: Boat owner balks at notice to move vessel from Beaufort River bluff | Local News | The Island Packet


I should be able to stay for free. I already paid!!! What's the interest rate on the loan i gave them?


----------



## benesailor (Dec 27, 2012)

Oh and the city pays to manage a marina? Last i checked if a private marina didn't make money they went out of business. 
Then they kicked in another $29.5k. How is this making money for the city. IDIOTS. WHO runs this place!!!


----------



## timtim (Dec 16, 2012)

if there is no demand for moorings or dockside stay, there is no revenue generated.
empty marinas means no revenue, 
No boater tourism revenue for businesses 
float your boats where people and businesses welcome you fairly


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

Dfok said:


> The city will now install and require the use of moorings where free anchorages existed for 300 years. They will now prohibit you from dropping an anchor into "our" mud, requiring you to hook up the "their" mooring. You will not have an option to not use "their" service.(despotism in service of capitalism?).


Actually, all they are restricting you from doing, as far as I can tell, is from anchoring in the midst of, or within 200 feet of, the mooring field... You can't anchor in mooring fields in New England, or Marathon, or anywhere else, either...

So, you'll simply have to anchor a bit further away from the town dock... Hell, isn't that what high-powered SUV dinghies are for? 

I don't like this trend any more than the next guy, but let's face it, we largely have fellow boaters to blame for the derelict boat issue that is often used as justification for mooring fields, and those that will still choose to patronize them... Try to look at the bright side, if this might motivate even ONE snowbird to bypass Beaufort and consider jumping out at Charleston or Edisto for what can so often be a beautiful bit of _SAILING_ outside, perhaps there is some upside to this sort of grubbing...


----------



## -OvO- (Dec 31, 2011)

$163K for 16 moorings. It's hard to know how many will be occupied at the proposed daily rate, but if you just figure that all of them will be 100% occupied at the proposed high end monthly rate of $250 / mo, that's $48000/yr in revenues. Operating costs are low but > 0. That's not a great ROI. 

HOWEVER, if you only consider the $33K that Griffith ponied up, and assume a 50/50 revenue split with the city, the deal looks much better from his perspective. Heck, even at a 30/70 split it's a good deal.

This is not socialism, this is "crony capitalism" to use the kindest epithet. It's capitalists using the power of the state to transfer taxpayer wealth to fund their business, and then using the power of the state to enforce their monopoly.


----------



## ltgoshen (Jan 5, 2009)

I agree with you Jon, "BUT"
A key difference is that I’m a fulltime resident here in Beaufort. I pay tax here, State, county and city. I have to pay to park downtown, what next will the city have a walking tax for foot traffic in the city limits? I have only been sailing for 4 years now. I had rather anchor out over a paid slip. The ICW should not be fare game for any city or county to levy tax in the name of whatever they want to in the betterment of the community. Bill the viewer of the great esthetic view our sailboats give, Hell you don’t tax the painter you charge the art center participant, right? Do you really think all sailors are rich? Most of us gave up the rat race in life to get away from this kind on force. Most of us spent all of our money on the vessel and good ground tackle so we could anchor out and hold well to the bottom as we go to town and spend our money in your towns. Early estimates I read in the Beaufort Gazette were as much as $200 a week. The average “hook sailors” annual budget is only $15 to $18,000 a year. You put another $2500.00? Add 10% to your budget all at once. Can you still have the car payment? The trip to the mountains? The river is not the city of Beaufort, its ours.
Oh ! my Dinghy is a 8 foot rowing boat not an SUV. We are of humble means. So to anchor 1 1/2 to 2 miles away is just not quite fair. It would be good exercise... 

LT


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

For me this just became a place I'm MORE likely to make a planned stop at since I would feel there is more chance of finding a safe spot once I arrive. I have a bigger anchor and like to use it, but not in the middle of a pack of unknowns in tight conditions.


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

JonEisberg said:


> Dream on...


That article explains a lot about what is going on.



> Beaufort has *a $100,000 federal grant* for the field, and *Griffin, who has a contract with the city to manage the marina, is paying an additional $33,000*. The city would kick in about $29,600, according to grant documents provided by the city.


Read more here: Boat owner balks at notice to move vessel from Beaufort River bluff | Local News | The Island Packet

I have a brother-in-law who does this for a living. By this, I mean he works for a company that finds these type grants, and then takes them to cities, counties and states, as a package, with his company doing the construction work for them, and giving campaign contributions to the deciding officials as a pot sweetener.

I've asked him over and over again how long it will be, before we have to start visiting him in prison, but they seem to have it figured out.


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

2009, barefoot landing, bridge closed high winds,$75for overnight,no facilities, police inquiry.
Off the list.
2011,St.Augustine, FL. installed mooring fields virtually eliminating anchoring.
Off the list.
2012-mooring field Florida test areas.
Off the list.
2014- Beaufort, SC. installs mooring.
Off the list.
Glad I got the chance to visit those places b4 the current changes.
I'm glad I now have the experience,and knowledge to bypass these places and stop elsewhere or better yet go coastal.
These changes will continue to impact the way sailors traveling the east coast address their options of where and when they stop,and for what duration.
it's really nothing new,been going on forever.
now the fun will be finding the new spots!


----------



## Dfok (Apr 11, 2010)

JonEisberg said:


> Actually, all they are restricting you from doing, as far as I can tell, is from anchoring in the midst of, or within 200 feet of, the mooring field... You can't anchor in mooring fields in New England, or Marathon, or anywhere else, either...


This isn't the end of the world but it may be the start of a big change for cruisers. Municipalities are privatizing a public amenity - access to our water. If eventually many desirable and safe anchorages are made into mooring fields it becomes easy to imagine breaking a sailor's budget $25 or $30 dollars at a clip.
Usually along with the managed moorings comes increased scrutiny and enforcement of all sorts of rules and regulations and more revenue from the fees and fines they generate. 
Sadly I can't imagine anything changing this course, cruisers have no effective voice in each locality to challenge in and debate these taxes disguised as fees.


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

joethecobbler said:


> 2009, barefoot landing, bridge closed high winds,$75for overnight,no facilities, police inquiry.
> Off the list.
> 2011,St.Augustine, FL. installed mooring fields virtually eliminating anchoring.
> Off the list.
> ...


I've learned. Just sail as fast as you can for the Bahamas. Florida and some of these other states, are making $300 for six months look like the bargain of the century. 

Going where you're not wanted, has never been as much fun as going somewhere that you are wanted.


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

Group9 said:


> I've learned. Just sail as fast as you can for the Bahamas. Florida and some of these other states, are making $300 for six months look like the bargain of the century.


Norfolk to Bahamas. Four days. Easy-peasy.


----------



## blowinstink (Sep 3, 2007)

JonEisberg said:


> Dream on...





joethecobbler said:


> 2009, barefoot landing, bridge closed high winds,$75for overnight,no facilities, police inquiry.
> Off the list.
> 2011,St.Augustine, FL. installed mooring fields virtually eliminating anchoring.
> Off the list.
> ...


I was in Beaufort SC 5 years ago and the docks were no more than $1/ft. Now the website says $1.85 and a post above indicates they anticipate $25 / night moorings. I had a nice time there, bought a print, ate out a couple times and stayed at the marina. I completely understand the need for small towns to control both abandoned boats and people who are essentially squatting in unseaworthy vessels. But it seems that they are simply ratcheting up prices with the expectation of greater revenues under the guise of controlling anchorages. It is a long run up the river to Beaufort (4-5 hours from the sea marker at Pt. Royal Sound???). That, coupled with the cost increases, will make me much less likely to make the side trip.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

Dfok said:


> This isn't the end of the world but it may be the start of a big change for cruisers. Municipalities are privatizing a public amenity - access to our water. If eventually many desirable and safe anchorages are made into mooring fields it becomes easy to imagine breaking a sailor's budget $25 or $30 dollars at a clip.
> Usually along with the managed moorings comes increased scrutiny and enforcement of all sorts of rules and regulations and more revenue from the fees and fines they generate.
> Sadly I can't imagine anything changing this course, cruisers have no effective voice in each locality to challenge in and debate these taxes disguised as fees.


Well, you haven't been paying very close attention, if you think this is the _START_ of a big change for cruisers 

Again, let me be clear, I detest the proliferation of this sort of thing, and I think using "Federal Grant" money for such purposes is total BS... However, those of us who travel a waterway like the ICW still represent a miniscule percentage of America's population, who reap an enormous reward in terms of Federal funds dedicated to maintaining the Ditch and keeping it free for all to use, so I'm not sure we want to go too far down that particular road of argument...

But I'm still always a bit perplexed by "the sky is falling" view of some, and why anyone would immediately cross a place like Beaufort off their list... Again, unless I'm missing something, the establishment of the mooring field may mean that you now might have to anchor 100 meters further out from downtown, than you did on your last visit... Is that really sufficient reason for bypassing a spot you may have enjoyed in the past?

Actually, if cruisers were to really act in concert to voice their objection, the best course of action might be to continue to stop in such communities, but simply to refuse to use the mooring field... This sort of obvious demonstration that "You can take your mooring field, and shove it..." seems to working to some extent in a place like Titusville... In the times I've passed by there since the establishment of their mooring field as part of Florida's pilot program, I've never seen more than a smattering of boats lying to moorings, while dozens are anchored further out, or to the north... In a conversation with one of the guys at Titusville Marina, he conceded it was pretty much of a bust... So, if sailors would simply refuse to participate, it might drive the point home pretty quickly...

We know that ain't happening, however, too many cruisers still prefer the 'convenience' of some of these mooring fields, and will gladly pay... And, of course, in many places throughout New England, or a harbor like Boot Key, these arrangements really are the best all-around viable solution...

That $500/month thing is getting tougher with each passing year, no doubt about it...


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

JonEisberg said:


> That $500/month thing is getting tougher with each passing year, no doubt about it...


Yeah, but it's not because of the inherent cost of cruising getting higher. It's because of the inherent characteristic of government to always get bigger and more expensive.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

Group9 said:


> I've learned. Just sail as fast as you can for the Bahamas. Florida and some of these other states, are making $300 for six months look like the bargain of the century.
> 
> Going where you're not wanted, has never been as much fun as going somewhere that you are wanted.


Unfortunately, it's happening in the Bahamas, as well... Last time I passed thru the Exumas 2 years ago, after not having been there in several years, I was stunned by the proliferation of moorings, and the requirements how far one had to anchor distant from them, and how rudely the regulations were being enforced by some park rangers (from what I've heard from others)...

Why anyone would take a park mooring at a place like Shroud Cay completely baffles me... But of course, some folks do, many apparently feel 'safer' lying to a mooring, than to their own ground tackle...

Delusional, especially in a place like the Bahamas...


----------



## Ajax_MD (Nov 24, 2009)

I think they feel safer, because the derelict boats have been removed, and won't drag down onto them, in a blow. It's not so much that they don't trust their own ground tackle.

I came to sailing late in life. As I begin my travels, I am disappointed to learn that the life I've read about, won't really exist anymore and that I could be priced right out of long-distance sailing.


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

JonEisberg said:


> Unfortunately, it's happening in the Bahamas, as well... Last time I passed thru the Exumas 2 years ago, after not having been there in several years, I was stunned by the proliferation of moorings, and the requirements how far one had to anchor distant from them, and how rudely the regulations were being enforced by some park rangers (from what I've heard from others)...
> 
> Why anyone would take a park mooring at a place like Shroud Cay completely baffles me... But of course, some folks do, many apparently feel 'safer' lying to a mooring, than to their own ground tackle...
> 
> Delusional, especially in a place like the Bahamas...


The only places I have been in the Bahamas where moorings had been put down, for the obvious reason of just making money, are the hurricane holes in George Town and in some of the harbors in the Abacos. Warderick Wells I kind of understand, it is a marine park. But, the last time I was in the Bahamas, the entire time I was there, I hooked to one mooring, for one night, and that was in Warderick Wells. And, I could have easily moved a little farther away and not done it, and been just as happy.

The designated mooring field phenomena is moving incrementally right now, but it is moving, and not in the right direction.

A worse thing in the Bahamas, has been the practice over the last few years, to sell islands off to millionaires and billionaires, who then fence the things off, and even try to claim the water near them (you would think they would have learned their lesson from Norman's Cay and Carlos Ledher with that one).


----------



## Bene505 (Jul 31, 2008)

Dfok said:


> Beaufort is following the quick money - the absolute definition of capitalism.


Such a wrong statement. This is goverment siezure, not capitalism. And yes, government siezure is usually very short-tem thinking. Substitute any other form of govt. and I'll agree with your statement.

But to denounce the only system (capitalism) where we get to keep what we earn, trade freely with others, and even own boats? Completely wrong. (There weren't a lot of sailboat owners in the Soviet Union during the 70s and 80s. I was in East Germany years before the wall came down. You never saw such fear on the faces of every person there. No thought of pleasure, only getting to where you were going without being singled out.)

No thread drift intended, only need to squash such completely idiotic mis-statements early.

Regards,
Brad


----------



## bljones (Oct 13, 2008)

Group9 said:


> And, with so many cities and counties going broke, it just makes it an easier sale for them.


That is the core of the argument, both for, and against.
the problem is, that we cruisers haven't been real good at presenting our side of the argument.
It is about the money. we need to show that we cruisers represent positive revenue- that in return for parking, we leave behind more dollars than are gained from mooring revenue.
We need stats and a spokesperson to go head to head with their stats.

Something simple to understand like "Each free mooring ball puts x dollars into the local economy every year. Each mooring ball with a price attached encourages that revenue to go elsewhere."


----------



## jimrafford (Jan 7, 2011)

I have property in Beaufort so I have skin in the game.
The problem for the city is anchored boats that become derelict are a nuisance and occupy prime space for transients. Not to mention not very attractive to look at from the waterfront park. The city has done a nice job fixing up the area to make it more attractive to tourism. The reality is revenue from cruisers will never come close to what arrives by car and bus.
Jim


----------



## Dfok (Apr 11, 2010)

Bene505 said:


> Such a wrong statement. This is goverment siezure, not capitalism. And yes, government siezure is usually very short-tem thinking. Substitute any other form of govt. and I'll agree with your statement.
> 
> No thread drift intended, only need to squash such completely idiotic mis-statements early.
> 
> ...


Idiotic? Really?
Looks to me like a public entity is being given to a private concern to run as a business and for a profit. The capitalist ends up with control of the property.
Capitalism run amuck.
The "government"- ie: US, the taxpayers didn't have to seize it, it was ours to use until some guy figured a way to make it his. 
Funny how that redistribution of wealth thing can bite you in the ass.


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

jimrafford said:


> I have property in Beaufort so I have skin in the game.
> The problem for the city is anchored boats that become derelict are a nuisance and occupy prime space for transients. Not to mention not very attractive to look at from the waterfront park. The city has done a nice job fixing up the area to make it more attractive to tourism. The reality is revenue from cruisers will never come close to what arrives by car and bus.
> Jim


And, neither will the money from traffic tickets. But, every city budgets that in, too, and expects their police department to meet that revenue projection.


