On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 00:10:13 -0600, Richard J Kinch <kinch@truetex.com> wrote:
When did Florida start outlawing fishing and boating from the beach?>
Just how does one find such picayune, strictly local laws?>
Is there a boater vs swimmer lobby?
=====================================
That area is a heavily used public beach as you probably know. My guess is that the town is trying to limit their liability from a boater-swimmer collision. It may also be their way of banning PWC rentals from the beach which are popular in some other areas.
How far out are the exclusion buoys? If not too far, you could anchor outside and swim in.
Short Wave Sportfishing 16 March 2005 16:55:22 [ permanent link ]
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 02:42:29 -0500, Wayne.B <waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 00:10:13 -0600, Richard J Kinch><kinch@truetex.com> wrote:>
When did Florida start outlawing fishing and boating from the beach?>>
Just how does one find such picayune, strictly local laws?>>
Is there a boater vs swimmer lobby?>
=====================================>
That area is a heavily used public beach as you probably know. My>guess is that the town is trying to limit their liability from a>boater-swimmer collision. It may also be their way of banning PWC>rentals from the beach which are popular in some other areas.>
How far out are the exclusion buoys? If not too far, you could anchor>outside and swim in.
This is interesting because I'm not sure they can do that.
Don't take this as fact, but Federal statute on beach ownership is to the Highest High Mean Tide point - anything lower than that it open to the public.
We just had a case down in Greenwich, CT and over in Jamestown, RI where those owning beach front property wanted to restrict access to "their" property which they took to mean Mean Lowest Low Tide. Ain't so and the cases were bounced from state and Federal courts.
There was also an issue on a State beach about five years ago about beaching boats where swimmers were. The State lost the case for the same reason as the private owners.
Now, exclusionary zones are legal in terms of wake and speeds can be regulated, but I'm not at all sure that landing rights can be denied.
Again, this is all from memory and I'm too lazy to look up the references. Take it for what that's worth.
Richard J Kinch 17 March 2005 00:11:24 [ permanent link ]
Wayne.B writes:
That area is a heavily used public beach as you probably know.
Not really public. The area I am talking about is from Atlantic Blvd in Pompano Beach, south to Commercial Blvd in Lauderdale-by-the-Sea. This is not "public" beach in that it is all private buildings on the waterfront, from hi-rise condominiums to small old cottages. It is definitely not a public park like the Ft Lauderdale beach.
Florida seems to have case law about the "wet sand" being public, though. "Wet sand" being the high-tide wash and below. This is apparently what lets you walk up and down the beach frontage that is all private. The "dry sand" above the high-water mark is privately owned (in this area).
Boating laws being a mishmash of admiralty/federal/state/local jurisdictions, I'm having a lot of trouble sorting things out.
I have also gotten a written warning about not having flares on board when I was pulled over for speed in a marina basin. Later I read the USCG regulations that boats under 16' in the daytime don't (legally) require flares (although of course it is a good idea to have em).
"Richard J Kinch" <kinch@truetex.com> wrote in message news:Xns961B9A827290Asomeconundrum@216.196.97.131...> Wayne.B writes:>
That area is a heavily used public beach as you probably know.>
Not really public. The area I am talking about is from Atlantic Blvd in> Pompano Beach, south to Commercial Blvd in Lauderdale-by-the-Sea. This is> not "public" beach in that it is all private buildings on the waterfront,> from hi-rise condominiums to small old cottages. It is definitely not a> public park like the Ft Lauderdale beach.>
Florida seems to have case law about the "wet sand" being public, though.> "Wet sand" being the high-tide wash and below. This is apparently what> lets you walk up and down the beach frontage that is all private. The > "dry> sand" above the high-water mark is privately owned (in this area).>
Boating laws being a mishmash of admiralty/federal/state/local> jurisdictions, I'm having a lot of trouble sorting things out.>
I have also gotten a written warning about not having flares on board when> I was pulled over for speed in a marina basin. Later I read the USCG> regulations that boats under 16' in the daytime don't (legally) require> flares (although of course it is a good idea to have em).
I got pulled over last summer, and got the flare lecture. My boat's 14', and the regs *seem* to say flares are required. Maybe. I ended up getting them because if nothing else, they'll eliminate some hassles next time my son's girlfriend with the short skirt is on board, and we're pulled over by four 23 yr old Coast Guard guys who are obsessed with my safety. <snicker>
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:11:24 -0600, Richard J Kinch <kinch@truetex.com> wrote:>Wayne.B writes:>
That area is a heavily used public beach as you probably know.>
Not really public. The area I am talking about is from Atlantic Blvd in >Pompano Beach, south to Commercial Blvd in Lauderdale-by-the-Sea. This is >not "public" beach in that it is all private buildings on the waterfront, >from hi-rise condominiums to small old cottages. It is definitely not a >public park like the Ft Lauderdale beach.
