SailNet Community banner
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
5,111 Posts
Reaction score
2,973
I think that is a good survey and hopefully things can be resolved. I think a 150 ft setback is reasonable. I anchor 300+days per year and when on land live in Florida on the water. In the last 2,000 days of anchoring I have never anchored within 150 ft of anything that might damage my boat except for another boat.

However, even when I had a 30 ft boat I never used the ICW...I get nervous near all those boats and people!

Is it as Captmeme writes an ICW problem?

Are there too many boats chasing too few anchoring spots?

Phil
As much as I've enjoyed anchoring in some tight spots like Lake Sylvia in Lauderdale...



...and Sunset Lake in Miami Beach...



...I'm inclined to agree that a setback of 150' is not all that unreasonable... I know that I was located more than 5 boatlengths off that palatial home pictured above, but even so, I was all too aware that I was definitely close to 'intruding' on that homeowner's space... Obviously, he owns neither the water, or the view, but I would hope any cruiser would give similar consideration to any waterfront homeowner's privacy...

Not sure where the 150 foot number is now coming from, previously talk of a 300' setback has been bandied about. Below are the maps Dave was referring to, which clearly indicate anchoring would be all but eliminated in much of Broward County, and a spot like Lake Sylvia might only accommodate 2 or 3 boats dead center...



Let your voice be heard! Potential Florida anchoring restrictions | General | Waterwayguide.com News Updates

So, 150 feet seems to me like an acceptable compromise, if it comes to that. I think the handwriting is on the wall, this seems an example of not letting the Perfect be the enemy of the Good, and such concessions might be the only way to get a reasonable state-wide policy instituted in Florida... And, seriously, anyone expecting to have a full array of anchorages available within a stretch of the ICW like that between Palm Beach and Ft Lauderdale, dream on... That strikes me a bit like driving an RV to New York City, and expecting to be able to park on the streets of Manhattan... :))

As I've mentioned before, what will be interesting to see in the event that setbacks are instituted, is what might become of some of the mooring fields already in place... The city mooring field at Las Olas Bridge in Lauderdale, for example, would presumably have to go...
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,111 Posts
Reaction score
2,973
I am not sure why some folks, some boaters here included, want to give up any of their freedoms. You have the right to navigate the waters of the USA. Why should the state of Florida or some municipality like Miami Beach be able to take those rights away.
Hmmm, sounds like you might need to get out more... Why don't you come on up here to the Northeast and New England, and try asserting your right to anchor anywhere you damn well please...

:))

I doubt anyone here really wants to "give up their freedoms"... All I've suggested, is that IF - and granted, that's a mighty big "IF" - such a 'concession' like the 150' setback is the sort of compromise that ultimately can result in a statewide policy being implemented, that seems reasonable enough to me, and something worth discussing as a bargaining chip... After all, such a setback would make very little difference in the larger scheme of Florida anchoring, and only eliminate a comparative handful of anchoring spots, mostly entirely within the highly developed and constricted waterways of Broward County... If you think the current status quo is gonna be maintained indefinitely in Florida, without some degree of compromise being reached on both sides of this very contentious issue, well... Dream on... :))

I'll say it again. The FWC has an agenda and that is to eliminate anchoring in certain places. They have already succeeded in areas where they have implemented the Pilot Program.
Well, anchoring may no longer be as unrestricted or CONVENIENT as it once was in those venues - but where has it been "eliminated" entirely?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,111 Posts
Reaction score
2,973
You obviously have not been cruising in the pilot program areas.......
These places may not mean anything to you, but you may no longer anchor here:
St Petersburg North Yacht basin
St Petersburg South Yacht Basin

All because the city added 13 moorings. BTW, that no one uses.
You're right, St Pete is the one pilot program venue I haven't seen since it was instituted...

Last time I was there, Vinoy Basin contained a surprising number of what appeared to be derelict boats, considering the surroundings...

Gee, what a shocker, that a mooring field wound up taking their place... :)



150' Set back will eliminate more than half the anchorages now in use.
And that's exactly what they want.
Seriously ??? "Half of the anchorages in use" WHERE, exactly? Even in Vinoy Basin as pictured above, to my eye only a few of those anchored boats might be within a 150' setback... My apologies for not being as familiar with the Gulf coast, but along the East coast between Fernandina and Key West, the number of anchorages "eliminated" by a 150' setback would be miniscule...

Surely, you're not referring to anchorages statewide, right?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,111 Posts
Reaction score
2,973
Thank you for your comments. They demonstrate exactly what local officials want you to think.

Because a derelict boat might anchor here, because an abandoned boat might anchor there, because someone might anchor too close to something. Let us eliminate all anchoring in this area. It's for your safety after all......