----------



## krisscross (Feb 22, 2013)

Cruising for $500 a month is getting harder and harder.


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

I believe in Vero,FL. if you are not on a mooring you are not welcome to land a dingy. also, they "raft"vessels while on mooring.
These types of policies will discourage anchoring in mooring field areas.
I've concluded there is nothing that will change the direction that these types of laws are taking.
It was fun while it lasted. 
I've chosen to buy waterfront and become one of the type I loath.I will dock or Moore along the waterfront adjacent to my property, and use the law to harrass all who attempt to anchor within view,except other adjacent waterfront owners of course.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

joethecobbler said:


> I believe in Vero,FL. if you are not on a mooring you are not welcome to land a dingy. also, they "raft"vessels while on mooring.
> These types of policies will discourage anchoring in mooring field areas.


And yet, Vero has become one of the most popular cruiser hangouts in all of Florida - they don't call it "Velcro Beach" for nuthin', after all...

Go figure...



joethecobbler said:


> I've concluded there is nothing that will change the direction that these types of laws are taking.
> It was fun while it lasted.
> I've chosen to buy waterfront and become one of the type I loath.I will dock or Moore along the waterfront adjacent to my property, and use the law to harrass all who attempt to anchor within view,except other adjacent waterfront owners of course.


yeah, but what if one of your neighbor's boats looks like this?

Shame on that taxpaying owner of a million dollar home on Islamorada, for being pissed that one of those 'Romantic-Looking Sailboats' like this sits off his property, year after year, right?


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

a little soap and paint, she'll be good.
Veronica is popular with some. but so are all the other popular places, long before many of the current laws.
I think the old days and ways are gone.
regulated out of existence. and if any of the old mentality exists, they are not long and not replaced. it's a changed world.
whether better or worse is merely perspective and opinion.
time to change tack, batten down and reef early.
it's a bold neutered world.


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

And, the truth is, it is the homeless looking boats they want to get rid of. But, there are a lot of constitutional and public relations problems with going after the homeless as a targeted group, so they go after all boaters, hoping it runs the homeless off, too.

This is not the country it used to be. Not for boating, and not for a lot of other things, too. When I lived in south Florida, you saw stuff like this every single day (Carl Hiassen made a living writing about it). 

The people behind things like this mooring ball program have the power to get away with it. All it takes is having the money, and being willing to spread it to the people who make these decisions. But, They don't have the power to control what we think about it, or them, for doing it.

At least, not yet, anyway.


----------



## ltgoshen (Jan 5, 2009)

Group9 said:


> Yeah, but it's not because of the inherent cost of cruising getting higher. It's because of the inherent characteristic of government to always get bigger and more expensive.


 One goverment does it they all do it. :chaser


----------



## Vasco (Sep 24, 2006)

Group9 said:


> The only places I have been in the Bahamas where moorings had been put down, for the obvious reason of just making money, are the hurricane holes in George Town and in some of the harbors in the Abacos. Warderick Wells I kind of understand, it is a marine park. But, the last time I was in the Bahamas, the entire time I was there, I hooked to one mooring, for one night, and that was in Warderick Wells. And, I could have easily moved a little farther away and not done it, and been just as happy.
> 
> The designated mooring field phenomena is moving incrementally right now, but it is moving, and not in the right direction.
> 
> A worse thing in the Bahamas, has been the practice over the last few years, to sell islands off to millionaires and billionaires, who then fence the things off, and even try to claim the water near them (you would think they would have learned their lesson from Norman's Cay and Carlos Ledher with that one).


The moorings that the Park put in at Shroud Cay about four years ago is a prime example of a money grab. The bottom is all sand, no heads, no reefs to protect. The Park put a bunch of moorings (about 20) in the prime spot in the Shroud anchorage and they are usually empty. They are not maintained and only a newbie would actually use one (as is the case of most moorings in the Exumas and some other islands in the Bahamas). And as a money grab I think they're a losing proposition if you figure the installation cost and the meager return but the cost is probably covered by some grant.

Although many of us deplore the new mooring fields on the Waterway they are loved by many new cruisers who have no anchoring skills. They would rather swing on a mooring of unknown reliability than use their own ground tackle. They see the moorings as a cheap alternative to marinas. Most of these cruisers last a year or two but there's always a new bunch ready to take their place.


----------



## Vasco (Sep 24, 2006)

JonEisberg said:


> And yet, Vero has become one of the most popular cruiser hangouts in all of Florida - they don't call it "Velcro Beach" for nuthin', after all...
> 
> Go figure...


I've been cruising since 1990 and there were moorings in Vero then. They were $5 a night. I think they're up to $14 a night now. The staff are very cruiser friendly, free wifi, and there's a free bus service at Vero. As for rafting most don't mind. You meet new friends. And the moorings are maintained and the field is very sheltered..

Also Vero has become a cruiser's retirement colony. Many cruisers who have given it up live there. We have friends who've retired there and they keep up with the cruisers passing through.

There's a good fuel dock, no fenders or lines needed. Good showers. Good mail drop. And quite a few marine services if you need something.

OK. That's the commercial for Vero. But it's not all good, it can get a bit buggy at times.


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

give it ten years and when the moorings start failing and the economics of installing and maintenance comes to view and the underuse becomes undeniable.
then maybe we'll see them go away.
I believe that there is no example of a financially self sustaining mooring field, even the most popular are cash loosers.


----------



## ltgoshen (Jan 5, 2009)

joethecobbler said:


> a little soap and paint, she'll be good.
> Veronica is popular with some. but so are all the other popular places, long before many of the current laws.
> I think the old days and ways are gone.
> regulated out of existence. and if any of the old mentality exists, they are not long and not replaced. it's a changed world.
> ...


Well The state needs to do somthing about that like keeping track of anchored vessels in there waterways, So when this happens they can address the porblem. Crusiers should not pay for that photo. I aspire to be a crusier and This is how my boat is kept. So again with this new post Reagan lib's. take the money from the wrong place and throw it at a problem that it will never fix. Where did they learn this math? Just saylin










This is the Mooring field in Beaufort where I found this derelic boat 3 years ago.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

Vasco said:


> Although many of us deplore the new mooring fields on the Waterway they are loved by many new cruisers who have no anchoring skills. They would rather swing on a mooring of unknown reliability than use their own ground tackle. They see the moorings as a cheap alternative to marinas. Most of these cruisers last a year or two but there's always a new bunch ready to take their place.


_EXACTLY_...

I hope some will keep that in mind, next time the discussion arises about the need for the 'Sailing industry' to better promote sailing, attract new people to sailing and get more folks out cruising, how we all benefit from keeping the sport 'vibrant', blah, blah, blah...


----------



## chef2sail (Nov 27, 2007)

Pure rubbish....this has nothing to do with Reagan or libs or even a cash grab

People in the Southeast have had it easy for a while, Cruise north from the LI Sound to Maine and youll find most of the prime anchorage areas have mooring fields in them by the townies and people who live in the coastal cities.

Their purpose is not necessarily to make money, but is a group of moorings for people who live their to get the "prime spots"

I dont think the Beufort mooring are necessarily there to make money,

Dave



ltgoshen said:


> Well The state needs to do somthing about that like keeping track of anchored vessels in there waterways, So when this happens they can address the porblem. Crusiers should not pay for that photo. I aspire to be a crusier and This is how my boat is kept. So again with this new post Reagan lib's. take the money from the wrong place and throw it at a problem that it will never fix. Where did they learn this math? Just saylin
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

joethecobbler said:


> give it ten years and when the moorings start failing and the economics of installing and maintenance comes to view and the underuse becomes undeniable.
> then maybe we'll see them go away.
> I believe that there is no example of a financially self sustaining mooring field, even the most popular are cash loosers.


A lot of these grants have no provision for maintenance of the facilities the local governments are paid to build. It's a continuing problem where I live. We were flooded with easy money for cities and counties to buy stuff after Katrina. But, a lot of it is falling apart because like person who buys a nicer yacht than they can afford, using grandma's inheritance, they can't afford to keep them up.

I bet the same thing happens on the mooring balls. As the lines get old and break, and mooring balls float off, no one will replace them. Because, there will be no funding budgeted for it.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

joethecobbler said:


> I believe that there is no example of a financially self sustaining mooring field, even the most popular are cash loosers.


Just a hunch, but I would guess that a look at the books of the mooring operations in places like Annapolis, Newport, Nantucket, Northeast Harbor, et al, might indicate a fairly profitable venture to be in operation...


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

JonEisberg said:


> Just a hunch, but I would guess that a look at the books of the mooring operations in places like Annapolis, Newport, Nantucket, Northeast Harbor, et al, might indicate a fairly profitable venture to be in operation...


maybe they would, I'd love to know if any are even paying for themselves.
I think that will or could be an interesting question when Florida completes the five year mooring field program.


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

jimrafford said:


> The problem for the city is anchored boats that become derelict are a nuisance and occupy prime space for transients.


This is the element of mooring fields I don't understand. Why not deal with derelict boats directly with legislation instead of installing mooring fields, often underused, and having many unintended consequences? Unless the locals really do want to drive cruisers and other transients away...?


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

JonEisberg said:


> Just a hunch, but I would guess that a look at the books of the mooring operations in places like Annapolis, Newport, Nantucket, Northeast Harbor, et al, might indicate a fairly profitable venture to be in operation...


I used to live in Annapolis. Completely different mentality at work. Annapolis actively tries to court boaters to come spend money in their town. Annapolis actually has free tie us space next to their downtown, first come, first served. Annapolis is first and foremost a boating community and they haven't been overrun with condos either.

They have things like water taxis that go to their moorings, but they don't send the police after you if don't use them. Guerrillas versus gorillas. Huge difference. Huge!


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

SVAuspicious said:


> This is the element of mooring fields I don't understand. Why not deal with derelict boats directly with legislation instead of installing mooring fields, often underused, and having many unintended consequences? Unless the locals really do want to drive cruisers and other transients away...?


All the more perplexing when you realize that if some derelict comes and hooks to one of those mooring balls, they have the exact same eviction and legal problem they have if he just anchors instead.

That's what me wonder if the whole "derelict boat" issue isn't just a false flag operation.


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

I been saying it's a sham from the start. derelict boats and pumpout.false flags that the uninformed can understand.
It will be curious what happens in the next decade. still would love to see the revenue from the mooring fields. the only one's I've ever seen full are Annapolis main field and Marathon. I doubt Annapolis is full even 6 months at best 4days a week.
I know titusville,FL. and St.Augustine, FL.are almost empty most of the time.


----------



## Bene505 (Jul 31, 2008)

Group9 said:


> A lot of these grants have no provision for maintenance of the facilities the local governments are paid to build. It's a continuing problem where I live. We were flooded with easy money for cities and counties to buy stuff after Katrina. But, a lot of it is falling apart because like person who buys a nicer yacht than they can afford, using grandma's inheritance, they can't afford to keep them up.
> 
> I bet the same thing happens on the mooring balls. As the lines get old and break, and mooring balls float off, no one will replace them. Because, there will be no funding budgeted for it.


What's the story with lawsuits when one of these for-fee moorings breaks and a boat goes up on the rocks or something even worse happens?

Regards,
Brad


----------



## benesailor (Dec 27, 2012)

> All the more perplexing when you realize that if some derelict comes and hooks to one of those mooring balls, they have the exact same eviction and legal problem they have if he just anchors instead.
> 
> That's what me wonder if the whole "derelict boat" issue isn't just a false flag operation.


Good question.

20-30 years ago nobody would blink an eye to see any boat sitting out on the hook; regardless of condition. Standards have changed. It is no longer acceptable to have nothing but a pristine yacht sitting out front.

Most of the reason for this is that the Nor'easter's have moved south along the eastern seaboard and brought their politics with them. They want the manicured yard, fresh paint and paved driveway; and, this attitude has moved to the waterfront as well. Check the real estate prices and who lives there. 
The sad part is why they left! They moved south to get away from taxes and regulation. They dream of the old south but want what they had up north. This is the said transformation of the south. There are few places left where this transformation has not taken hold.

Unfortunately; we can gripe all we want, it will most likely change nothing.

If they really want to bring in more revenue. Make it free with a 2 or 3 night max stay, then pay after that. This would be good for local businesses. 
I transit the NYS canal quite a bit. Every town has FREE docking (48 hr stay or more) with cheap electric ($5) and cheap($2) or free pumpouts. Sometimes it's hard to find a spot. They flip side of this it has ruined some marinas. During the summer months people have one thing on there mind. GO party. The villages are making money.


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

I grew up on the NYS canal and remember well when there was no fee,open till10pm. and free tie up every where you wanted. now you pay an annual pass and they have invested millions in upland facilities.
I know of no Marina's closing due to it.
even at $75 a season, the NYS canal is incredible.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

Bene505 said:


> What's the story with lawsuits when one of these for-fee moorings breaks and a boat goes up on the rocks or something even worse happens?
> 
> Regards,
> Brad


I'm no lawyer, but according to the agreement you'll sign with St Augustine, sounds like a pretty ironclad release of responisibility:



> RELEASE OF LIABILITY AND INDEMNITY:
> Licensee, on his/her own behalf and on
> behalf of his/her executors, agents, heirs,
> personal representativ
> ...


----------



## benesailor (Dec 27, 2012)

> I grew up on the NYS canal and remember well when there was no fee,open till10pm. and free tie up every where you wanted. now you pay an annual pass and they have invested millions in upland facilities.
> I know of no Marina's closing due to it.
> even at $75 a season, the NYS canal is incredible.


Agreed, it is a bargain.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

joethecobbler said:


> I grew up on the NYS canal and remember well when there was no fee,open till10pm. and free tie up every where you wanted. now you pay an annual pass and they have invested millions in upland facilities.
> I know of no Marina's closing due to it.
> even at $75 a season, the NYS canal is incredible.


My absolute favourite cruising ground. We spent all of last August in there for the $100 pass. Free docking at dozens of small towns, free wifi, some free laundry facilities, free power, free water some amazing small town museums, the wineries on the Finger Lakes, car racing at Watkins Glen, bridge tenders, harbour masters and lock tenders who actually want and welcome cruisers.

Take a look at these photos Cruising the NY State Canal System, of hundreds of yards of empty dock walls. We often docked by ourselves or only one or two other boats.


----------



## benesailor (Dec 27, 2012)

Boatpoker, quiet down. You;ll ruin it for those that know.


----------



## benesailor (Dec 27, 2012)

This is what happens when you cruise the canal. 

sinking Erie Canal | tugster: a waterblog


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

benesailor said:


> Boatpoker, quiet down. You;ll ruin it for those that know.


I get that..... but ..... How long can the state keep supporting that if people don't use it.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

boatpoker said:


> My absolute favourite cruising ground. We spent all of last August in there for the $100 pass. Free docking at dozens of small towns, free wifi, some free laundry facilities, free power, free water some amazing small town museums, the wineries on the Finger Lakes, car racing at Watkins Glen, bridge tenders, harbour masters and lock tenders who actually want and welcome cruisers.
> 
> Take a look at these photos Cruising the NY State Canal System, of hundreds of yards of empty dock walls. We often docked by ourselves or only one or two other boats.


