SailNet Community - Reply to Topic

   Search Sailnet:

 forums  store  


Quick Menu
Forums           
Articles          
Galleries        
Boat Reviews  
Classifieds     
Search SailNet 
Boat Search (new)

Shop the
SailNet Store
Anchor Locker
Boatbuilding & Repair
Charts
Clothing
Electrical
Electronics
Engine
Hatches and Portlights
Interior And Galley
Maintenance
Marine Electronics
Navigation
Other Items
Plumbing and Pumps
Rigging
Safety
Sailing Hardware
Trailer & Watersports
Clearance Items

Advertise Here






Go Back   SailNet Community > General Interest > General Discussion (sailing related) > UPDATE - Stuart Anchoring Victory Florida
 Not a Member? 


Thread: UPDATE - Stuart Anchoring Victory Florida Reply to Thread
Title:
  

By choosing to post the reply below you agree to the rules you agreed to when joining Sailnet.
Click Here to view those rules.

Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the SailNet Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
Please note: After entering 3 characters a list of Usernames already in use will appear and the list will disappear once a valid Username is entered.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Click here to view the posting rules you are bound to when clicking the
'Submit Reply' button below


Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Click here to view the posting rules you are bound to when clicking the
'Submit Reply' button below


Topic Review (Newest First)
05-27-2011 01:46 PM
Don1500
Quote:
Originally Posted by norsearayder View Post
some people.....i float around and anchor where i want and you know what i paid a lot of taxes this year.......the water is common ground owned by all.i am also old and ugly maybe they dont want to look at my face either....but on the other hand up in maine people dont have that problem..last summer i was anchored up in a small gut next to a small island town on one side and a private island[one house] on the other.the owner of the private island yelled out to me offering 2 mooring balls one in town and one near his island[out of the current ]
I agree the North East is very boater friendly, that's why I'm moving to the east coast. But if that same house and island were in Ft. La Ta Da there would be 200 boats trying to tie up to those mooring balls, without permission. That is the difference.

Some of the anchorages in Fl are used mainly by folks traveling up the ICW. The towns along the water way may have been doing us what they thought was a good turn by limiting the stay. How would you feel if your favorite hidey hole that was always so peacefull but you could only stay 24hs, was suddenly full of boats that stay there all winter? This is just another view point. I do agree that the 24 hr law was illegal, but it may have been to our advantage.
05-27-2011 11:31 AM
norsearayder some people.....i float around and anchor where i want and you know what i paid a lot of taxes this year.......the water is common ground owned by all.i am also old and ugly maybe they dont want to look at my face either....but on the other hand up in maine people dont have that problem..last summer i was anchored up in a small gut next to a small island town on one side and a private island[one house] on the other.the owner of the private island yelled out to me offering 2 mooring balls one in town and one near his island[out of the current ]
05-26-2011 11:25 PM
Don1500
Quote:
Originally Posted by xort View Post
They're blocking MY view of the water, the nerve. I pay lots of taxes for that view and they aren't paying anything, the bums!

Meddling nabobs

We ARE the view!
06-27-2008 09:35 PM
xort banshi
Did you read the original posting?
"Mr. Sibilla may not have much money, but he had a nice recreational boat which he anchored in the Okeechobee Waterway within the city limits"

This has never been about derelict boats. There are plenty of means to deal with derelict boats. This is about wanting to force cruisers into controlled environments where fees can be charged. Anchoring is FREE, how dare they! They're blocking MY view of the water, the nerve. I pay lots of taxes for that view and they aren't paying anything, the bums!

Meddling nabobs
06-27-2008 03:57 PM
chucklesR My friend here on the Little Magothy River watched the DNR come by and refloat a deserted boat that broke free of it's anchor and sank. Upon raising said boat from the water they dove in, checked for bodies or evidence of foul play, then let it sink back down where it was.

Seems clearing sunken boats is the owners responsibility, and since no one knew who the owner was there it sat. My friend called 7 on your side (local news) who then did the investigative report thing we all love so much.
Two phone calls and one day later the boat was refloated and towed off by DNR.

Squeaky wheels get oil.

If a boats been deserted DNR (or the local version in FL) can put a sticker on a boat with a 30 day call back warning. Then impound the boat for 60 days (charging fair rate per day if the owner wants to recover), after which they can auction the boat off for salvage.
They could even have the tow companies do the service for free.
Self funded clean water, what an idea

People that don't visit their floating ping pong balls for more than 30 days deserve to have them impounded.

Nasty, but it does not impose on our legal right to navigate as we see fit, not as some city council member who doesn't like his view of his waterfront spoiled sees the law.
06-27-2008 01:49 PM
cardiacpaul "is the severe problem of derelict vessels we have in Florida"

agreed, but I've inquired about some of the same.
You would be amazed at the abject lack of knowledge of various departments who all claim to either "be in charge" of these vessels, or have even a modicum of a clue as to what paperwork is needed, required, supplied, wiped with pertaining to the salvage rights and or disposal of these vessels.

I have personally spent over 2 days straight waiting in various offices, (forget phone calls) being jacked from one official to another, only to be told that not only do they don't have a clue, they have no idea as to which 7-11 sells these clues.

I have taken the stance with some of the F&G folks, as well as the dept. of hemp undies fella's that upon my first encounter with a human with a pulse, my very first question is....
"you got a boss?" "I'll wait for 'em". and still, nada.
From city, to county, to state, to even the USCG (who reports said tubs to the state), who reports 'em to F&G, who reports 'em to state police, county police, local police and I think the local garden club, that nothing happens because nobody has a nickel in the game. I give up.
06-27-2008 10:53 AM
bubb2 This is good new!
06-27-2008 10:46 AM
sailingdog Banshi-

If they are not anchored in a channel, then the analogy of parking in the emergency lane of I-95 falls apart. It would be more like them being parked in a rest area parking lot. Not the same thing at all. And, yes, I've seen vehicles parked in a rest area for more than a day. If they've got a good reason, the cops let them do it.
06-27-2008 10:37 AM
Banshi Once again we find tax payers subsidizing a lawyers income. It was probably a lawyer who wrote the code and another lawyer who used it to fill his pockets with cash.

The real issue here, that was probably the main reason the code was created to begin with, is the severe problem of derelict vessels we have in Florida. Someone tried to create a code that would address the problem and still protect the rights of everyone. Unfortunately everyone looses when you try to write compromise legislation (based on protecting your ability to get reelected by not offending some nitch of voters).

In my opinion any vessel anchored in these types of areas not expressly designated for long term anchorage for more than a couple of weeks should be considered derelict and be subject to impounding, retitling and sold to fund the clean up of derelict vessels through out the state. It has become a real navigation hazard and eye sore for everyone. We do not allow people to park their motor homes in the emergency lane on I-95 or even at the rest areas for any extended period. It's simple common sense, something that appears to be a lost trait in today's world.
06-26-2008 11:20 PM
sailingdog Very good post Free...
This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

 
Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may post attachments
You may edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:06 PM.

Add to My Yahoo!         
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
(c) Marine.com LLC 2000-2012

The SailNet.com store is owned and operated by a company independent of the SailNet.com forum. You are now leaving the SailNet forum. Click OK to continue or Cancel to return to the SailNet forum.