Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Narragansett Bay
Thanked 561 Times in 538 Posts
Rep Power: 11
Re: Florida is at it again
I've read the argument that a 200ft setback would effectively close miles of the ICW and one isn't permitted to transit the ICW in the dark. While I don't subscribe to providing anchorages, as I can count may places that never had any for miles to begin with, I also can't see a measure that effectively closes long stretches of the ICW to anyone that can move fast enough between anchorages. We also don't want to open it up to night travel, or the consequences and cost could be greater. In a sense, we've already created the problem.
There must be a compromise in there somewhere. Does 100ft allow for anchorages close enough that they can be transited during daylight? Could the regulation exclude anchoring in some places between 1hr after sunrise and 1 hr before sunset, rather than excluded it entirely by the setback, just to allow transiting?
I'm not saying these are good ideas, only that we all need to get along and come up with something. There are a-holes in all walks of life, ashore and afloat.
The slow boiling water analogy is a damnation against democracy. I should decide all these matters, rationally.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
In the harsh marine environment, something is always in need of repair. Margaritas fix everything.