Agreed, although it's not really much of a "cruising ground" for sailors...  I've always loved doing the Canal, though it's certainly much better done in a powerboat...










However, I think the Trent-Severn Waterway is even a bit more interesting, certainly offering a bit more variety and opportunity for more off-channel exploration...

One of the inland waterways that can be done with the mast up, that I've found to have a feel closest to that of the NYS Barge Canals and upstate NY in general, is New Brunswick's St John River system... Just a delightful cruising ground, with some surprisingly good opportunities for sailing...


----------



## benesailor (Dec 27, 2012)

GEEZ Jon, Why don't you tell eveyone??

There will be mooring fields everywhere!


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

lt, since you live there...I understand the first major brick you can throw at the town is to ask if they have conducted an environmental impact study. If they haven't, you bring suit and force them to do so. That may cost them a year immediately, and then there's no reason to move boats since no moorings can be sunk for another year.

When they do the study, get it thrown out and redone, because there's bound to be something they omitted. Meanwhile...get the local Boy Scouts to start getting signatures on a petition. Easy enough once the downtown merchants get reminded that fewer boats means fewer dollars.

There _are _ways to fight city hall.

Derelict boats? There are also ways to find owners, not all the time but most of the time, and nail 'em with the bills. Even easier when the town fathers ID the boats and owners when they first come in. That can be done a number of ways, the same way road cops find ways to stop and check motor vehicles on land.

Just takes a little planning, and that's something most politicians, like most voters, are simply incapable of doing.

All this talk kinda reminds me of the late 1820's, when they started saying that grazing livestock on the Boston Common was too dirty and disruptive. And sure enough, don't you know, in 1833 those prigs changed the law and made it totally illegal to graze livestock on the Common any more! Hey, we'd been grazing sheep there for over 120 years in my family alone! Talk about screwing with public rights and interests....


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

you can sail the finger lakes and lake Ontario and Erie,Champlain. and the seasonal slip rates ar e right.never had any marina even mention insurance. no anchoring issues. no midnight boardings and the live aboard issue,isn't.
If it didn't freeze it would be perfect.


----------



## ltgoshen (Jan 5, 2009)

hellosailor said:


> lt, since you live there...I understand the first major brick you can throw at the town is to ask if they have conducted an environmental impact study. If they haven't, you bring suit and force them to do so. That may cost them a year immediately, and then there's no reason to move boats since no moorings can be sunk for another year.
> 
> When they do the study, get it thrown out and redone, because there's bound to be something they omitted. Meanwhile...get the local Boy Scouts to start getting signatures on a petition. Easy enough once the downtown merchants get reminded that fewer boats means fewer dollars.


Now that might be an Idea. 
There has only been only 1 meeting where the public was invited. I was told that the folks that don't move their boats by the end of the week will be fined 1,000. a day.Now the lion share of the boat owners in that field cant pay $1,000 a day fine any more than they can move their boats. My boat came from that derelict field three years ago. 
I was blessed to find an owner that needed to sell and I got a great boat.

The rest of the boats left behind need to be auctioned off and required to be move by the new owner. the rest go to the dump. After the field is cleared, Rick the harbor master should do a better job of registering boats that pull in and drop tackle. If someone in the past would have been doing there job this collection of boats would have been a lot smaller of a group.

I Still have my storm tackle there and will go on Saturday and remove it. 
I have two QCR 45Lb pounders with 50' foot of chain. I have a new storm spot, where I will reset it. What gets me here, is not making people clean their mess up with regards to old boats. Its the fact that the Government half hazardly throws my tax money dollars at a mooring field that is not the problem, while driving boating guest from this fine city away. At the same time some contractor pockets the grant money again leaving the taxpayer "Me" to cover the maintenance for years to come knowing damn well the moorings will not pay for themselves.
I just don't like cronyism in local government or anywhere for that matter. Someones pocket will be filled in this BS, and cruisers and taxpayers will suck 
it up.

I will try this environmental impact study if I can make it to the next meeting in time.
Thanks for the Idea.
LT


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

joethecobbler said:


> you can sail the finger lakes and lake Ontario and Erie,Champlain. and the seasonal slip rates ar e right.never had any marina even mention insurance. no anchoring issues. no midnight boardings and the live aboard issue,isn't.
> If it didn't freeze it would be perfect.


That's similar to what I say about the Mississippi Gulf Coast, but I add, "Thank God we have hurricanes or the Yankees would have come in and run us out by now".


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

hellosailor said:


> lt, since you live there...I understand the first major brick you can throw at the town is to ask if they have conducted an environmental impact study. If they haven't, you bring suit and force them to do so. That may cost them a year immediately, and then there's no reason to move boats since no moorings can be sunk for another year.
> 
> When they do the study, get it thrown out and redone, because there's bound to be something they omitted. Meanwhile...get the local Boy Scouts to start getting signatures on a petition. Easy enough once the downtown merchants get reminded that fewer boats means fewer dollars.


Well, since the $100K Federal grant has _ALREADY_ been awarded, and The U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Services is the federal funding agency for this Boating Infrastructure Grant, it would seem pretty unlikely that the necessary environmental impact study was not already conducted long ago...

Beaufort to upgrade downtown Marina with $100,000 grant - WTOC-TV: Savannah, Beaufort, SC, News, Weather & Sports


----------



## Argyle38 (Oct 28, 2010)

JonEisberg said:


> Well, since the $100K Federal grant has _ALREADY_ been awarded, and The U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Services is the federal funding agency for this Boating Infrastructure Grant, it would seem pretty unlikely that the necessary environmental impact study was not already conducted long ago...
> 
> Beaufort to upgrade downtown Marina with $100,000 grant - WTOC-TV: Savannah, Beaufort, SC, News, Weather & Sports


Are you implying that one branch of the Government actually COMMUNICATES with another branch of the Government. :laugher

Good one!


----------



## Vasco (Sep 24, 2006)

boatpoker said:


> My absolute favourite cruising ground. We spent all of last August in there for the $100 pass. Free docking at dozens of small towns, free wifi, some free laundry facilities, free power, free water some amazing small town museums, the wineries on the Finger Lakes, car racing at Watkins Glen, bridge tenders, harbour masters and lock tenders who actually want and welcome cruisers.
> 
> Take a look at these photos Cruising the NY State Canal System, of hundreds of yards of empty dock walls. We often docked by ourselves or only one or two other boats.


Love the NY State canal System from the days when it was all free. Now it's still a bargain but in case you guys aren't aware of it - it's winter in the northern hemisphere!!!


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

Argyle38 said:


> Are you implying that one branch of the Government actually COMMUNICATES with another branch of the Government. :laugher
> 
> Good one!


Agreed, not always very likely, but the possibility still exists 

Since the Army Corps of Engineers has already issued the permit, sounds most likely that the required studies (among them, a request for notification from Indian Tribes to determine whether the mooring field might have any impact on properties of religious or cultural significance) have already been completed...

See Pages 2-3 of the following:

http://www.sac.usace.army.mil/Porta..._of_Beaufort_Downtown_Marina_Modification.pdf

Discussion of this proposal has actually been ongoing for a few years, sounds like they have their ducks in a row, and it's probably a bit late in the game for the boat owners being displaced to being a halt to this project. Which, incidentally, long ago received the endorsement of the local Beaufort Sail and Power Squadron...

Somewhat overlooked in this discussion, has been the proposed upgrades to the city marina, and how those reflect the sort of boaters Beaufort is most interested in attracting... Namely, those big spenders who will be plugging in with 50 amp shore power cords, as opposed to the $500/month crowd... 



> While some boaters prefer moorings, many desire the conveniences offered by dockage at the transient pier. The Downtown Marina falls short is satisfying the electrical needs of large, modern, well-equipped vessels - largely because the electrical service at the marina was installed in the 1970s.
> 
> Key elements in the project include:
> 
> ...


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

JonEisberg said:


> Agreed, not always very likely, but the possibility still exists
> 
> Since the Army Corps of Engineers has already issued the permit, sounds most likely that the required studies (among them, a request for notification from Indian Tribes to determine whether the mooring field might have any impact on properties of religious or cultural significance) have already been completed...
> 
> ...


Probably so. As I said earlier, the people who set these kinds of federally paid for projects up, do it for a living, and usually cover all of those bases. These type things are submitted to the cities as a package deal, with campaign fund checks stapled to the proposal. They never lose in court as they usually have that covered, too.

What they won't come back with, is a maintenance package, because there is never enough money in that, because there are never any federal grants for maintenance, and they are in it for the quick buck.


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

like I said - Off the list !
I enjoyed Beaufort, SC. the times we stopped. the workers at the marina were quite friendly and showers were $1 .
I may anchor again around there, across the way.
it was a tourism town, nothing special.
it'll all be different ten years from now, just like it's different than it was ten years ago.
after all you're not the same as you were ten years ago.what makes you think anything else would be.


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

joethecobbler said:


> like I said - Off the list !
> I enjoyed Beaufort, SC. the times we stopped. the workers at the marina were quite friendly and showers were $1 .
> I may anchor again around there, across the way.
> it was a tourism town, nothing special.
> ...


You're right. And, for every one of us who like the way things were 20 or 30 years ago better, there is someone who likes the way things are now better.

That is, the constant struggle. Half likes things the way they are, and half wants to change things to what they want them to be. I just hate being a member of the losing half.


----------



## ltgoshen (Jan 5, 2009)

JonEisberg said:


> Which, incidentally, long ago received the endorsement of the local Beaufort Sail and Power Squadron...


This group is a grout of elitist folks in our community. They are the rich folk. The ones making decisions for the common folks. The same rich, retired elitist groups like the HOA presidents and board members that mandate no palm tree there, no Wooden fence your gardens because "WE" decide,. Because it's in "YOUR" Best interest. The same folks that have their power boat in a dry-stack in their gated community. Not to mention, that they are tied into the City council by the hip, Like the Rotary, and the Chamber. Their political wing of the same body. Most local boaters have little faith in the local Squad . Look at their membership ratio to boats



JonEisberg said:


> Somewhat overlooked in this discussion, has been the proposed upgrades to the city marina, and how those reflect the sort of boaters Beaufort is most interested in attracting... Namely, those big spenders who will be plugging in with 50 amp shore power cords, as opposed to the $500/month crowd...


If you were following a long, the upgrade to the city dock has nothing to do with this discussion. Who don't want the dock spruced up? Thats great for the dock renters and transient boaters. 
The discussion has always been about the unjust, heavy handedness of city and state governments taken rivers and waterways that have for over 200 years, belonged to the "PEOPLE" and whore it out to contractors for profit and campaign contributions.

Progress to the middle class only means that they no longer get to partake in the fun. It means they will be priced out of the lifestyle by the elite.

What ever.
Cheers.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

benesailor said:


> GEEZ Jon, Why don't you tell eveyone??
> 
> There will be mooring fields everywhere!


Nah, not very likely... I was amazed how few American boats I ran into up there - 1, maybe 2 at the most...

Of course, even just going east of Schoodic, the number of boats drops precipitously...


----------



## benesailor (Dec 27, 2012)

Jon, You're right. It's to cold for most.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

lt, there's all sorts of ways to fight city hall. Start with going online, or going to the clerk's office, and check out the exact laws requiring notifications for a town meeting, or whatever they held. Often the law will specify how notice has to be given, and how far in advance, and often someone will not comply 100% with that. 

If you get lucky, they didn't comply and they have to throw out the meeting and start over.

Then there's the grant itself, you can also check to see IF they properly complied with the terms for that, the timetable, if there are any technicalities that you can get them DSQ'd for on that.

This is how Dennis Conner winds yacht races: Scrutinize the enemy, and DSQ 'em for any infraction you can find.

Then if you really feel bold, you start a recall campaign against the pols who have started the whole business.

Question everything, because the odds are at least one mistake was made and that's all the ***** you need in their armor.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

hellosailor said:


> lt, there's all sorts of ways to fight city hall. Start with going online, or going to the clerk's office, and check out the exact laws requiring notifications for a town meeting, or whatever they held. Often the law will specify how notice has to be given, and how far in advance, and often someone will not comply 100% with that.
> 
> If you get lucky, they didn't comply and they have to throw out the meeting and start over.
> 
> ...


That's all excellent advice, of course, and represent avenues certainly worth pursuing... Just seems to me, looking at this from afar, some may have waited until a bit late in the game, to begin doing so. After reading the OP, and this thread being the first I'd ever heard of this, I was surprised to learn this whole project was as advanced as it is, and the funding for it already approved...



ltgoshen said:


> If you were following a long, the upgrade to the city dock has nothing to do with this discussion. Who don't want the dock spruced up? Thats great for the dock renters and transient boaters.


Well, seeing as the mooring field is but one of the 'improvements' being made to the city waterfront, with 70% of the project's budget consisting of the $100K Federal grant, seems to me it certainly does have something to do with it...



ltgoshen said:


> The discussion has always been about the unjust, heavy handedness of city and state governments taken rivers and waterways that have for over 200 years, belonged to the "PEOPLE" and whore it out to contractors for profit and campaign contributions.
> 
> Progress to the middle class only means that they no longer get to partake in the fun. It means they will be priced out of the lifestyle by the elite.
> 
> ...


Again, to be clear, I am just as distressed by this sort of proliferation of mooring fields in towns like Beaufort as you are... However, there are a couple of things that are not clear to me:

Are you saying that you will no longer be permitted to anchor in the Beaufort River adjacent to/outside of the confines of the mooring field? If that were the case, this would, indeed, be a BFD for local sailors and cruisers passing through Beaufort. But I have yet to see anything that defines a prohibition on anchoring, could you clarify that for us?

Just curious, what has been your mooring/anchoring arrangement there? Do you have a private mooring, or are you just lying to an anchor(s)? If on a mooring, do you have to pay a fee for a permit from the city?

Help me out here, how is this project going to "price middle class sailors" out of the pastime, exactly? Obviously, the new mooring field will occupy the 'prime anchoring spot' off town, they always do... But if you are still allowed to anchor or moor in the river outside of the mooring field, doesn't it simply mean you might have to travel a greater distance by dinghy to get to your boat? (Not to mention, one of the proposed 'enhancements' to water access includes a small boat launching ramp that could be of benefit to those anchoring in the river) What am I missing, here? I can certainly appreciate this may make sailing more 'inconvenient' for you, but I'm not seeing how this might compel you, or others who have been keeping their boats in that anchorage, to give up sailing or boat ownership completely...


----------



## Yorksailor (Oct 11, 2009)

As a full time cruiser I prefer to drop my 122lb anchor on 7 to 1 scope of 7/16 G4 chain but living in Coconut Grove near Miami I have seen the benefits of a city mooring field.

