I'd also like to know the difference between a boat operator's right to move through water and his/her right to anchor in it. IOW, if stationary boats trouble you, what will happen when you decide that moving boats do also?
You can point to instances of anchored boats causing problems with noise, pollution, dereliction, etc. and I think anyone would be sympathetic to aggressive ordinances tailored to those problems. But it's unreasonable, and pretty arrogant, to say, "I own the shoreline, it's expensive to own because of my water view, therefore I get to control the water view."
Let's get the last point out of the way. It is arrogant for a shoreline owner to expect to control the water view. That said, it is also arrogant for the transient cruiser to expect to control that same water space. That's what public agencies, like harbor commissions, are for: to sort out conflicts and come up with solutions in the public interest. Yes, I know that there are some public agencies that don't get it right, but so, too, are boaters who expect no limits.
So back to the first part of the quote. There are neighborhoods where parking on public streets is reserved for residents as a result of abuse by the public. One example is Newport, RI, where certain neighborhoods have been repeatedly overrun by tourists and boaters arriving by land in the downtown harbor district. The city subsequently established "Resident parking only" areas so the locals could find a place to park within walking distance from their homes. We have a situation in New London, CT, where employees from a commercial operation were saturating the nearlby neighborhood parking. The city is now instituting the "residential parking only" restriction. These areas are typically enforced with the help of stickers for residents who have registered with the city.
Now, I'm not saying that boaters are generally abusing the waterfront, but there are enough troublemakers to generate resentment of uncontrolled transients. In our harbor alone, there have been at least 3 problemmatic boats that required town legal and police action to resolve. Do you think that the waterfront owners' property taxes might have paid for that enforcement?
If you haven't dealt with the issue of irresponsible boaters from the perspective of public agencies, you have no idea of the public burden resulting from attempts at enforcement. Aggressive regulations don't enforce themselves. If you need an example, check out the saga leading up the the destruction of a sailboat that was run aground in Niantic, CT, this year.