====================
I'm familiar with that stretch of beach. It's true that it is not a park, but is readily accessible to the general population in many places via a number of public walkways tucked in between the condos, beach bars and old Florida funky motels.
You wouldn't happen to be a PWC operator by any chance? If so, bear in mind that careless PWC operation is one of the primary factors leading to the current state of over regulation.
Patty O'Furniture 17 March 2005 15:00:47 [ permanent link ]
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 21:02:48 -0600, Richard J Kinch <kinch@truetex.com> wrote:
~~ snippage ~~
He did remark that the buoys >300 ft off the shoreline were put in only a year or two ago. Now I wonder >if there wasn't a 9/11 super-security justification for some new strict >regulations.
That's a good point. I know over in Narragansett Bay, the bridge restrictions are no stopping, anchoring or trolling within 500 feet of the bridges and the Navy base shore. The shore line is bouyed, but the bridges aren't.
They aren't enforcing it though - it almost impossible to.
Patty O'Furniture wrote:> On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 21:02:48 -0600, Richard J Kinch> <kinch@truetex.com> wrote:>
~~ snippage ~~>
He did remark that the buoys >>300 ft off the shoreline were put in only a year or two ago. Now I wonder >>if there wasn't a 9/11 super-security justification for some new strict >>regulations.>
That's a good point. I know over in Narragansett Bay, the bridge> restrictions are no stopping, anchoring or trolling within 500 feet of> the bridges and the Navy base shore. The shore line is bouyed, but> the bridges aren't.>
They aren't enforcing it though - it almost impossible to.>
Later,>
"Patty" O'Furniture?
Hey, I realize it is the Day for Wearing the Green, but there's no need to crossdress.
A proper Irishman's name is Paddy...NOT Patty.
And a good morning to you, too.
We have a 20 per cent chance of rain today, but it is too cold to be a fine, soft day.
St. Patrick died on this day in 461. Jonathan Swift became Dean of St. Patrick's Cathedral, Dublin, in 1713 — though these verses, tacked to the Cathedral door when Swift's appointment was announced, show that some didn't put him in the saintly category:
...Look down, St. Patrick, look we pray On thine own church and steeple; Convert the Dean, on this great day; Or else God help the people.
And now, whene'er his deanship dies Upon his stone be graven, A man of God here buried lies Who never thought of Heaven.
But satirists took on Dean Swift at their peril. The source of these lines, the Rev, Jonathan Smedley, was the uncomfortable recipient of many poetic paybacks, a typical one beginning: "Dear Smed I read thy brilliant lines / Where wit in all its glory shines...
Not that Swift thought himself a saint: his housekeeper-nurse remembered the debilitated Dean on his last St. Patrick's Day, 1744, sitting in his rocking chair, repeating "I am what I am, I am what I am..." as he rocked.
Swift is buried beneath the floor of St. Patrick’s.
"Patty O'Furniture" <emaildisguised@askme.com> wrote in message news:lloi31l8lgkvqstct7fsg0ijhn2h4861l3@4ax.com...> On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 21:02:48 -0600, Richard J Kinch> <kinch@truetex.com> wrote:>
~~ snippage ~~>
He did remark that the buoys>>300 ft off the shoreline were put in only a year or two ago. Now I wonder>>if there wasn't a 9/11 super-security justification for some new strict>>regulations.>
That's a good point. I know over in Narragansett Bay, the bridge> restrictions are no stopping, anchoring or trolling within 500 feet of> the bridges and the Navy base shore. The shore line is bouyed, but> the bridges aren't.>
They aren't enforcing it though - it almost impossible to.>
Later,>
Navy base in N-Bay? Was it installed after 1970, or was I below, making a sandwich when my dad cruised us through the bay way back then?
"thunder" <thunderTAKEOUT@gti.net> wrote in message news:39tf58F677jluU2@individual.net...> On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:04:11 +0000, Doug Kanter wrote:>
Navy base in N-Bay? Was it installed after 1970, or was I below, making a>> sandwich when my dad cruised us through the bay way back then?>
Isn't Quonset Point, the Home of the Seabees, still there?
Dunno. I'm still dealing with the flu. I expect to be catered to for a few more days. Let me know what you find out about this Navy base. And, send over a couple of lap dancers or something.