The anchorage outside Dinner Key Marina was full of semi-derelicts that would sink at the rate of one every 8 weeks. The City would spend $50,000 every two years raising and destroying these sunken derelicts. It is still possible to anchor outside the mooring field with a long dinghy trip but the number of semi-derelicts has been reduced by 75%.

The Dinner Key mooring field now attracts lots of cruising boats that spend significant amounts of money in the local business community, previously cruising boats were reluctant to anchor close to the semi-derelicts. 

I also take note of every anchor I see on cruising boats and 1-2% have such inadequate anchors that I would not use them for my rubber dinghy!

In places where there are tidal swings in the anchorage I far prefer well maintained moorings, not because of the safety of my anchor but because of the 1-2% who are likely to pull and damage my boat.


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

x2 on moorings...the issue for me at least is when you are forced to use a mooring and are NOT allowed to anchore even for a short stay

Ill be makiing my mooring down here as its cheaper and more simple thah having to reanchor every weekend after useage...

what I dont like is when people are forced into certain areas deemed appropriate when in reality its almost never so...

many many charted anchorages are in fact just that they are marked and deemed appropriate

thats why cruising guides are so popular they tell you what charts dont

and now with city folk dictating where is good and where you cant it just makes it less desireable as a destination...

again this happens time and time again all over the world

we had this happen in the red sea...we where arriving around 3pm at a "resort town" only to find out anchoring was prohibited and all moorings were used up so we had to head up another 20 miles or so to a known stop

full engine and all sails up beating into wind...
we made it just at sunset...at 630 or so exhausted but EXSTATIC that we made it

jejeje

peace


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

Yorksailor said:


> As a full time cruiser I prefer to drop my 122lb anchor on 7 to 1 scope of 7/16 G4 chain but living in Coconut Grove near Miami I have seen the benefits of a city mooring field.
> 
> The anchorage outside Dinner Key Marina was full of semi-derelicts that would sink at the rate of one every 8 weeks. The City would spend $50,000 every two years raising and destroying these sunken derelicts. It is still possible to anchor outside the mooring field with a long dinghy trip but the number of semi-derelicts has been reduced by 75%.
> 
> ...


Very good points, I agree completely...

St Augustine is one of the better examples of a spot I would not necessarily worry about anchoring on my own, but would be VERY reluctant to anchor among a large fleet of cruising boats, if all were lying to an anchor...

Nantucket can be a very challenging anchorage, as well... I always feel much more secure there, knowing that very few others try to anchor, and choose to lie to the outrageously priced, but very secure, moorings instead... 










2 winters ago, I rode out a very strong frontal passage in the anchorage in Boot Key Harbor, one that naturally came thru in the middle of the night... You can be sure I was up most of the night, keeping a very close eye on some of the local boats upwind of me - but all was well, and of course some of those anchors are _NEVER_ coming up out of that bottom...


----------



## jimrafford (Jan 7, 2011)

Another consideration is current and tidal range in that area. The current is over 2 knots and the tidal range is 8'. A mooring field will allow more boats into the same area safely. The boats it will attract will be more likely to spend money at local restaurants and shops. A lot of the boats anchored there and in factory creek are an eye sore. Cleaning up the area will make the area more attractive from the water and shore.
Jim


----------



## ltgoshen (Jan 5, 2009)

jimrafford said:


> Another consideration is current and tidal range in that area. The current is over 2 knots and the tidal range is 8'. A mooring field will allow more boats into the same area safely. The boats it will attract will be more likely to spend money at local restaurants and shops. A lot of the boats anchored there and in factory creek are an eye sore. Cleaning up the area will make the area more attractive from the water and shore.
> Jim


Completely Agree! 
Beaufort has a slue of old rundown boats that trash the waterways. Get rid of them. Bill the owners with the cost, But more importantly hire someone" RICK" a harbormaster be required to identify the boats that drop their hook's within 24 hrs. then when the vessel id left derelict there is a way to contact them and more importantly "BILL" them for forced removal and destruction in the land fill or auction off to the public. 
1) I Agree there should be a safe mooring. This mooring should be for the visitors and they should pay. 
2) The derelict boats is problem is not the same complaint or problem and should not be sold to the public as the same "its a LIE"
3) No one should have the right to take the ICW waterway and claim rights to make money with is.

Just show me one example of maintenance expenses that is covered by the fees charged in any east coast mooring field. They take the grant money. A contracter stuffs his pockets and the cities are stuck with the annual maintenance fee. 
So Me I have to move my mooring $2,000- tackle That Robert dives on at least once a year. And to stay there I have to rent from Rick? 
Just not fair for locals that are doing the right thing and have there tackle and boat in good shape. So who makes out ? The Coastal cruiser with money. The local guy like me . Well i'm screwed.

LT


----------



## jimrafford (Jan 7, 2011)

3) No one should have the right to take the ICW waterway and claim rights to make money with is.

Just show me one example of maintenance expenses that is covered by the fees charged in any east coast mooring field.

LT[/QUOTE]
Tell that to the home owners in New London, CT. That went all the way to the supreme court.

The reality is the waterways are federally regulated and the fed issued a permit.

As far as mooring fields, I don't have access to their books but if they were a looser I doubt Block Island, Newport, Cuttyhunk, The Vinvard, Nantucket and every other harbor up the coast to Maine would continue to do it.
Jim


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

ltgoshen said:


> 1) I Agree there should be a safe mooring. This mooring should be for the visitors and they should pay.
> 2) The derelict boats is problem is not the same complaint or problem and should not be sold to the public as the same "its a LIE"
> 3) No one should have the right to take the ICW waterway and claim rights to make money with is.


Points 1 and 3 would appear to be contradictory...



ltgoshen said:


> So Me I have to move my mooring $2,000- tackle That Robert dives on at least once a year. And to stay there I have to rent from Rick?
> 
> Just not fair for locals that are doing the right thing and have there tackle and boat in good shape. So who makes out ? The Coastal cruiser with money. The local guy like me . Well i'm screwed.
> 
> LT


I'm still wondering, how far distant will you be required to move? Have you been required to have a permit from the city for your mooring?

And, sorry to be blunt, but you're no more "screwed" than most every boatowner without waterfront property or a private dock between New York and Eastport, Maine, to name just one region of the US...


----------



## ltgoshen (Jan 5, 2009)

JonEisberg said:


> Points 1 and 3 would appear to be contradictory...
> 
> I'm still wondering, how far distant will you be required to move?


Have you been required to have a permit from the city for your mooring?[/QUOTE]

If the force me to move a inch It would be an injustice



JonEisberg said:


> And, sorry to be blunt, but you're no more "screwed" than most every boat owner without waterfront property or a private dock between New York and Eastport, Maine, to name just one region of the US...


Well maybe you misunderstand my argument. I have keep my yacht at a local Marina for a few years now. I don't mind the cost associated with keeping it there. I know boat owners in the mooring that have a struggle trying to keep up with the escalating cost of boat ownership. I want to be able to drop my hook in any U.S navigable waterway without some money grubbing local city gov, standing there with their hand out looking for a revenue stream. 
If you can't wrap your head around my problem with that. Well maybe you have friends on the city council. what ever I'm done with this topic.,
enjoy your weekend.
LT


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

I'm still not buying the derelict boat reasoning.

If you can move the boats that are in the location where they want to build the mooring field, how come they can't move the derelict boats in places they don't want them?

The truth is, that someone thinks they are going to make some money off of this, one way or the other. In the end, that's what it's always about. It's what politics is always about.


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

went to St. Augustine yesterday to see the usage of the mooring fields there. 
about 10 in salt run by the lighthouse.
8-10 North of Bridge and 20-25 south of the bridge of Lyons.
Not even half full and that was the most I've seen there.
The area south of the city limit and the rt312 bridge where the people who got pushed out,there was no less than 25 vessels at anchor.
So,did installing mooring fields in the areas adjacent to the city's downtown, marina,and upland facilities eliminate derelict vessels and encourage using pumpouts?
Or did it just push the anchoring bunch further from view and available facilities thereby making it less likely they will utilize the legal avenues available?
the other anchorage area north of the city I did not view, but it is my understanding it is much utilized and publix supermarket has made a free dinghy dock available to boaters.
publix is a bussiness that recognized the economic gain in the dock investment.
I also recognize that there's been legal means available all along to deal with the derelict vessel issues, but they we're not used/applied.
Also, Florida set aside millions for vessel clean up available to municipalities .


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

ltgoshen said:


> If the force me to move a inch It would be an injustice
> 
> *I want to be able to drop my hook in any U.S navigable waterway without some money grubbing local city gov, standing there with their hand out looking for a revenue stream. *
> If you can't wrap your head around my problem with that. Well maybe you have friends on the city council. what ever I'm done with this topic.,
> ...


Well, then I would suggest you cross off your list the marvelous cruising ground of New England, to name just one, of places you might ever wish to explore on a boat 

Sorry, but it seems your anger over this issue is overriding all else, you're starting to sound irrational, and contradictory... You've already acknowledged that:

_1)" I Agree there should be a safe mooring. *This mooring should be for the visitors and they should pay."*_

And yet, if *YOU* were to become the "visitor" to any other locale, *YOU* should be able to anchor anywhere you choose, without any infringement or cost whatsoever?

Seriously?


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

Titusville, Fl. - about 4 boats on the moorings. 

About 15-20 boats anchored just outside of the boundry bouy's of the mooring field. Further from the traditional anchorage,dinghy landing and pump out.
Is this addreesing the alleged Derelict boat armagedon ? same boats are there ,just a couple hundred feet south of where they have been anchoring -forever. No less of them.
So, alot of money spent and misinformation spread and propaganda bantied about , but no real change in the alledged "issues" that were the driving force behind getting the mooring fields. And now, how will they be maintained? and for who? few seem to be using them, certainly not being used by the ones it was perported to address, just shuffled them around a little,inconvenienced them and moved them further from the facilities the advocates of these policies supported.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

joethecobbler said:


> went to St. Augustine yesterday to see the usage of the mooring fields there.
> about 10 in salt run by the lighthouse.
> 8-10 North of Bridge and 20-25 south of the bridge of Lyons.
> Not even half full and that was the most I've seen there.


It's the middle of winter right now, not too many snowbirds choose to spend their winters in St Augustine... Last time I went by there was in December, and the mooring field was surprisingly full, as it usually appears to be during the transient season... Probably not many boats on moorings in Annapolis right now, either, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are under-utilized on an annual basis 



joethecobbler said:


> The area south of the city limit and the rt312 bridge where the people who got pushed out,there was no less than 25 vessels at anchor.
> So,did installing mooring fields in the areas adjacent to the city's downtown, marina,and upland facilities eliminate derelict vessels and encourage using pumpouts?
> Or did it just push the anchoring bunch further from view and available facilities thereby making it less likely they will utilize the legal avenues available?


i didn't do a count when I last passed by, but that number sounds perhaps just a bit high, to me...

Nevertheless, you're absolutely correct about those boats that have been 'displaced', mooring fields as a solution to the problem of so-called "derelicts" is always the weakest argument in their favor... 'Out of sight, out of mind' seems to be all that really matters, and it's quite obvious that those boats are not availing themselves of pumpout facilities, etc...












joethecobbler said:


> the other anchorage area north of the city I did not view, but it is my understanding it is much utilized and publix supermarket has made a free dinghy dock available to boaters.
> publix is a bussiness that recognized the economic gain in the dock investment.


I almost always go into Cammachee Cove whenever I stop in St Augstine, and in my experience, it is extremely rare to see a single boat anchored in proximity to the Vilano Beach Bridge... There is one large multihull that seems to hang out up off the north end of the Cammachee Cove development, but that's about it...

The new floating dock at Vilano Beach was not installed or paid for by Publix, it would be a couple of centuries before they would have seen a profitable return on that particular investment... The Vilano Beach floating dock adjacent to the Inlet Marina fuel dock is a courtesy dock similar to the one in Beaufort, technically overnight stays are not permitted, but apparently not always enforced @ Vilano...


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Even with the mooring fields the Northeast has its' share of quality boats out anchored, this this one in Provincetown that has been there so long that it is surrounded by mooring balls:


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

I am positive there were at least 25 boats anchored south of the city(one was aground,a motorboat,it was low tide.) as I drove there yesterday with my family in part to see for myself how many boats were anchored and how many mooring balls were empty. 
I confirmed exactly what I had seen in the past. low mooring ball occupation and a growing number of boats at anchor south of town. 
In the future I will make a point to take photos and also check the north end by vilano as well as the "Holy Hole" and the launch ramp area to look for anchored boats.


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

Daytona has no less than 3-4 vessels anchored just south of the Seabreeze Bridge north of main street bridge across from Carribean Jacks Marina. Showed up shortly after St. Augustine Put in the Mooring fields. Coincidence ? a few have been there a bit longer and are "anchored" in close near the foot of the bridge adjacent to the public launch. There are often a bicycle or two chained up nearby as there ws in St. Augustine yesterday as well.
I'm 3 minutes from the river by bicycle, i cruise by amost every day.


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

there are 5-7 more anchored boats north of Saebreeze bridge stretched out along the river 1/2 way to ormond beach and the rt. 40 bridge they dinghy into the 3-4 waterfront parks and public launch ramps. most of those boats have been there for a few years about half I've seen underway. these are technicaly in Holly Hill where the guy with the 50' houseboat was grounded a year or so ago that got towed and sold.


----------



## Vasco (Sep 24, 2006)

joethecobbler said:


> Titusville, Fl. - about 4 boats on the moorings.
> 
> About 15-20 boats anchored just outside of the boundry bouy's of the mooring field. Further from the traditional anchorage,dinghy landing and pump out.
> Is this addreesing the alleged Derelict boat armagedon ? same boats are there ,just a couple hundred feet south of where they have been anchoring -forever. No less of them.
> So, alot of money spent and misinformation spread and propaganda bantied about , but no real change in the alledged "issues" that were the driving force behind getting the mooring fields. And now, how will they be maintained? and for who? few seem to be using them, certainly not being used by the ones it was perported to address, just shuffled them around a little,inconvenienced them and moved them further from the facilities the advocates of these policies supported.


I have never seen many boats on the Titusville moorings. It's good holding in that area, you always lie to the wind and you can anchor just north of the field or east of it on the east side of the ICW, although it shallows up fast there. I noted on a forum that the Titusville moorings did not seem well maintained and someone from the marina responded that the missing ones were down for maintenance. All the liveaboards in Titusville just moved north a few hundred feet. The various jurisdictions might be getting grants for the installation but where will the money for maintenance come from?


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

Wow, Titusville is already having maintenance issues ? 
I guess it won't be as ong as I thought.

In titusville you can get dinghy dockage and water and shower for a fee on a monthly basis. I'm not sure they will come out to pump out but I know the ave pumpout at the municipal.


