Hey All, Regrding Florida's FWC and its proposed changes in boating Statutes; I have been following and voicing my opinions on each revision. I also have been very active getting the word out every time there seemed to be a new bottom line.
At the risk of being repetitive, I would like to take the time to get any and all up to speed on this most important issue. If you're up to speed, then great! In the State of Florida, liveaboard vessels are those who either do not move and/or are used solely as a place of business. Someone else pointed that out and they are 100% correct. Non-liveaboard vessels are those boats that are otherwise (we who navigate waters and do not use our vessels solely as a place of business). The designations have nothing at all to do with anything else (be it property owners or not). It was Jeb Bush who put the definitions into place and it was a huge victory for cruisers. But you know some people didn't like it and decided to strip away at the victory by pretending to make "derelict vessels" an issue. If it were truly the issue, then why even touch the Statute 327.60 that protects we cruisers. As that Statute has nothing to do with derelict vessels. They did so because they cannot ignore Maritime Law and the rights we cruisers have (i.e., keep vessels that are "in navigation" from anchoring). Their loses of big cases (i.e., Marco Island) put a monkey wrench in their ideals...so they had to be more clever than ever. I believe it very important that everyone know exactly where we are today with the FWC's proposal for revisions to Florida State Statutes, as it has been submitted. In a nutshell: Proposed tp the Florida Legislature, the Florida FWC, in conjunction with the EPA, would like to experiment with five Pilot Programs. These Pilot Programs would need funding to turn an otherwise free anchoring area into a mooring field and ban anchoring. Yes, BAN anchoring period in those areas. Strictly mooring fields with absolutely no vessels outside of the mooring field. Period. No where. They say this is the only way they can find out whether or not anchoring vessels are actually making a negative impact on the environment. It also would prove that mooring fields are more environmentally friendly. I know. Ridiculous. You have to remember that this all started out under the guise of ridding FL communities of "derelict vessels." I was among the very first to to point out to the FWC that the State of Florida created the derelict vessel problem, not lawbreakers. You see, up to this very day, a boat that does not move [a liveaboard] does NOT have to register with the State of Florida. That's right. No matter how long they are here. If it doesn't move, it's not a boat. It does not navigate the waters and it does not have to register. So...after all the hurricanes and all the years of people using any and everything to sit upon the water...when they tired of it or relocated, they simply left it. Since the boat was not registered and no one could make them register, there is no way to find an owner of record. So, under this derelict vessel issue the powers that be suddenly began to play with definitions and lots of other statutes that had nothing to do with the derelict boat problems. They got caught at it and put in check. So they addressed the registration oversight and now propsed all vessels over 14 ft. must be registered with the State of Florida. Great! Unfortunately, they didn't stop there. Thus, the very last part they added (and I will say that if it was up for public view, I and everyone I know missed it) is the whole "Pilot Program" for mooring fields. The Program would begin sometime in 2009 and run for five years. Five "geographically diverse areas" would be asked to participate or volunteer to participate. We all know that Sarasota is first in line (as they jumped at the chance) to say "Pick us!" I'm sure Marco Island is trying their darndest to be a part of the "pilot program," as it is the few people from Marco Island who began this latest venue of ridding Florida of "derelict boats." Interesting, isn't it? We, as boaters, liveaboards, cruisers, those who love the freedom we have upon the waters CANNOT allow this thinly disguised attack on law-abiding boaters, cruisers, and liveaboards to be enacted as law. If it is adopted in Florida, which coastal State will not be soon to follow? Contact information for Representatives to write are best found at: www.boatus.com Big Hugs, Charmaine Aboard s/v September Sea "Life's a Gift... Unwrap It!" - C~ www.SeptemberSea.com On Feb 15, 2009, at 1858, Norm of Bandersnatch wrote: > > The recent developments in the Florida anchoring situation in encouraging. > > ...."Livaboards" are defined by law as those folks on a boat who DO NOT > own or > rent property ashore (and therefore, not coincidentally, DO NOT pay > property taxes), while "full time cruisers" are folks on a boat who DO own > or rent property ashore (and therefore, not coincidentally, DO pay property > taxes). That's why cops often ask us if we have a residence ashore when > they come alongside... _______________________________________________ Liveaboard mailing list [email protected] To adjust your membership settings over the web http://www.liveaboardnow.org/mailman/listinfo/liveaboard To subscribe send an email to [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] The archives are at http://www.liveaboardnow.org/pipermail/liveaboard/ To search the archives http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] The Mailman Users Guide can be found here http://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/mailman-member/index.html
