SailNet Community banner

1 - 20 of 51 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
362 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)

·
Registered
Joined
·
362 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
The map. A lot of traditional (Skipper Bob's & Waterway Guide) anchorages are outlawed.

https://coastalgadnr.org/Liveaboards

Bill
Indeed. Some of us over at the Facebook Group Save Georgia's Anchorages inventoried the anchorages in Active Captain, Waterway Guide and Cruisers' Net. The impacts were assessed and tabulated as attached in the spreadsheet. Come join our growing membership (1100+) and join the discussion on these new regulations.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
I am on anchor now Bradley Creek behind Ossabaw. I was planning on heading to St Catherine's and Walburg Creek tomorrow but after looking at the chart it appears one of the docks is halfway down. Now I'm wondering if it will be a good spot since we are not allowed within a 1000 feet?
 

·
bell ringer
Joined
·
4,757 Posts
GA is going to need the Buy a lot of boats and hire a lot of new watercops to polce these anchorages in middle of nowhere
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
362 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
I am on anchor now Bradley Creek behind Ossabaw. I was planning on heading to St Catherine's and Walburg Creek tomorrow but after looking at the chart it appears one of the docks is halfway down. Now I'm wondering if it will be a good spot since we are not allowed within a 1000 feet?
There is space both N and S of the 1000ft exclusion zone caused by the dock. I know of 2 vessels that anchored there a few nights ago. If you want to go there, you should. It is a great anchorage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
362 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
I am on anchor now Bradley Creek behind Ossabaw. I was planning on heading to St Catherine's and Walburg Creek tomorrow but after looking at the chart it appears one of the docks is halfway down. Now I'm wondering if it will be a good spot since we are not allowed within a 1000 feet?
Blew - take a look at this overlay I did in Google Earth on NOAA RNC's. Just avoid the pink area.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,595 Posts
What a bummer. This trend only seems to be going one way. Can anyone recall winning anything back lately, or are we just holding off the landlubbing barbarians at the gate.

I’d be curious of any backstory here. Were the commercial fisherman complaining? Too many squatters? These look like narrow channels, where there recurring issues with impeding traffic. I read the accusation that waterfront landowners may have lobbied for this.

1000 feet seems arbitrary and capricious. If you’re not anchoring inside a shellfish bed or a hazard to a structure or shoreline, what’s the logic of being so far away. It seems only to the be exercise of one’s will and not a defensible distance. One would think a legal action could be brought forward, but I’m surprised that BoatUS doesn’t do more of that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
362 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
What a bummer. This trend only seems to be going one way. Can anyone recall winning anything back lately, or are we just holding off the landlubbing barbarians at the gate.
So there was a proposed bill in FL, not state wide, but around the areas of Ortega and Cedar River, to restrict anchoring. Enough boaters voiced their opposition that the council backed off. Good government in action, I say! And thanks to all the boaters who took the time to speak. Read more here:
https://www.facebook.com/kris.l.fletcher/posts/10221385298082652

I’d be curious of any backstory here. Were the commercial fisherman complaining? Too many squatters? These look like narrow channels, where there recurring issues with impeding traffic. I read the accusation that waterfront landowners may have lobbied for this.
During the public hearing held in the summer of 2019 where the public was invited to comment, Rep Hogan, sponsor of House Bill 201, made a reference to 4 people on a docked yacht, throwing trash overboard, pumping black water overboard, etc. When challenged on how he knew they were pumping overboard, he acknowledged he could not know for sure. The channels are narrrow in some places yes (not as narrow as Rock Pile) so its even more egregious to give 1000ft radius control to the land owner.

1000 feet seems arbitrary and capricious. If you’re not anchoring inside a shellfish bed or a hazard to a structure or shoreline, what’s the logic of being so far away. It seems only to the be exercise of one’s will and not a defensible distance. One would think a legal action could be brought forward, but I’m surprised that BoatUS doesn’t do more of that.
If you assume it's a semi circle, that's 36 acres of navigable waterway that the homeowner now controls. These waterways are owned by the state but held in the public trust for all to use.

There is a Facebook Group dedicated to the discussions around these regs. If it can happen in FL and GA, it can happen next anywhere. I encourage all boaters to come be part of this discussion: https://www.facebook.com/groups/SaveGeorgiasAnchorages/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,595 Posts
So ......These waterways are owned by the state but held in the public trust for all to use.....
Is that really the case, or would these be federal waters, where an old act from the 1800s (I can’t recall the name) delegated rights to the States to regulate. Not sure this matters, more than who you might be leveraging.

The trash thing is indefensible, if true. The black water thing is more frustrating. Want to bet the homeowners septic system is having a notably more negative impact on the adjoining waterway than any recreational boats discharge every would. Of course, recreation boats should not do it and, in significant quantity, would be worse. However, shoreside properties typically put large amount of nitrogen in the waterways from septic leaching and lawn fertilizer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
362 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
How big is a 1000ft radius semi-circle? I wrote this open letter and sent it to several cruising oriented publications.