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

I think a better approach to anchored vessels would be on the order of how Annapolis approaches anchoring. you get pumped out every couple days and they pay attention to he anchored boats while they are at it. 
In Daytona, if you go into the municipal marina and inquire about dinghy dock , there isn't one. 
Not sure if they offer paid use of the facilities if your anchored. they didn't in the past.if they offered these services it wouldn't harm the bottom line as they would be charging .and if they offered pumpout from a boat while at anchor I would think it would aleviate that issue. The anchorage across from the north basin in Daytona south of the orange ave bidge is a poor spot IMO I prefer south of Seabreeze as it is a no wake zone and little fetch and close to a public ramp you can walk to the beach.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

joethecobbler said:


> I think a better approach to anchored vessels would be on the order of how Annapolis approaches anchoring. you get pumped out every couple days and they pay attention to he anchored boats while they are at it.
> In Daytona, if you go into the municipal marina and inquire about dinghy dock , there isn't one.
> Not sure if they offer paid use of the facilities if your anchored. they didn't in the past.*if they offered these services it wouldn't harm the bottom line as they would be charging .and if they offered pumpout from a boat while at anchor I would think it would aleviate that issue.* The anchorage across from the north basin in Daytona south of the orange ave bidge is a poor spot IMO I prefer south of Seabreeze as it is a no wake zone and little fetch and close to a public ramp you can walk to the beach.


I think you're missing one very important point... the cost of a municipality to purchase a pump out boat is not insignificant, $50-60K in the example of Tiverton, RI cited below... That is only gonna be justified in a town or harbor which is collecting a significant amount of money from mooring or other usage fees, pumpout boats are only economically feasible in places like Annapolis, Nantucket, Marathon, etc - very busy harbors, hosting LOTS of boats, where the economies of scale make the initial outlay for such a costly piece of equipment viable...



> "A marine pump-out is the most cost effective way to provide this service," said Cox.
> 
> The pump-out boat, which would have charged customers $5 per 30 gallons of waste water, would have operated at a net loss over the 10-year contract necessitated by accepting the grant to pay for the boat. Cox argued the net loss was absorbed by the Harbor Department's revenues.
> 
> ...


For a community like Daytona to purchase a $50K pumpout boat to service a relative handful of anchored boats - who are paying nothing beyond the cost of each individual pumpout - I think might be a _VERY_ tough sell to the taxpayers of Daytona... If an anchored boat can't make it to a pumpout dock under their own power in such a location, too bad... They should either be gone, or figure out some way to comply with the law...


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

The Daytona Municipal Marina is operated by a corporation and they already have a pumpout boat they use in the Marina. I see ads for the operator job occasionaly. So the Equipment and Manpower is already there and being used,they just won't come out to an anchorage,they could they just don't/won't.
After all we are discussing the merits of a mooring field and the advantages and costs and such.
As well as offering services like shower,water they don't have a dinghy dock and if you o in and say your at anchor and would like to purchase a shower they will not accomidate you,why? 
Seems using equipment and manpower and laws already in place and being underutilized would be a no brainer. couple that with an increased awareness of who and what is at anchor and which vessel is incapable of making way and all the merits of he mooring field arguement go away. 
They (law enforcement) have taken action to remove several boats that were anchored and unable to make way. No engine,no mast, your out of there. also ,if your boat sinks in the halifax river and you are identified as the last owner of record via the last registration or HIN you will be recieving a visit from the man, 
there are already laws in place to address vessel operation on florida waters.
What's more , I think Daytona is missing the boat on all the boat traffic as you don't get the chatter online about Daytona as you do for places like Oriental,Vero,St.Aug. etc. if they fostered a more welcoming atmosphere instead of being known for aggressive FWC/Law enforcement tactics everyone would be better served,local merchants and boaters of all stripe.


----------



## Vasco (Sep 24, 2006)

joethecobbler said:


> The Daytona Municipal Marina is operated by a corporation and they already have a pumpout boat they use in the Marina. I see ads for the operator job occasionaly. So the Equipment and Manpower is already there and being used,they just won't come out to an anchorage,they could they just don't/won't.
> After all we are discussing the merits of a mooring field and the advantages and costs and such.
> As well as offering services like shower,water they don't have a dinghy dock and if you o in and say your at anchor and would like to purchase a shower they will not accomidate you,why?
> Seems using equipment and manpower and laws already in place and being underutilized would be a no brainer. couple that with an increased awareness of who and what is at anchor and which vessel is incapable of making way and all the merits of he mooring field arguement go away.
> ...


Actually Daytona is not a good stop on the Waterway. I only stop there because it's between St. Augustine and Titusville. There's not much there. No laundry, Publix, liquor store convenient to any dink dock. The restaurant in the Halifax Harbor basin seems to be under different management every other year. West Marine is gone. The anchorage is well sheltered, that's about it. And the rowers wake you up early in the morning.


----------



## Bene505 (Jul 31, 2008)

Why not have these federal grants be for getting pumpout boats?

Better yet, sail-driven pumpout boats, with electric engines.

Regards,
Brad


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

Vasco, you don't know Daytona well. The public transportation will take you anywhere and have bike racks.
There are places to land a dinghy all over as well as a few of the private marinas. There are several public launches one at the eastern base of the Seabreeze bridge.from there you can walk a block or two towards the beach and find restaurants all along seabreze not to mention A1A all walking distance,to go furthr jump on the bus. 
There is laundry at the western foot of the seabreeze bridge near marker 32.
Beach street on the mainland is walking distance from the municipal marina and there are many cafes and rest. there.
I prefer anchoring between seabreeze and Main Street,nice and quiet.
Further to the north of seabreeze bridge you can anchor and land at a public launch and park . directly across the street is Park's Seafood,a bit more swanky and a couple small storefronts convenient type and a bike shop ,and another small store.
That's what I'm saying. Daytona doesn't promote itself to the boating crowd who largely are vacationing and have a disposable income ! 
I have been thinking about printing a map and informational flyer to distribute to cruisers north and south of Dytona to promote Dytona bussinesses that boaters might want, it would be supported by small ads from the bussinesses listed and I would distribute, but I haven't gotten to it yet. If anyone wants to jump on it go for it.


----------



## night0wl (Mar 20, 2006)

Vasco said:


> I have never seen many boats on the Titusville moorings. It's good holding in that area, you always lie to the wind and you can anchor just north of the field or east of it on the east side of the ICW, although it shallows up fast there. I noted on a forum that the Titusville moorings did not seem well maintained and someone from the marina responded that the missing ones were down for maintenance. All the liveaboards in Titusville just moved north a few hundred feet. The various jurisdictions might be getting grants for the installation but where will the money for maintenance come from?


You nailed it RIGHT on the head. Once the mooring field is permitted, it doesn't matter WHAT condition the moorings are in...you're not allowed to anchor in its proximity. These cities are putting in mooring fields in popular anchorages *NOT* to attract cruisers, but to keep them away! No one in their right mind will hook up to one of these broken down moorings once they fall apart. Now, the landside dwellers will get their exclusive view of the anchorage...without those pesky cruisers in the way.

This is why mooring fields MUST be fought off...especially in the keys, where they're talking about making Monroe County one big restricted mooring field. Get educated and GET OUT THERE AND FIGHT THEM OFF.


----------



## Vasco (Sep 24, 2006)

joethecobbler said:


> Vasco, you don't know Daytona well. The public transportation will take you anywhere and have bike racks.


You might be right. I've been just anchoring south of Memorial Bridge and moving on in the morning. Been doing that for many years. Nothing much to attract me to the place. I do like that little anchorage though. I have never really made an effort to get to know the place. Walked miles to a second hand marine store once in 1991. The place doesn't seem to be cruiser friendly. But that could be said for many of the stops on the Waterway.


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

when I travel by auto I visit places that I have past by or briefly stopped.
I often surprised that the perspective from the land reveals many available services within walking or biking distance from the waterfront. But, for whatever motivation, nobody at the waterfront seems to be forthcoming with any knowledge of.
I often wonder if their is a hidden agenda.
However, it is more likely that they are just not in tune with what a cruises needs /wants are due to their scewed perception of what traveling by boat means to different boaters.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

joethecobbler said:


> The Daytona Municipal Marina is operated by a corporation and they already have a pumpout boat they use in the Marina. I see ads for the operator job occasionaly. So the Equipment and Manpower is already there and being used,they just won't come out to an anchorage,they could they just don't/won't.
> 
> After all we are discussing the merits of a mooring field and the advantages and costs and such.
> 
> As well as offering services like shower,water they don't have a dinghy dock and if you o in and say your at anchor and would like to purchase a shower they will not accomidate you,why?


Well, that does seem a bit inexplicable, but seems a decision made by a private business... They are under no obligation to provide pumpout service to boats anchored some distance away, of course, perhaps they've simply decided it's not worth the effort?

Same thing with the showers, perhaps? Not completely unreasonable that they might want to reserve them for the use of their tenants? Have you had much success at other marinas buying just a shower, and nothing else? Many places will extend the courtesy if you stop in for fuel (generally helps to be taking several hundred gallons, of course) but I'm not sure how much more common that is along the Ditch, than a Hampton Inn off I-95 selling a shower to anyone just passing by...

I do know that some locales - Beaufort NC Town Docks, for example - are forced to make a continuous effort to prevent unauthorized use of their showers by liveaboards and others in the anchorage. Constantly changing the combination, installation of security cameras, and so on... Other marinas such as Charleston City, or Halifax Harbor, have resorted to the use of weird keys not easily duplicated, etc., due to the apparent 'issues' that can arise with attempted use of their facilities by non-paying customers... Not trying to justify the attitude taken by Halifax Harbor towards the anchored-out riff-raff , just suggesting that some of these businesses have grown weary of some of the hassles, and simply might prefer to keep them to a minimum...



joethecobbler said:


> Seems using equipment and manpower and laws already in place and being underutilized would be a no brainer. couple that with an increased awareness of who and what is at anchor and which vessel is incapable of making way and all the merits of he mooring field arguement go away.
> They (law enforcement) have taken action to remove several boats that were anchored and unable to make way. No engine,no mast, your out of there. also ,if your boat sinks in the halifax river and you are identified as the last owner of record via the last registration or HIN you will be recieving a visit from the man,
> there are already laws in place to address vessel operation on florida waters.


Agree completely, the derelict problem is largely one of simple lack of enforcement. The authorities lack the political will to get tough, 'out of sight, out of mind' is a far easier 'solution'...

However, such 'evictions' might be often easier said than done... Years ago, down at Ponce Inlet right off the entrance channel to Lighthouse Boatyard, there was a guy who had 2 old wooden motoryachts rafted together, anchored there for years... the boats never moved, it was obvious he was discharging sewage, etc... For YEARS the municipality and the boatyard attempted to get him evicted, even the fact that he was adjacent to the state park seemed to carry little weight, endless court appearances produced no result... Finally, one of the hurricanes about a decade ago settled the issue, once and for all...



joethecobbler said:


> What's more , I think Daytona is missing the boat on all the boat traffic as you don't get the chatter online about Daytona as you do for places like Oriental,Vero,St.Aug. etc. if they fostered a more welcoming atmosphere instead of being known for aggressive FWC/Law enforcement tactics everyone would be better served,local merchants and boaters of all stripe.


I've always liked Daytona, though that is one stretch that I'm always desperate to run outside, the ICW between St Augustine and Ponce can be an incredible PITA, where the sail down outside can often be a beauty... I always enjoyed stopping at Daytona Marina & Boatworks, but when I stopped there a couple of months ago after not having been in there for a few years, I was shocked how much that formerly first class facility had deteriorated under their new management, and how low their occupancy seemed to be...

Daytona might be a nice spot for a seasonal liveaboard who never leaves the dock, but its distance from any real cruising ground or opportunity for sailing would seem to prevent it's ever becoming a destination for cruising sailors, who might actually be interested in leaving the dock or anchorage from time to time...


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

joethecobbler said:


> when I travel by auto I visit places that I have past by or briefly stopped.
> I often surprised that the perspective from the land reveals many available services within walking or biking distance from the waterfront. But, for whatever motivation, nobody at the waterfront seems to be forthcoming with any knowledge of.
> I often wonder if their is a hidden agenda.
> However, it is more likely that they are just not in tune with what a cruises needs /wants are due to their scewed perception of what traveling by boat means to different boaters.


In my hometown, the city is currently building a marina (using federal grant money, of course), that was supposed to be completed April 30. A couple of days ago, they announced a change order, that will add $130,000 and 30 days to the completion cost and date.

What was this major change? They had forgotten to put in any slips for people to pull in and tie up for a few hours to eat or shop at one of the numerous restaurants and shops, located with three blocks of the new harbor, (although people coming to this harbor in their boats and shopping and eating had been one of the justifications for building it). They have been building this harbor for two years before this problem was recognized, (mainly, as it neared completion, and people looking at it said, "I don't see the day slips. Where will they be located?" Dohhhhh!

Sometimes, it's evil, and sometimes it is just the normal dysfunction that all government is famous for and excels in.


----------



## ltgoshen (Jan 5, 2009)

Their having their last workshop on this mooring field problem today. then its a done deal.

http://www.cityofbeaufort.org/Data/Sites/1/media/City_Council/2014/worksession-agenda-february-18,-2014-w.pdf


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

lt-
The laws regarding who and how you can drop your hook in any navigable waterways are fairly old, longstanding, and undisputed. You can drop it, incidental to the purposes of navigation, but if you're not "passing through" you're no longer navigating, you're an _obstruction _to navigation.

OTOH, there had to be an environmental impact study before a mooring field could be permitted. And a publication and a reference copy of that study, which should be available for public inspection. If the "last meeting" is tonight, ask where the study is and insist on access to it. If the study does not provide for "What happens when a boat breaks loose and founders?" then it was done incompletely, and you have the right to ask it to be thrown out and revisited, forcing a restart to the whole permitting process.

You might be able to reach someone at the Sierra Club or Greenpeace in their national hq for some fast "emergency" advice as to how to use that kind of monkeywrench.

But as to dropping an anchor anywhere, without limit? No, you won't be able to challenge or change the whole basis behind federal navigable waterway laws. Although a clever sailor could install a whole set of thrusters and a GPOS and actively "hover" without needing to anchor at all. They'd just LOVE that, you'd be underway and actively navigating the vessel, in full conformance with the laws. (VBG)


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

hellosailor said:


> lt-
> 
> But as to dropping an anchor anywhere, without limit? No, you won't be able to challenge or change the whole basis behind federal navigable waterway laws. Although a clever sailor could install a whole set of thrusters and a GPOS and actively "hover" without needing to anchor at all. They'd just LOVE that, you'd be underway and actively navigating the vessel, in full conformance with the laws. (VBG)


I would imagine this will be standard equipment on many boats in just few years.

Helicopter pilots used to joke about hitting "the hover button". Now, many helicopters actually have auto-hover.