As they say, you've taken the bait, hook, line and sinker....:(
No, not at all... I'm simply accepting the reality of the situation, and how things are done in Florida... Certainly, the derelict boat issue is often being used as the 'excuse' here, as a means to restrict anchoring. It serves no one's argument to try to deny that...

Another related issue in Florida is the proliferation of NO WAKE ZONES along the ICW... Not an issue for most of us here, but as one who often winds up running large, fast boats thru certain stretches of the Ditch, it is for me... Gets more annoying with each passing year, how much more my "freedom" to run as fast as I can past waterfront homes is being lost... :))

Here's how it works... As soon as a previously undeveloped stretch of the ICW becomes developed, it becomes designated as a MANATEE ZONE... Apparently, manatees are strongly attracted to expensive real estate, and their migration patterns are influenced by new waterfront McMansion construction :) But, that's how such stretches become designated as NO WAKE ZONES, with all the ridiculous, convoluted speed restrictions that apply to Manatee Zones (30 MPH in Channel, 25 MPH at Night, for example)... Manatees are being used as the rationale for speed limits, just as derelicts are are re anchoring... Of course, they're not the REAL reason, we all know that...

Simply pointing out how this happens, doesn't mean I've fallen for it "hook, line & sinker"
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,111 Posts
Reaction score
2,973
Lots of places on the Southeast coast. Mike Ahart at the Waterway Guide has been keeping track and has some great graphics.

It is a problem, and could get worse.
Again, just to be clear, I'm not IN FAVOR of a mandated 150' standoff... I'm simply arguing that if it comes to that eventually, I just don't see it being all that onerous a restriction throughout Florida - at least in the waters of the East coast with which I'm most familiar...

In trying to recall all the times I might have anchored within 150' of private property in FL over the years, I can only come up with 3...

Once in Lake Sylvia, when a strong W wind preceeding a frontal passage probably swung me within that distance of the docks on the E shore...

Another time in Miami Beach, where I usually anchor much farther out in the general vicinity of Monument Island... Again, with the passage of a very strong front, I tucked up into the corner afforded by the lee of the Venetian Causeway, and the first island to the west for a day or so...

Third, I sometimes anchor just inside Ft Pierce Inlet... There's a small little patch that lies outside of the strongest current just to the NE of the Pelican Yacht Club, close to the dock of a nice little pub/restaurant with an open wifi :) Not the most comfortable spot to be, and requires an anchor watch with each swing of the tide, but probably within about 150' of the shore... OK, I've anchored there a few times, so that ups my total number to more than 3... :) But if I simply went further to the west, a couple of hundred yards past the CG station, there's all kinds of room outside of the channel there, well away from shore... No wifi signal that I can pick up, however :)

The tightest spot I've anchored in recently, was last summer when I went up into the head of Lake Tashmoo on the Vineyard to ride out Hurricane Arthur. I was probably just about 150' from either shore there, but it sure felt a lot closer that night :)

Passing back thru there in September, I once again went into Tashmoo at the end of my passage back from Nova Scotia... I was pretty tired and was looking forward to a nice quiet night, so once again I headed for that spot...

When I got back in there, however, it just seemed too close to the beautiful home I'd anchored in front of during the storm... The conditions were benign, there was no need for me to be seeking that level of protection, and I simply felt I was an intruder in that situation, seemed like I was anchoring right in that guy's front yard... So, I moved back out to the middle of the lake, outside of the mooring field, and everything was fine...

I don't know, 150' is really not all that far... Twice the width of my lagoon, to be precise...

:))

 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,111 Posts
Reaction score
2,973
Wouldnt it be nice to see the government doing something proactive and for the people like dropping courtesy moorings in some designated areas for passing boats. Put a time limit on them to prevent them from becoming "home" to the derelict boats. Make a small access point on shore for dinghies. It would save a lot of bottom scouring from dragging ground tackle, would congregate boats in desired areas and be a benefit to the community as when cruisers stop, they invariably go ashore and spend money.

Even the designated anchorages are sweet. If im going to an area and spot one I definately prefer to anchor there. The one near the megadock in charleston and the one in beaufort sc come to mind.
So, the taxpayers of Charleston - in addition to footing the bill for the removal of derelicts from those "Special Anchorages" you prefer - should also be paying to install and maintain Courtesy Moorings, as well?

Just because it would be the "Nice" thing to do?

Good luck selling that one to the voters... :)

Womack said the stretch of the Ashley River from Brittlebank Park to the Wappoo Cut is where most boats are abandoned locally. There are two areas within that stretch known as special federal anchorages. Boats are allowed to moor and anchor in those areas at no cost and with few rules. And they aren't required to be attended to regularly, he said.

Abandoned boats aren't limited to the anchorages, he said, but the special areas could be a contributing factor to the large number of derelict boats on the Ashley.

Derelict boats a matter of cash - Post and Courier
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top