Taking The Bat and The Ball & Going Home

So my friend James Newsome (co founder of Facebook Group “Save Georgia’s Anchorages” and I were ruminating about the impact of a single structure of a waterfront property owner now taking exclusive control of a huge swath of waterway and prohibiting anchoring.

We believe the structure now causes unreasonable obstruction to navigation and have started discussions with US Army Corps of Engineers as they have a role in administering the permitting process for these waterfront structures under PGP0083 – but that’s a topic for another day.

A semi circle defined by a radius of 1000ft off a waterfront property owner’s structure is 36 acres.

So how can we picture one acre? A football field is approximately 1.32 acres.

(Ref: https://www.stack.com/a/how-many-acres-is-a-football-field)

So 36 Acres / 1.32 Acres per football field = 27.3 football fields!

I’ve heard about unsportsman like conduct when one kid takes the bat and ball and goes home and ends the game for everyone. Looks like this time the one kid is taking the bat the ball and 27 football fields away to end the game for everyone.

Addendum:
For those of you interested in the math:

A semi circle with a 1000ft radius from a structure is equivalent to 36 acres.

Area of a circle = p r2 so 3.14 * (1000ft)2 = 3,140,000 square feet

1 acre = 43560 square feet

So the area of that semi circle = 3,140,000 sq ft / 43560 sq ft per acre / 2 = 36.0 Acres

A football field is approximately 1.32 acres.

(Ref: https://www.stack.com/a/how-many-acres-is-a-football-field)

36 Acres / 1.32 Acres per football field = 27.3 football fields
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,595 Posts
The math makes an even better case for arbitrary and capricious. I’m surprised legal action hasn’t ensued to force the State to explain their rationale for these specific limits. Have they already tried to make clear why they picked 1000ft? It would far from the first time that a law was passed, knowing it could be challenged, but the legislature takes its chances.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
362 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
The math makes an even better case for arbitrary and capricious. I’m surprised legal action hasn’t ensued to force the State to explain their rationale for these specific limits. Have they already tried to make clear why they picked 1000ft? It would far from the first time that a law was passed, knowing it could be challenged, but the legislature takes its chances.
I have not seen any logical rationale for 1000ft, other than "to reduce conflicts between homeowners and boaters". I guess if you get all the boaters "outta my sight from my house" there will be fewer conflicts. Ironically if "distance" is the solution to "conflicts", the law specifically excludes recreational fisherman who are going to be close to their docks and fishing the structures.

We had an attorney on our FB Group raise his hand and offer to defend, pro bono, the first boater arrrested / charged under the new law. Sadly that is what it may take...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
986 Posts
I have not seen any logical rationale for 1000ft, other than "to reduce conflicts between homeowners and boaters". I guess if you get all the boaters "outta my sight from my house" there will be fewer conflicts. Ironically if "distance" is the solution to "conflicts", the law specifically excludes recreational fisherman who are going to be close to their docks and fishing the structures.

We had an attorney on our FB Group raise his hand and offer to defend, pro bono, the first boater arrrested / charged under the new law. Sadly that is what it may take...
So is a potential work around to the law to have a fishing pole handy? :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
986 Posts
It is an overreach by the state - appreciate you taking the time to raise awareness of the issue. Hopefully the BoatUS campaign will help the governor see the light and spur a change in the regulations. If not - at some point I have to believe this will be challenged in court and hopefully it will be heard in a court with a judge that will rule based on matters of law......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,595 Posts
....We had an attorney on our FB Group raise his hand and offer to defend, pro bono, the first boater arrrested / charged under the new law. Sadly that is what it may take...
Many have this romantic hippie with a cause image about civil disobedience, but this is really what it’s tactically used for. If the legislature just passed the law, there is absolutely no way one will refocus their attention on changing it. Unless the governor hasn’t singled it yet, the BoatUS letter is only going to make their membership feel like they are doing something. If it’s signed law, I’m pretty disappointed in BoatUS after the fact. It’s little more than pandering.

The way signed law is modified is through the court system. It’s very intentionally designed that way. Legislatures pass laws they know are not fully detailed or supported and expect those details will be sorted out in the courts. The cause often needs someone to suffer an injury (arrest, fine, penalty) in order to bring the action forward. If no one has been injured, it’s harder to get the courts to simply take up a constitutional matter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
362 Posts
Discussion Starter #20 (Edited)
Legislators must rely on subject matter experts and lobbyists to understand what is put before them, I get that. But how did House Bill get overwhelming support in the House (Yea 162 Nay 1 NV 8 Exc 9) and Senate (Yea 45 Nay 0 NV 4 Exc 7)?
(Ref: HB*201*2019-2020 Regular Session)

Here is how HB 201 Sponsor Rep Hogan presented it in the House. Video by Georgia Public Broadcasting

 
1 - 20 of 51 Posts
Top