----------



## ltgoshen (Jan 5, 2009)

hellosailor said:


> lt-
> The laws regarding who and how you can drop your hook in any navigable waterways are fairly old, longstanding, and undisputed. You can drop it, incidental to the purposes of navigation, but if you're not "passing through" you're no longer navigating, you're an _obstruction _to navigation.
> 
> OTOH, there had to be an environmental impact study before a mooring field could be permitted. And a publication and a reference copy of that study, which should be available for public inspection. If the "last meeting" is tonight, ask where the study is and insist on access to it. If the study does not provide for "What happens when a boat breaks loose and founders?" then it was done incompletely, and you have the right to ask it to be thrown out and revisited, forcing a restart to the whole permitting process.
> ...


The premit notice

http://www.sac.usace.army.mil/Portals/43/docs/regulatory/publicnotices/SAC-2012-00498-1W-Beaufort-City_of_Beaufort_Downtown_Marina_Modification.pdf


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

hellosailor said:


> lt-
> The laws regarding who and how you can drop your hook in any navigable waterways are fairly old, longstanding, and undisputed. You can drop it, incidental to the purposes of navigation, but if you're not "passing through" you're no longer navigating,. (VBG)


really? that's not how the states attorney of Florida defines vessels in navigation.
the states attorney of Florida says vessels at anchor ARE in navigation.
There is no. time limit.
So, how do you define "passing through " 
Would a week be acceptable? what about a month,2 months, 3?
Who decides? 
it's not an easy question to answer.
the answer I favor is,if you are abiding the laws already in effect you anchor as long as you want.
a week,a year, a decade.
does your boat sail or motor? registered? anchor lite,mad,life jacket, etc.
then what's the REAL reason you object to unfettered anchorage?
I'm. not interested in "what if" scare scenarios only things that did happen.
in Florida if your boat sinks or washes ashore it's a misdemeanor if you don't /can't or choose not to address it.this law is not new and when utilized works well, when the laws already in effect are not enforced,you have problems.
let's encourage law enforcement to enforce the current laws we pay them to already.


----------



## OPossumTX (Jul 12, 2011)

joethecobbler said:


> I'm. not interested in "what if" scare scenarios only things that did happen.
> in Florida if your boat sinks or washes ashore it's a misdemeanor if you don't /can't or choose not to address it.this law is not new and when utilized works well, when the laws already in effect are not enforced,you have problems.
> let's encourage law enforcement to enforce the current laws we pay them to already.


The problem is that so many laws are not enforced, and when they are enforced, they are enforced to suit those who seem to be in power at the time. This is all part of the "Some animals are more equal than others" mind set that seems to be infesting this country of late. Perhaps a requirement that prior laws be repealed when the new law takes effect would reduce the clutter and impenetrable morass of conflicting regulation.

Have FUN!
O'


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

joe, without playing sealawyer, what the State of Florida thinks can be meaningless. Federal waterway, federal law, federal courts, and if anyone disagrees, including the States, they can go argue with the Feds. You know who usually wins, it just takes some time before all the appeals get _thrown _out.

Now what the status of bottomland is in Florida may be something else again, not all bottomland is private, federal, public, or any other specific property. That varies too, and that's also all settled long under the laws. Florida? As the fairly new Archbishop of Miami said at his first public speech, "It is so nice to be so close to the continental United States"[sic]. Florida, coming from Spain and only a recent and less than totally enthusiastic member of the Union, has it's own peculiar ways and if they keep selling swampland to dumb Yankees, sooner of later they'll pay the piper as those Yankees are accustomed to voting. Or at least, to getting a good price for their votes. Hell, you know, these damned Yankees are actually raising taxes in an attempt to PAVE the streets, and forcing the young ones into SCHOOLS when they could be out working the fields. And they've made so much competition for housing, why, you can't hire maids or gardeners anymore unless you actually pay them!

lt-
I'm confused by what I thought was a discussion of converting an anchorage to a mooring field, when the permit calls only for expanding an existing mooring field. That alone could force a postponement, if there was in fact no prior mooring field but the city was asking for a non-existent field to be expanded??
There's also mention of fish and shrimp, one might ask the USACE if the environmental impact study considered what the toxic copper bottom paint from 49 moored vessels was going to do to them. If that wasn't considered...it could boomerang and restrict the field size, or a mooring field could be denied completely. You need to find regular players in this game, and invite them to join in.


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

hellosailor-
you may not recognize Florida state authority on the water, but the FWC,and most county sherrif's do!
I think the red's give the states certain rights as well or how else would the state be able to pass laws like SS327.2 ?
I recognize the bottom owner issues.
the state of Florida cedes control to the municipalities of liveaboards but not vessels in navigation (non liveaboards).
don't know about SC.
Georgia regulates anchoring as well as live aboards.


----------



## ltgoshen (Jan 5, 2009)

Here is the news after last nights work session.

Beaufort officials consider increasing initial phase of mooring field | Business | The Island Packet

The Contract held by Rick Griffin and the fact that he is willing to put his own money in to sweeten the pot, looks to be the issue pushing this threw. 
LT


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

ltgoshen said:


> Here is the news after last nights work session.
> 
> Beaufort officials consider increasing initial phase of mooring field | Business | The Island Packet
> 
> ...


It's always about money, no matter what the public relations people say.


----------



## ltgoshen (Jan 5, 2009)

Got that right.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

> Long-term leases -- which would only be allowed on the moorings Griffin and the city purchase -- would be as low as $200 a month with a yearlong lease. The terms of the federal grant requires that the first 16 moorings be for transient boats.
> 
> ...
> 
> ...


And this idiot wants an increase to 30 moorings ???

Without any concession to local residents, looks like he'll be presiding over an empty mooring field for about 40 weeks per year...

Are we supposed to believe that local boaters who keep their boats at the Downtown Marina, are paying the daily transient rate X 365 on an annual basis?

His approach makes no sense whatsoever...


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

JonEisberg said:


> And this idiot wants an increase to 30 moorings ???
> 
> Without any concession to local residents, looks like he'll be presiding over an empty mooring field for about 40 weeks per year...
> 
> ...


There is a plan, I have no doubt. Boaters up there just haven't seen the other shoe drop, yet.


----------



## blowinstink (Sep 3, 2007)

ltgoshen said:


> Here is the news after last nights work session.
> 
> Beaufort officials consider increasing initial phase of mooring field | Business | The Island Packet
> 
> ...


"Work will take 90-120 days and must be completed by June 30th" Or, in other words, "work must start within 10 days".

Nicely done. Nothing like local politics.uke


----------



## blowinstink (Sep 3, 2007)

JonEisberg said:


> And this idiot wants an increase to 30 moorings ???
> 
> Without any concession to local residents, looks like he'll be presiding over an empty mooring field for about 40 weeks per year...
> 
> ...


His plan makes plenty of sense if 30 is the "perfect" number of moorings needed to fill the entire anchorage with moorings and thereby preclude anchoring. 15 probably would have left a nice anchorage for 5-10 boats passing through.

I think Hellosailor had the right approach. If anyone is local, showing up at meetings, asking questions (refusing to be shouted down or intimidated) and ensuring that all of the necessary processes have been followed can go a long way. Local political types almost always have something more important to do that follow procedures . . ..


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

So,I've been checking the charts and inlets. as it looks like I'll be going coastal, who needs the icw? once you've done, it's pretty boring. looking forward to the offshore thing. 
After doing NJ inside and out we just go by it now, same for Georgia.
I guess pretty soon I'll just go non-stop,gotta be quicker and less expensive too.


----------



## benesailor (Dec 27, 2012)

In 10 years you'll be the lobster in the trap everytime you come to port.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

Joe-
"you may not recognize Florida state authority on the water"
You misread what I said. I don't dispute the particulars of any state here, I'm just saying that what ANY government, ANY watercop, has so say about anchoring rights versus navigation on the ICW or other federal waterways, is not always correct, not always legal, and absolutely never the final word until and unless the Feds say it is. 
There is quite a long history of "fed versus state" and vice versa in the US. Mr. Lincoln's War was just the loudest part of it. Many laws are passed, and enforced, and then overthrown in the courts. Sometimes in a month, sometimes not for fifty years or more.


----------



## benesailor (Dec 27, 2012)

> And this idiot wants an increase to 30 moorings ???
> 
> Without any concession to local residents, looks like he'll be presiding over an empty mooring field for about 40 weeks per year...
> 
> ...


Rick Griffin has a hard enough time running the Marina let alone moorings too. Who's running who thru the wringer here? 
Why is the city/village so hot on jumping into this? Most be that "Free" government money that comes from the never ending pit. 
Take away that grant "i gave" them and i'd like to see what they propose then.


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

benesailor said:


> In 10 years you'll be the lobster in the trap everytime you come to port.


Aaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh,let me out!


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

joethecobbler said:


> So,I've been checking the charts and inlets. as it looks like I'll be going coastal, who needs the icw? once you've done, it's pretty boring. looking forward to the offshore thing.
> After doing NJ inside and out we just go by it now, same for Georgia.
> I guess pretty soon I'll just go non-stop,gotta be quicker and less expensive too.


Well, I'm all for running outside whenever possible, and the chance of actually doing some _sailing_, but I must admit to being a bit perplexed why the installation of a mooring field in a single locale like Beaufort would serve as the motivation - or final straw - for taking the decision to do so 

Between the Savannah River and Charleston, for instance, there are dozens of beautiful anchorages to choose from, it's certainly not like Beaufort is your only option... And, we've yet to see any talk of anchoring in the river being restricted beyond the mooring field, or prohibited...

I still think the best way to send a message, is for cruisers to continue stopping in places like Beaufort, but simply refusing to use the moorings, as people appear to be doing in Titusville... I'd love to see next fall's ICW Rally, for instance, make a stop in Beaufort, but have NONE of the boats avail themselves of the moorings, even if it required anchoring at an inconvenient distance from town... Such a demonstration could send a pretty clear message, whereas boats heading up or down outside, really aren't being 'heard from' quite so clearly...

If you are running coastwise past Beaufort, keep the South Edisto River in mind as an alternative... It's a pretty good entrance, the quickest In & Out along that entire coast... I often stop at the Edisto Marina if I need to make a pit stop for fuel around there, or for an overnight stop... Nice little spot off the beaten track, very rare to see another transient boat in there, and the Sunset Grille upstairs is a decent little restaurant...


----------



## night0wl (Mar 20, 2006)

JonEisberg said:


> Well, I'm all for running outside whenever possible, and the chance of actually doing some _sailing_, but I must admit to being a bit perplexed why the installation of a mooring field in a single locale like Beaufort would serve as the motivation - or final straw - for taking the decision to do so
> 
> Between the Savannah River and Charleston, for instance, there are dozens of beautiful anchorages to choose from, it's certainly not like Beaufort is your only option... And, we've yet to see any talk of anchoring in the river being restricted beyond the mooring field, or prohibited...
> 
> ...


No offense...but dont they win if you do that? They get to clear out the anchorage but for anyone willing to part with enough duckets as they want...and you move out of sight, out of mind????

The better thing to do would be to anchor IN their mooring field 

On a more serious note, anchor or go to a more receptive town. That way, the businesses shoreside feel the pain rather than just the cruisers that have to go further distances, burn more fuel just to visit this town.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

night0wl said:


> No offense...but dont they win if you do that? They get to clear out the anchorage but for anyone willing to part with enough duckets as they want...and you move out of sight, out of mind????
> 
> The better thing to do would be to anchor IN their mooring field
> 
> On a more serious note, anchor or go to a more receptive town. That way, the businesses shoreside feel the pain rather than just the cruisers that have to go further distances, burn more fuel just to visit this town.


Perhaps I should have been clearer, I was speaking of anchoring adjacent to the mooring field, as close as possible to the waterfront, so as to make your presence known. Just as many are doing at Titusville. That section of the Beaufort River is not that tight, one definitely has some options, it might largely depend on how strict the enforcement of some defined boundaries might be by the local Sheriff/law enforcement...

20-30 years ago, Beaufort gained a real reputation among powerboaters running the ICW as a classic 'Speed Trap', no matter how slowly one passed thru there, it seemed almost impossible to avoid getting ticketed for throwing what the water cops deemed to be an excessive wake... I was running a lot of sportfishermen for Ocean Yachts back in those days, and if running thru Beaufort, you had to be at dead idle, with one engine out of gear. The word quickly spread, and a real boycott of Beaufort began, lasting for years... Hmmm, what's that about those who refuse to learn from the mistakes of the past? 

As far as going to "a more receptive town", well, there aren't many others right on the ICW between Charleston at MM 470, and Fernandina at MM 715. Beaufort and Thunderbolt are pretty much it... Hilton Head can hardly be considered to be very receptive or convenient to cruisers on a budget, and other places like Savannah, Darien, Brunswick, or St Marys all involve considerable side trips off the magenta line...


----------



## Yorksailor (Oct 11, 2009)

We deal with the Coconut Grove Mooring field by anchoring outside and having a 0.9 dinghy run.

Some mooring fields have an exclusion zone of hundreds of yards.


----------



## Multihullgirl (Dec 2, 2010)

I honestly don't understand why so 'up-in-arms' when a municipality decides to put in a mooring field. I mean, no-one thinks it's OK to have squatters on public (or private) land. 

Why is it supposed to be different on the water? I'm really, truly curious, and maybe we should have a thread about that separately


----------



## ltgoshen (Jan 5, 2009)

Multihullgirl said:


> I honestly don't understand why so 'up-in-arms' when a municipality decides to put in a mooring field. I mean, no-one thinks it's OK to have squatters on public (or private) land.
> 
> Why is it supposed to be different on the water? I'm really, truly curious, and maybe we should have a thread about that separately


What is the difference than a city squatting in the ICW with their mooring field or a Citizen dropping anchor? Really? You're not from the south are you? Down here we still think that the country belongs to the people, not the government! That's the same way we think of the constitution and the rest of the rules good people put into place when this country was being built. We feel it to be strong armed to put limits on freedom, in the name of progress. To us Progress is not restricting access to land that belongs to all of us in the name of a few or for profit. In This case, an outside contractor will have the mooring field under his control well after the Grant money has long been spent. Perhaps people should go to the first of the thread and read the, as Paul Harvey would say "the rest of the story". I would hope that freedom of travel would not be restricted on the waterways of the U.S. It's a freedom that is deer to many and slowly being eroded by folks that think "What's the harm" What's the big deal" The worst part is they are using abandon / derelict boats as there excuse. 
Have a great day.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

Yorksailor said:


> We deal with the Coconut Grove Mooring field by anchoring outside and having a 0.9 dinghy run.
> 
> Some mooring fields have an exclusion zone of hundreds of yards.


As of now, sounds like it's 200 feet for Beaufort...