Patty O'Furniture 17 March 2005 21:10:21 [ permanent link ]
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:04:11 GMT, "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Patty O'Furniture" <emaildisguised@askme.com> wrote in message >news:lloi31l8lgkvqstct7fsg0ijhn2h4861l3@4ax.com...>> On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 21:02:48 -0600, Richard J Kinch>> <kinch@truetex.com> wrote:>>
~~ snippage ~~>>
He did remark that the buoys>>>300 ft off the shoreline were put in only a year or two ago. Now I wonder>>>if there wasn't a 9/11 super-security justification for some new strict>>>regulations.>>
That's a good point. I know over in Narragansett Bay, the bridge>> restrictions are no stopping, anchoring or trolling within 500 feet of>> the bridges and the Navy base shore. The shore line is bouyed, but>> the bridges aren't.>>
They aren't enforcing it though - it almost impossible to.>
Navy base in N-Bay? Was it installed after 1970, or was I below, making a >sandwich when my dad cruised us through the bay way back then?
It's the Navy's Antisubmarine Warfare Center in Newport, RI. Entering the Bay from East Passage, it's right after the Newport Bridge on the Starboard side.
"Patty O'Furniture" <emaildisguised@askme.com> wrote in message news:1aej311qdm0h7r5ts2j3tc0ikk036t9if7@4ax.com...> On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:04:11 GMT, "Doug Kanter"> <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote:>
"Patty O'Furniture" <emaildisguised@askme.com> wrote in message>>news:lloi31l8lgkvqstct7fsg0ijhn2h4861l3@4ax.com...>>> On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 21:02:48 -0600, Richard J Kinch>>> <kinch@truetex.com> wrote:>>>
~~ snippage ~~>>>
He did remark that the buoys>>>>300 ft off the shoreline were put in only a year or two ago. Now I >>>>wonder>>>>if there wasn't a 9/11 super-security justification for some new strict>>>>regulations.>>>
That's a good point. I know over in Narragansett Bay, the bridge>>> restrictions are no stopping, anchoring or trolling within 500 feet of>>> the bridges and the Navy base shore. The shore line is bouyed, but>>> the bridges aren't.>>>
They aren't enforcing it though - it almost impossible to.>>
Navy base in N-Bay? Was it installed after 1970, or was I below, making a>>sandwich when my dad cruised us through the bay way back then?>
It's the Navy's Antisubmarine Warfare Center in Newport, RI. Entering> the Bay from East Passage, it's right after the Newport Bridge on the> Starboard side.>
I'm pretty sure it was there in the '70s.>
Later,>
Tom
I must've been making a sandwich. But, I was pretty attentive to notes on the charts, especially since my father once drove us right through an area where there was a target practice ship parked, and got a rather terse talking to from a sub. Pretty funny, at least to my sister and I. Dad was not amused.
"Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:TXi_d.858$hg.287@news01.roc.ny...>
"Patty O'Furniture" <emaildisguised@askme.com> wrote in message > news:1aej311qdm0h7r5ts2j3tc0ikk036t9if7@4ax.com...>> On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:04:11 GMT, "Doug Kanter">> <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote:>>
"Patty O'Furniture" <emaildisguised@askme.com> wrote in message>>>news:lloi31l8lgkvqstct7fsg0ijhn2h4861l3@4ax.com...>>>> On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 21:02:48 -0600, Richard J Kinch>>>> <kinch@truetex.com> wrote:>>>>
~~ snippage ~~>>>>
He did remark that the buoys>>>>>300 ft off the shoreline were put in only a year or two ago. Now I >>>>>wonder>>>>>if there wasn't a 9/11 super-security justification for some new strict>>>>>regulations.>>>>
That's a good point. I know over in Narragansett Bay, the bridge>>>> restrictions are no stopping, anchoring or trolling within 500 feet of>>>> the bridges and the Navy base shore. The shore line is bouyed, but>>>> the bridges aren't.>>>>
They aren't enforcing it though - it almost impossible to.>>>
Navy base in N-Bay? Was it installed after 1970, or was I below, making a>>>sandwich when my dad cruised us through the bay way back then?>>
It's the Navy's Antisubmarine Warfare Center in Newport, RI. Entering>> the Bay from East Passage, it's right after the Newport Bridge on the>> Starboard side.>>
I'm pretty sure it was there in the '70s.>>
Later,>>
I must've been making a sandwich. But, I was pretty attentive to notes on > the charts, especially since my father once drove us right through an area > where there was a target practice ship parked, and got a rather terse > talking to from a sub. Pretty funny, at least to my sister and I. Dad > was not amused.>
Before the correction robots get all fussy, I should add that this area was not in N-Bay, but out in the Block Island Sound, if I recall, maybe halfway between BI and Montauk, maybe somewhat north of a line drawn between those two places.
Shortwave Sportfishing 17 March 2005 21:30:17 [ permanent link ]
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 17:23:03 GMT, "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote:
~~ snippage ~~
Before the correction robots get all fussy, I should add that this area was >not in N-Bay, but out in the Block Island Sound, if I recall, maybe halfway >between BI and Montauk, maybe somewhat north of a line drawn between those >two places.
Yep - it's called a torpedo range. Purple colored area on the chart.
Short Wave Sportfishing 18 March 2005 02:40:19 [ permanent link ]
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 22:29:14 GMT, "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote:
~~ snippage ~~
Probably nobody here will talk to me ever again, but this regulation sounds >like a good idea. Combine swimmers, propellors, booze and an average >frequency of stupid operators which we can assume is no different than >automobile drivers, and you've got a reason to be concerned.
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 06:43:10 -0500, Dave Hall <nojunk_n3cvj@ptd.net> wrote:
I would agree that restricting an entire stretch of beach effectively>isolates boaters from land access. Many boaters like to "raft", beach,>or otherwise utilize a spot of land to anchor near.
========================
Here in south western Florida it is idle speed only inside of 200 yards, but OK to beach in most places. More commonly, we anchor off the beach in 3 or 4 feet of water and wade in.
"Wayne.B" <waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:4ool315526b7rnur100h41lk4bki2he7fg@4ax.com...> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 06:43:10 -0500, Dave Hall <nojunk_n3cvj@ptd.net>> wrote:>
I would agree that restricting an entire stretch of beach effectively>>isolates boaters from land access. Many boaters like to "raft", beach,>>or otherwise utilize a spot of land to anchor near.>
========================>
Here in south western Florida it is idle speed only inside of 200> yards, but OK to beach in most places. More commonly, we anchor off> the beach in 3 or 4 feet of water and wade in.>
Around here, some of the Finger Lakes and local waters are havens for yahoos in floating Camaros, who have no awareness of a world outside their own boats. In other areas, things are much better. These contrasts are well known to normal boaters.
Perhaps your part of Florida has more seasoned boaters, and the area being discussed in other messages is more....yahoo territory? Or something? Just wondering.....
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 15:06:11 GMT, "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote:
Perhaps your part of Florida has more seasoned boaters, and the area being >discussed in other messages is more....yahoo territory? Or something? Just >wondering.....
========================================
It's hard to say. There are yahoos everywhere and we have our share. There are big differences in population between the west coast and east coast however so perhaps are yahoo density has not yet reached critical mass. We still have beaches here that are accessible only by boat and are relatively unspoiled. Don't tell anyone though.
I lived on Cayuga Lake for a year back in the late 60s and don't recall yahoos being a big issue but things change I guess.
"Wayne.B" <waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:hgcn31d7ekj5ffqp5k05lcatie2hhlgus1@4ax.com...> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 15:06:11 GMT, "Doug Kanter"> <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote:>
Perhaps your part of Florida has more seasoned boaters, and the area being>>discussed in other messages is more....yahoo territory? Or something? Just>>wondering.....>
========================================>
It's hard to say. There are yahoos everywhere and we have our share.> There are big differences in population between the west coast and> east coast however so perhaps are yahoo density has not yet reached> critical mass. We still have beaches here that are accessible only by> boat and are relatively unspoiled. Don't tell anyone though.
Here, the yahoo factor is based on proximity to Rochester. The north end of Canandaigua Lake is ridiculous. Not even worth boating on. And, Honeoye's about the same.
I lived on Cayuga Lake for a year back in the late 60s and don't> recall yahoos being a big issue but things change I guess.>
The West side of Cayuga now attracts large contingents of fools who think it's fun to crank along the shore, maybe 100 off, and cause as much turbulence as possible for the docks, swimmers and parked boats. This, while the center of the lake is dead calm, and moving out 1/4 mile would make all the difference in the world. The north end's better, though. I fish up that way a lot, and it's fun to see some idiot come to a sudden stop in those nice weeds, and spend 15 minutes in the water trying to hack the tangled salad off the prop.
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 20:13:16 GMT, "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote:
The West side of Cayuga now attracts large contingents of fools who think >it's fun to crank along the shore, maybe 100 off, and cause as much >turbulence as possible for the docks, swimmers and parked boats.
That's the "look at me" factor at work. I was on the east side at Lansing Station Road, about 10 miles north of Ithaca. It was a beautiful spot but there was a railroad track between the house and the lake with one train a day for the power plant as I recall.
Richard J Kinch 24 March 2005 06:33:54 [ permanent link ]
There are plenty of local ordinances that would never survive legal> scrutiny but they survive because nobody wants to actually fight them> in court. This is particularly true in places where the sand meets the> sea and they probably don't have jurisdiction in the first place.
Hmmm. Florida Statutes 327.60(2) reads:
"... local governmental authorities are prohibited from regulating the anchorage of non-live-aboard vessels engaged in the exercise of rights of navigation."
Obviously, every little town would want to outlaw any outside boats and keep their little private ocean. Does excluding the entire beach count as "anchorage" or the "rights of navigation"?