> The city adopted an ordinance Aug. 13, making it unlawful to anchor or moor within 200 feet of city-owned buoys in the Beaufort River "immediately west of the downtown marina without permission of authorization from the downtown marina operator."
> 
> Read more here: Boats must clear out of bend in Beaufort River | Editorials | The Island Packet


----------



## delite (Nov 2, 2009)

ltgoshen said:


> What is the difference than a city squatting in the ICW with their mooring field or a Citizen dropping anchor? Really? You're not from the south are you? Down here we still think that the country belongs to the people, not the government! That's the same way we think of the constitution and the rest of the rules good people put into place when this country was being built. We feel it to be strong armed to put limits on freedom, in the name of progress. To us Progress is not restricting access to land that belongs to all of us in the name of a few or for profit. In This case, an outside contractor will have the mooring field under his control well after the Grant money has long been spent. Perhaps people should go to the first of the thread and read the, as Paul Harvey would say "the rest of the story". I would hope that freedom of travel would not be restricted on the waterways of the U.S. It's a freedom that is deer to many and slowly being eroded by folks that think "What's the harm" What's the big deal" The worst part is they are using abandon / derelict boats as there excuse.
> Have a great day.


Most people realize compromises are often necessary to balance competing uses and make the best use of public resources for everyone. I cant see cant how adding a mooring field has any effect on your ability to travel the waterway. Your ability to do exactly as you want has not been effected by this at all. Everything I have found online suggests you can still drop anchor nearby if not in the mooring field.

As usual its a case of a few spoiling it for the many. Derelict boats are a problem just about everywhere. Perhaps your outrage, for lack of a better word, should be directed at the irresponsible boat owners who created so many problems that the city felt something had to be done.
We all pay for irresponsible boat owners whether it be higher fees, equipment rules, limiting access or outright bans. Sounds like this is another example of the irresponsible ruining it for others. Irresponsible owners typically fall into 1 of 3 categories: Ignorant, Arrogant or Financially strapped.

At least one report claims The mooring field and electrical upgrade project received endorsements from the Beaufort Regional Chamber of Commerce, Beaufort Sail & Power Squadron and local boaters. Sour grapes?


----------



## Multihullgirl (Dec 2, 2010)

ltgoshen, I'm not only from the South, I'm a Daughter of the Confederacy, my 3d Great-Grandfather fought for States' Rights.

Nevertheless, I see no difference between someone squatting in a public park and a derelict boat owner squatting on a public waterway. If you care to stick to the question, I'm still looking for an answer to 'what is the difference?'


----------



## ltgoshen (Jan 5, 2009)

Multihullgirl said:


> ltgoshen, I'm not only from the South, I'm a Daughter of the Confederacy, my 3d Great-Grandfather fought for States' Rights.
> 
> Nevertheless, I see no difference between someone squatting in a public park and a derelict boat owner squatting on a public waterway. If you care to stick to the question, I'm still looking for an answer to 'what is the difference?'


Yeeea, like I said, go back and read the thread. This story is not about derelict boats or squatters.I live in this city and have for many years. I have a boat and pay for a slip at a near by facility. This issue and complaint about a contractor of a city dock taking a mooring field for profit from the citizens for profit. 
if all you had to say is there should be no abandoned boats then I would be inclined to agree with your statement. However, that's not what you said.
How cool "So did my Grand Father"

MCDANIEL, DAVID - CO. G, 49TH GA. INFANTRY Born in
1821 in Laurens County, probably a son of David and
Elizabeth Bracewell McDaniel. Married Nancy
__________. Discharged on May 1, 1862 due to
disability. RCS 5-259, Mid 1800 People, p. 30.


----------



## Multihullgirl (Dec 2, 2010)

So, ltgoshen, you have no answer to the question I asked, which is:

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PEOPLE SQUATTING IN A PUBLIC PARK AND PEOPLE SQUATTING IN A PUBLIC WATERWAY?

This question does not mention anything about the standards under which the people who are squatting live, k?


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

Maybe Multihull Girl will change her mind after she actually cruises the ICW and sees more and more anchorages disappear every year.


----------



## delite (Nov 2, 2009)

ltgoshen said:


> Yeeea, like I said, go back and read the thread. This story is not about derelict boats or squatters.I live in this city and have for many years. I have a boat and pay for a slip at a near by facility. This issue and complaint about a contractor of a city dock taking a mooring field for profit from the citizens for profit.
> if all you had to say is there should be no abandoned boats then I would be inclined to agree with your statement. However, that's not what you said.
> How cool "So did my Grand Father"


Given it has no effect on your ability to use the waterway or anchor nearby I dont understand your issue. So a transient boat may or may not use a mooring - big deal. How does this effect you or local boat owners? 
Within 6 months they will be full of derelict boats dumped by irresponsible owners anyway and then they will be the contractors problem. Sounds more like the city dodged a potential liability than they gave someone a business opportunity with only 16 moorings.

Even if every mooring was used every day of the year at $25 a day thats only $146k in revenue. Now be realistic about the numbers and this is very likely less than $50K a year in revenue Sorry but the city gave the operator nothing but a headache.

What is your complaint? That someone got a bad govt contract that didnt cost you anything?


----------



## Multihullgirl (Dec 2, 2010)

Actually I have cruised the ICW and I found anchorages in plenty. The thing that really sucks about the ICW is the rudeness of other boaters. I would never care to ICW again.

again… what is the difference, please… I would honestly like to have a real answer, and so far I'm not getting one.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

The Northeast is full of moorings, most run by marinas, that cost $50+/night. Yet we can still find places to anchor at if we want. You guys need to get over your Chicken Little and The Gov't is out to get me issues.


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

if I anchor for the weekend am I "squatting "?
if I stay in the park for a weekend am I squatting?
if I sleep in my car/truck/van at the curb for the weekend am I squatting?
if I do this for a week?
what about for a month??
what if I'm parked in a public lot in a camper?
I think it is quite different being in a vessel particularly a sailing vessel.
A vessel at anchor is definitely different than a box under a bridge, or sleeping in the park or living in a car if there were no difference I'd have skipped buying the boat!


----------



## lancelot9898 (Dec 30, 2008)

Two factors about moorings...

1. They take up the most desireable anchoring space.

2. I trust my anchoring gear more than a city maintained mooring.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

I have good anchoring gear with an oversized Manson Supreme and 350' of chain. But I don't feel it will ever be more secure than a properly sized, installed, and inspected mooring. My boat has ridden storms at its' mooring where my boat took the whole system with a 5,000 pound mooring block for a ride, but the boat didn't go far. I don't believe my anchor would have been better.


----------



## lancelot9898 (Dec 30, 2008)

The key word there...is properly sized, installed and inspected!!


----------



## lancelot9898 (Dec 30, 2008)

The key word there...is properly sized, installed and inspected!!


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

I hung on a claw and chain and a Danforth and chain each #40-45 for three days in Chesapeake basin during Sandy.
I'm pleased with my ground takle.
was I "squatting "? We were there for 5-6 days total.


----------



## remetau (Jan 27, 2009)

Don0190 said:


> I have good anchoring gear with an oversized Manson Supreme and 350' of chain. But I don't feel it will ever be more secure than a properly sized, installed, and inspected mooring. My boat has ridden storms at its' mooring where my boat took the whole system with a 5,000 pound mooring block for a ride, but the boat didn't go far. I don't believe my anchor would have been better.


I've seen a boat on a mooring ball in Put-N-Bay, OH go drifting after the ring on the mooring ball broke in half. So it probably depends on how well they are maintained.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

lancelot9898 said:


> The key word there...is properly sized, installed and inspected!!


Of course, but if you are going to start down this road as an excuse for a mooring owned by either a marinia or City where there are requirements for inspections and chain replacements then you now are just on a fear of The Man rant.

On the other side of the question is the size and condition of ground tackle on the unknown low cost cruiser anchored in front you during a blow.


----------



## ltgoshen (Jan 5, 2009)

The best thing is to hold boaters responsible for their boats. Governments do best at summons and ticketing. They have historically failed at fixing civil problems. 
Again we still need to divide this thread into 2 sections. one for derelict vessels and the other is Government mandated mooring fields threw waterway confrontation.


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

the pro-mooring advocates cannot justify the mooring fields unless they first blur the topic with talk of the big bad derelict vessel and msd smoke screen.
the choice to use anchor or mooring should remain a choice.
if mooring fields are to be installed, why can't the mooring fields be put where the anchorage isn't?
why must the best or most desirable anchoring locations always be where the moorings need to be?


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

could say the same they about every new public building, library, park, road etc.


----------



## Multihullgirl (Dec 2, 2010)

So the only difference between these types of squatting, for that's what it is, is that one is land-based and one water-based?

If you have a nice, fancy, high-dollar, well-kept camper rig and park it in a public park, you'll get run out in short order. So take your nice camper rig and spend a bit and go to a state or national park campground. It's a nominal fee, and limited duration, and it's public land. I'm assuming that, based on the lack of complaint, everyone is OK with that.

So maybe if you view the mooring fields in the same light, you get my take on it. I'm damned if I can see any difference.

It's a public waterway, moorings installed and controlled by a public entity, for a nominal fee, with limited duration. Just like a state or national park campground.

In any case, one never sees commercial boats (fishermen or the like) just randomly anchoring, as cruisers do. Would the commercial boats be asked to leave the anchorage, or do they just not want to anchor for free?


----------



## delite (Nov 2, 2009)

joethecobbler said:


> the pro-mooring advocates cannot justify the mooring fields unless they first blur the topic with talk of the big bad derelict vessel and msd smoke screen.
> the choice to use anchor or mooring should remain a choice.
> if mooring fields are to be installed, why can't the mooring fields be put where the anchorage isn't?
> why must the best or most desirable anchoring locations always be where the moorings need to be?


Really? Moorings are typically paid for. Why would you expect someone to pay good money to be in the location you dont want for free?


----------



## remetau (Jan 27, 2009)

Multihullgirl said:


> So the only difference between these types of squatting, for that's what it is, is that one is land-based and one water-based?
> 
> If you have a nice, fancy, high-dollar, well-kept camper rig and park it in a public park, you'll get run out in short order. So take your nice camper rig and spend a bit and go to a state or national park campground. It's a nominal fee, and limited duration, and it's public land. I'm assuming that, based on the lack of complaint, everyone is OK with that.
> 
> ...


I can see your point for long term users, but what about the transients?
Should somebody that just wants to rest as they make their way down the ICW be required to pay for every night that they stop?
If that is the case, then what about public rest stops where truckers are allowed to park their rigs while they rest.


----------



## Multihullgirl (Dec 2, 2010)

remetau said:


> I can see your point for long term users, but what about the transients?
> Should somebody that just wants to rest as they make their way down the ICW be required to pay for every night that they stop?
> If that is the case, then what about public rest stops where truckers are allowed to park their rigs while they rest.


finally, an analogy, and a good one. Rest stops. Yes, and something of the like should probably be considered in addition to the longer-term moorings, that seems fair to me.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

remetau said:


> I can see your point for long term users, but what about the transients?
> Should somebody that just wants to rest as they make their way down the ICW be required to pay for every night that they stop?
> If that is the case, then what about public rest stops where truckers are allowed to park their rigs while they rest.


Well, over the 1065 statute mile length of the ICW between Norfolk and Ft Lauderdale, these are the mooring fields comparable to the Beaufort proposal that come to mind, off the top of my head:

Carolina Beach - Mile 295
Beaufort - Mile 535
Fernandina Beach - Mile 715
St Augustine - Mile 775
Titusville - Mile 880
Vero Beach - Mile 950
Lauderdale, Las Olas - Mile 1065

I may have overlooked something, and I'm unclear about the current status of a place like Georgetown, SC - seems there are some moorings in there, whether they're private or not seems unclear. I do know Georgetown has long had an issue with derelict boats, seems just a matter of time before the town does something to address it:



> We had looked for possible places to anchor along the way, but decided to press on and anchored at 557pm amongst the many derelict boats either anchored to tied up to mooring balls in Georgetown harbor. It's really too bad that Georgetown doesn't do something about these derelict boats, as it makes it less welcoming to visit. Phil mentioned that's how St. Augustine FL use to look until they changed things. Yes I know that you need to pick up a mooring ball now, but it is much nicer now too. What do you think?
> 
> Passage and Stay in Georgetown, SC | Changesgoingsouth


With the exception of Vero and Las Olas, it's possible to anchor adjacent to the mooring field (In Lauderdale, one can anchor in Lake Sylvia about 1/2 mile to the south)

So, I think we're probably still a ways off from people plowing down the Ditch "having to pay for every night that they stop"... 

The variety and sheer number of anchorages along the ICW is truly remarkable... From the remoteness of the bottom of the Alligator River, where you'll likely be unable to get a cellphone signal...










... to the bright lights of Miami Beach, where you'll be afforded free municipal wifi while surrounded by the multimillion dollar homes of the Rich & Famous, the ICW is still littered with scores of free anchorages where you'll be permitted to linger for as long as any real 'Cruiser' might be inclined to...


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

you're an optimist jonE


----------



## miatapaul (Dec 15, 2006)

joethecobbler said:


> you're an optimist jonE


As long as you don't involve an SUV style dink or davits with a ton of stuff on them!

I actually like his style of cruising, you know using sails! ;-)

Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

joethecobbler said:


> you're an optimist jonE


Well, if that were the case, I suppose I would hope that I might live long enough to see the day where it would not be possible for for me to sail up or down the East coast without having to pay to stop at night...

But I'm more of a realist, and I seriously doubt I will live long enough to see such a time...


----------



## miatapaul (Dec 15, 2006)

Multihullgirl said:


> So the only difference between these types of squatting, for that's what it is, is that one is land-based and one water-based?
> 
> If you have a nice, fancy, high-dollar, well-kept camper rig and park it in a public park, you'll get run out in short order. So take your nice camper rig and spend a bit and go to a state or national park campground. It's a nominal fee, and limited duration, and it's public land. I'm assuming that, based on the lack of complaint, everyone is OK with that.
> 
> ...


Yes, and those campgrounds are often run by private companies to manage the campground. I see little difference here.


----------



## RichH (Jul 10, 2000)

So, here we have 180+ posts about a teeny harbor in a very nice southern town that has a marina with space for 50 boats at long-dock slips (@$1.80/ft), a harbor that has low density anchoring crowding out the harbor, and a proposed paltry 30 moorings to make the density of boats not at slips more efficient. 
We've discussed the rights of the proletariate, the absolute unabridged greed of capitalism and cronyism of the municipal government, the "tyranny of the commons", and the thuggery of water cops with radar guns vs. boaters (ending in ~2009).

On the otherside of the alternative universe, Beaufort SC is a wonderful town, filled with extremely polite and friendly people (_for the most part_) ... unlike some places to the 'north', the folks in Beaufort will look you in the eye and sincerely wish you Good Morning, etc.; has some very good 'down home' restaurants and shops, etc.; is 'safe'; and is welcoming; plus, the cost of a night's tie up is quite reasonable. 
I suggest you actually stop off at Beaufort for a day or two before you complain about something that in total effect may simply be 'trivial'.

More moorings, .... I say great!!!! Maybe I can pick one up when the municipal marina is at full capacity. I havent seen a water cop-thug looking for easy bust money / 'wakes' from transient boater prey-species since 2009 ... although its a physical impossibility to NOT have a wake when moving 'anything' through the water at ANY speed above ZERO; and as I did one time very carefully explain to the local justice of the peace, who fully agreed with me.

If on the AICW - Beaufort, SC ... not to be missed, even if you have to anchor behind Ladies Island and 'dinghy yourself' to town.

;-)


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

Multihullgirl said:


> So the only difference between these types of squatting, for that's what it is, is that one is land-based and one water-based?
> 
> If you have a nice, fancy, high-dollar, well-kept camper rig and park it in a public park, you'll get run out in short order. So take your nice camper rig and spend a bit and go to a state or national park campground. It's a nominal fee, and limited duration, and it's public land. I'm assuming that, based on the lack of complaint, everyone is OK with that.
> 
> ...


One big difference is we don't have a huge body of federal law, called camperly law (i.e. Admiralty Law) that governs a large body of legal issues on waterways and is a superseding authority in the issues where it does apply.

Cities, counties and states are not immune. We had the state attempt to build a 75 foot fixed bridge down here, after Katrina, and were successfully sued in Admiralty court by a boat builder whose completed boats would have been hindered in navigation under the bridge. The mayors of the two towns on either side, and the head of the state Department of Transportation, all basically were quoted in various news media as saying they didn't believe the lawsuit was going to be won by the boatbuilder.

But they were wrong. They were enjoined in federal court from building the bridge at that height. That bridge now has 95 feet of clearance.

The moral of the story being, there is a difference when it's navigable waters, local governments will attempt to violate that law (or any other law) if they feel it is in their best interest to do so, and boaters do have some rights in those areas that can't be infringed (but only if, they are willing to fight for those rights).


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

RichH said:


> So, here we have 180+ posts about a teeny harbor in a very nice southern town that has a marina with space for 50 boats at long-dock slips (@$1.80/ft), a harbor that has low density anchoring crowding out the harbor, and a proposed 30 moorings to make the density of boats not at slips more efficient.
> We've discussed the rights of the proletariate, the absolute unabridged greed of capitalism and cronyism of the municipal government, the tyranny of the commons, and the thuggery of water cops with radar guns vs. boaters (ending in ~2009).
> 
> On the otherside of the alternative universe, Beaufort SC is a wonderful town, filled with extremely polite and friendly people (_for the most part_) ... unlike some places to the 'north', the folks in Beaufort will look you in the eye and sincerely wish you Good Morning, etc.; has some very good 'down home' restaurants and shops, etc.; is 'safe'; and is welcoming; plus, the cost of night's tie up is quite reasonable.
> ...


Good post, Rich... As I've said previously, I very rarely wind up stopping in Beaufort, but it has always been a pleasure doing so, it's a very nice town...

I'd recommend to anyone doing so, make a stop in Hemingway's Bistro, a very cruiser-friendly hangout... Not certain if they're still doing it, but they used to have a great Thanksgiving dinner for any snowbirds who happened to wind up in Beaufort for Turkey Day...

Herringways Bistro

Introduce yourself to the proprietor, Andina Foster, who also is the inventor of the original Battery Combiner, and runs the marine electrical business Yandina Marine Electronics... No vendor in the marine industry stands behind their products better than Yandina, wonderful people to deal with, and their website is a great source of information and advice, their 'Projects' page is well worth a look for any Do-It-Yourselfer...

Yandina Marine Electronics

I've never done it, but one spot I'd be tempted to anchor off Beaufort is in that slue that bisects the large marsh south of town, across the channel from the marina... I passed thru there once with a trawler at high tide, it's a bit shoal at the top end, but there's plenty of water thru the rest of it, and you'd be by yourself and out of the river traffic in there, and closer to town than being over in Factory Creek - which I suspect is gonna become a pretty tight/crowded anchorage once the mooring field is in place....

I still think there will be plenty of room on the outside of the bend in the river to the west of the mooring field, but the spot I'm referring to is right near the bottom of the image below, directly underneath the "Surfaced Ramp" notation...


----------



## Multihullgirl (Dec 2, 2010)

Thanks Group9. I now see where the laws differ.

In our instance (mooring fields) it would take a pretty good lawyer to argue that navigation is impeded as in the example of the OS/BLX bridge. That is to say, in a historic anchorage whereat navigation was really already impeded, yes? And of course Trinity could afford good lawyers. I've not yet seen anything come out of the Trinity yard which challenges anything near that bridge height  only a couple of gin palaces, ha ha

It appears, ltgoshen, that Group9 has offered your answer. Got lawyer?


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

Hmmm, speaking of "squatters"...

Or, make that "Constitutionalists"... 

Not hard to see why unoccupied derelict boats are left to languish indefinitely, when it took weeks for authorities to respond to a situation such as this:

Wretched conditions on sailboat lead to child abuse charges - CapitalGazette.com: For The Record


----------



## lancelot9898 (Dec 30, 2008)

Well Rich, I wish I had better things to do than adding my two cents worth to some of these posts. I'm sitting here in the mountains of NC some 6 hour drive away from the boat thinking of all the work that needs to be done. Plan to use that Preval sprayer for some gel coat repair that we discussed some time ago. Always good to read your posts.


----------



## miatapaul (Dec 15, 2006)

Group9 said:


> One big difference is we don't have a huge body of federal law, called camperly law (i.e. Admiralty Law) that governs a large body of legal issues on waterways and is a superseding authority in the issues where it does apply.
> 
> Cities, counties and states are not immune. We had the state attempt to build a 75 foot fixed bridge down here, after Katrina, and were successfully sued in Admiralty court by a boat builder whose completed boats would have been hindered in navigation under the bridge. The mayors of the two towns on either side, and the head of the state Department of Transportation, all basically were quoted in various news media as saying they didn't believe the lawsuit was going to be won by the boatbuilder.
> 
> ...


I understand the difference, but the discussion was of the "taking of public area's" so I think the comparison is valid. Are there any portions of the Admiralty law that protects people's rights to permanently abandon there boats in the middle of a designated anchoring zone?


----------



## miatapaul (Dec 15, 2006)

joethecobbler said:


> I hung on a claw and chain and a Danforth and chain each #40-45 for three days in Chesapeake basin during Sandy.
> I'm pleased with my ground takle.
> was I "squatting "? We were there for 5-6 days total.


I don't think anyone here is saying anything about anchoring during a storm, there are still area's that you can do that. Now are you squatting after 5 days, no certainly not, 30 days perhaps. I think as long as you are actively on the boat it is not an issue, but if you are just using it as a free place to permanently moor your boat, yes it is squatting. Anchoring areas are for everyone and if someone comes in and leaves there boat permanently then it they are making it essentially there private mooring area, so as to prevent others from using it.


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

Multihullgirl said:


> Thanks Group9. I now see where the laws differ.
> 
> In our instance (mooring fields) it would take a pretty good lawyer to argue that navigation is impeded as in the example of the OS/BLX bridge. That is to say, in a historic anchorage whereat navigation was really already impeded, yes? And of course Trinity could afford good lawyers. I've not yet seen anything come out of the Trinity yard which challenges anything near that bridge height  only a couple of gin palaces, ha ha
> 
> It appears, ltgoshen, that Group9 has offered your answer. Got lawyer?


My recollection is that at the time, they had some orders for some boats that were going to be taller than 75 feet. Trinity was also in the process of moving their New Orleans operations to Gulfport. But, the big thing, that I remember, was that the Coast Guard joined the lawsuit and agreed the bridge height affected navigable waters.

I used to work for the state attorney general and it was always amusing when government officials would write for an opinion on whether they could do "A" and we would tell them they couldn't. And, then they would go and do it anyway, and then come to us wanting us to represent them when they were sued for doing what we told them they couldn't do.

Amazing, but it happened a lot.


----------



## Multihullgirl (Dec 2, 2010)

Group9 said:


> And, then they would go and do it anyway, and then come to us wanting us to represent them when they were sued for doing what we told them they couldn't do.


I suspect, though, in the instance of Beaufort, the precedent is that mooring fields are established along our waterways and have been for some time. Not just in Florida but in the New England/Northeast. Are there examples to the contrary, that is to say, removal of mooring fields?


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

Multihullgirl said:


> I suspect, though, in the instance of Beaufort, the precedent is that mooring fields are established along our waterways and have been for some time. Not just in Florida but in the New England/Northeast. Are there examples to the contrary, that is to say, removal of mooring fields?


I don't know. But, I used to be amazed how any cases of first impression we used to get. You would think in a couple of hundred years that everything would have come up at least once, but people always find new things to disagree about. 

I used to say the funniest thing was the fact that we had 82 counties, with each one putting their own interpretation to every statute, and one hundred per cent sure the other 81 had it wrong.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

One can only wonder whether a 'cruising boat' burning up yesterday in the Miami Beach anchorage might renew the pressure for more 'regulation' of the popular anchorage south of the Venetian causeway...

Fire Destroys Sailboat, Kills Pet Near Monument Island « CBS Miami

This is one of my favorite anchorages in S Florida, it's a great staging spot for crossing to the Bahamas. Very convenient to a large Publix market, drug, hardware & liquor stores, Post Office, you name it. Close to Lincoln Road, and all the attractions of Miami Beach, and the setting is spectacular, as metropolitan anchorages go. Endless parade of watercraft, one's girl-watching glasses will get a good workout around here... 

The spot most choose to anchor is in the lee of the high-rise condos, close to shore. I generally choose to anchor much further out, near Monument Island, where I'm always by myself.










There are a few drawbacks to the more popular anchorage, the primary one being some weird tidal current swirls in that area. Boat traffic generally passes close aboard, so you can see a lot of wakes there, it's noisier, and being so close to those high rises, I always feel my cockpit might be subject to some 'prying eyes' from some balcony 18 stories up  My wind generator produces more amps anchored out in the open... And finally, I'd prefer to distance myself from some of the other 'cruisers' who inhabit the anchorage closer in...

I've always been surprised by some of the boats in there, given their proximity to some very high-dollar real estate... There has been one large, very unsightly rusting steel-hulled boat with no mast that has been anchored there for years, and a smattering of other boats that appear to be teetering on the verge of derelict status...

The report is that the owner of the boat that burned yesterday had "multiple boats" anchored there... Also, that his dogs "barked all the time"... Yeah, I'm familiar with the type, hence my preference for anchoring off more by myself... 

This incident cannot be good news for cruisers, given the uneasy truce that has been established between the city of Miami Beach and the cruising community in recent years. Miami Beach had one of the most restrictive anchoring ordinances/policies prior to the Florida Supreme Court ruling on anchoring several years ago that struck down such local laws, but an incident like this will only provide more ammunition for the local residents to 'clean up' the anchorage, and rid the area of some of their 'less desirable' neighbors...

Sadly, we only have 'one of our own' to thank for whatever closer scrutiny or regulation is likely to come...


----------



## Multihullgirl (Dec 2, 2010)

JonEisberg said:


> Sadly, we only have 'one of our own' to thank for whatever closer scrutiny or regulation is likely to come...


That is almost always the case. But you should have turned around and taken a picture from behind, for that would show the ugly pile of cruise ships and rows of gantry cranes along the Causeway and Dodge Island behind you. Not really much of a view, wouldn't you say?


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

Multihullgirl said:


> That is almost always the case. But you should have turned around and taken a picture from behind, for that would show the ugly pile of cruise ships and rows of gantry cranes along the Causeway and Dodge Island behind you. Not really much of a view, wouldn't you say?


Actually, I posted the view in the opposite direction back in #182... It's not bad, particularly after the sun sets, and the Miami skyline lights up... 

I don't notice the cruise ships or container port all that much, they're somewhat obscured by the large homes of the Rich & Famous on the isles, anyway... All part of being in the midst of a large port city, no?

Unquestionably, those cruise ships are among the ugliest creations of modern mankind:










However, they're not necessarily any worse than some of the 'Sailing Vessels' that pass through that anchorage... I'll take my view of the cranes on Dodge Island without that eyesore in the foreground, thank you... 










Furthermore, anyone who is overly offended by the sight of cruise ships, may want to think twice before sailing off to "Paradise", themselves... For that's where all these things are headed, after all...


----------



## Multihullgirl (Dec 2, 2010)

ha ha, I guess my point was more to say that even if there's some derelicts in your anchorage there, the Condo Commandos have far uglier things to see when they look out the window. You're luckier to be lower to the water so those high-dollar homes on the little isles there will obscure your view of the 'industrial' port things 

The last time we passed through, we had a north wind so we could anchor between Fisher Island and Virginia Key. One of my best Miami anchorage experiences: quiet (we were by ourselves); and a great shot of the night skyline. I have to agree, Miami's night skyline is the prettiest I've seen.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

Multihullgirl said:


> The last time we passed through, we had a north wind so we could anchor between Fisher Island and Virginia Key. One of my best Miami anchorage experiences: quiet (we were by ourselves); and a great shot of the night skyline. I have to agree, Miami's night skyline is the prettiest I've seen.


Just curious, how long did you linger off Fisher Island? I've had a look in there, but never stayed, but it would definitely be the most convenient if you just wanted to pop into Government Cut for the night... The downside of that location, of course, is convenient shore access...

Yours is a fine looking boat, so I would imagine the folks at Fisher Island would 'tolerate' your presence there for at least a while... that guy whose boat burned up the other day however, with dogs that were barking incessantly, well... I would imagine the powers that be at Fisher Island would soon find a way to 'encourage' him to move on...


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

JonEisberg said:


> Just curious, how long did you linger off Fisher Island? I've had a look in there, but never stayed, but it would definitely be the most convenient if you just wanted to pop into Government Cut for the night... The downside of that location, of course, is convenient shore access...
> 
> Yours is a fine looking boat, so I would imagine the folks at Fisher Island would 'tolerate' your presence there for at least a while... that guy whose boat burned up the other day however, with dogs that were barking incessantly, well... I would imagine the powers that be at Fisher Island would soon find a way to 'encourage' him to move on...


Knowing first hand, how protective Fisher Island is of it's residents, even from law enforcement (it was difficult, to say the very least, to try and investigate anyone living there), and knowing who some of the people who live there are, I would not expect them to let any boat linger long without someone approaching them to find out who they were.

One of the weird things about south Florida (and there are many weird things about south Florida ), are the quasi-police forces a lot of the smaller, super wealthy, towns, and even private subdivisions got away with running down there. Most would actively work against us and are not really police the way we traditionally think of them.


----------



## Multihullgirl (Dec 2, 2010)

We just overnighted. We were just about where in your picture, in the lower right corner, the seagrass ends as you move from lower right to upper right of the picture. We were arguably closer to Virginia Key. There is, though, an enclosed area if you were to continue along out of the photograph right and top. A little embayment at Virginia Key, apparently there used to be a bar there or something. The satellite pics show boats anchored up in there. We found the spot we were in via ActiveCaptain, and yes, we popped in there late after a sunset entry to Government Cut. Elsewhere here at SN I've put up a picture of the sunrise we saw anchored here.

This anchorage, as I'm sure y'all know, it is open from what I would think is the typical fetch in the area (southeast) so I wouldn't think anyone in their right mind would want to anchor there unless the conditions were just so. I should think that, and the lack of access, would limit anchoring as much as po-po from Fisher Island


----------

