Talahassee -- The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation (FWC), Commission Division of Law Enforcement Boating and Waterways Section, is recommending public mooring fields and new means of dealing with the owners of derelict vessels as part of the Anchoring and Mooring Pilot Program’s Proposed Report of Findings and Recommendations, released this week.

FWC has engaged key stakeholders to explore and discuss possible legislative solutions and identify points of consensus.

Some of the recommendations include: establishment of public mooring fields under state regulation of anchorages; giving the state the option to empower the local counties in anchoring and mooring matters; creation of “anchoring limited” areas and the suspension of titles on derelict vessels. See the complete list of recommendations is below.

Back on December 31, 2013, FWC submitted a report to the Governor, the President of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives on the findings to-date from the Anchoring/Mooring Pilot Program (pilot program), along with FWC’s recommendations. FWC recommended continuation of the pilot program for three additional years to allow a more thorough and complete assessment of what works, and what does not work, relative to the local anchoring regulations being tested.

This was based on the fact that delays in ordinance implementation and the lack of ability at that time to establish, with some degree of certainty, which components of the various ordinances accomplished the intended goals and which did not.

In essence, the testing was not complete.

The following recommendations, categorized by pilot program goals in Section 327.4105(1), F.S., reflect the lessons learned from the individual pilot program participating governments, public responses to surveys directly related to this topic, and additional input from key stakeholders.

Recommendations related to promoting the establishment and use of public mooring fields

• Further protect safety of mooring field users 

To further enhance the value of mooring fields to boaters, there is a need to provide additional safety precautions in the immediate vicinity of public mooring fields.

This recommendation would provide an allowance for a 300-foot buffer extending beyond mooring field boundaries, within which anchoring is prohibited. The no-anchoring buffer would

enhance the safety of vessels using the mooring field by reducing the likelihood that nearby anchored vessels, which may break loose and drag anchor, will impact and cause damage to moored vessels. This protection could be accomplished either through a universal, statewide prohibition –

a concept that is preferred by some pilot program participants and many stakeholders –

or by revising Section 327.60, 1 Two of the pilot program participants, Martin County/City of Stuart and Monroe County/cities of Marathon and Key West, only had their ordinances in effect for three to six months when the initial report was due. The others had been in effect from 13 to 21 months.

50 F.S., Local regulations; limitations, to allow local governments to prohibit anchoring within a 300 foot buffer around public mooring fields.

• Authority to regulate the anchoring of vessels should be retained by the State.

Should the State choose to grant such authority to local governments, public mooring fields must be available– Should authority be granted for local governments to lawfully restrict anchoring of vessels on waters of the State, permitted public mooring fields of adequate capacity and at a reason able cost must be available within a reasonable distance to any anchoring restricted areas?

Local governments, however, should not be allowed to restrict all anchoring within the area authorized for them to regulate, and an exemption should be created to provide relief should mooring field capacity be met.

Based on discussions with pilot program participants and stakeholders, a distance of ten miles may be considered a “reasonable distance,” and costs for using mooring fields should be consistent with comparable market rates.

• Authority to regulate the anchoring of vessels should be retained by the State. Should the State choose to grant such authority to local governments, it should be granted to counties only.

In order to minimize confusion among boaters and to avoid the likelihood of a patchwork of anchoring

restrictions and regulated areas, any authority granted for the creation of local anchoring restrictions encompassing all or specific waterways areas within any county or municipal jurisdictions should be granted to county governments only.

There should be a requirement for consultation and cooperation with any and all affected municipalities, FWC, Department of Environmental Protection, U.S. Coast Guard, the applicable Inland Navigation District, and associations or other organizations representing vessel owners or operators.

• Quantify the economic benefits of mooring fields

Pilot program participants consistently agreed that their communities have experienced economic benefits as a result of their mooring field(s). In order to further encourage other local

governments to establish mooring fields, it would be beneficial to quantitatively demonstrate the economic benefits to Florida communities, such as benefits to local businesses, reductions in derelict vessels, etc. Research should be conducted so local governments can be better prepared with economic benefit information as they explore whether mooring fields are appropriate solutions for local needs.

• Document the environmental benefits of mooring fields

The effects of mooring fields on seagrasses and other portions of the marine environment are

inadequately substantiated in the various waterway types in Florida. Mooring field proponents claim that seagrass areas are substantially better off when boats occupy the water on an engineered mooring system as compared to boats being secured to the bottom by anchoring (due to anchor dragging, scouring, etc.). Opponents contend that shading from moored boats is detrimental to seagrasses.

Proponents further argue that water quality is likely to improve because moored boats typically have easy access to sewage pump-outs. Opponents contend that more boats on the water equates to diminished water quality. Research should be conducted to adequately identify the environmental pros and cons associated with mooring fields in Florida’s various marine environments.

Recommendations related to promoting public access to the waters of this state, enhancing navigational safety, and protecting maritime infrastructure.

The ability of persons to gain access to and enjoy the benefits of Florida’s waterways should be protected. When anchored boats are within close proximity to locations where boats are being loaded, unloaded or navigated in close quarters, the anchored boats may serve as impediments to safe and enjoyable access to the water.

Anchored boats, particularly those being stored unattended on the water, when left in close proximity to maritime infrastructure, may serve as a threat to the integrity of that infrastructure in the event they drag anchor or break free. The following recommendation is intended to improve safe access to, and use of, State waters:

• Create anchoring limited areas

Establish universal, statewide prohibition against allowing an anchored vessel to come within 150 feet of any marina, boat ramp or other vessel launching and loading facility.

Exceptions should be created that mirror some of those listed in Section 327.4108, F.S., Vessels at risk of becoming derelict on waters of this state. These include when there is unreasonable risk of harm due to weather conditions, vessels owned by government entities, construction or dredging vessels on an active job site, vessels engaged in commercial fishing, and vessels engaged in recreational fishing

when persons onboard are actively tending hook and line fishing gear or nets. These exceptions must not be construed to allow for violation of the provisions of Section 327.44, F.S., Interference with navigation.

Derelict Vessels

In North Carolina back in March local governments such as Brunswick County officials took action to combat the onslaught of abandon boats in that area.

According to WECT, “There are hundreds of abandoned and sunken boats along North Carolina's coastline and Brunswick County could be the first county in the state to finally address the problem.”

Just beyond a children's playground in Brunswick County's Dutchman Creek Park along Fish Factory Road, is a wasteland of abandoned and sunken boats.

"This is a snapshot," Captain Mose Highsmith told WECT. Highsmith is with the Brunswick County Sheriff's Office, pointing out the abandoned and sinking vessels in the park's basin.

It's a snapshot of the huge problem, not just Brunswick County, but all coastal counties in North Carolina.

Also, according to the Jacksonville Daily News, the Eastern Carolina Council of Governments is working with North Carolina Sea Grant to bring new attention to the issue of abandoned and derelict boats.

Judy Hills, executive director of the ECC, said the issue is a coast-wide one but is a difficult one for local communities to address because of the complexities involved.

For one, she said, boats are abandoned for many reasons and just determining ownership can be a challenge. In some cases a vessel has been in the water for a long time and it’s no longer possible to find the owner. In other cases and owner may have removed a boat number or other identification and can’t be traced.

Adding to the complexity of the issue is that many different agencies have different roles, making it unclear at times who is responsible for removing or otherwise taking action regarding an abandoned boat.

Hills said the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers investigates vessels that have sunk or that impact a navigable channel while the Coast Guard investigates possible contamination and marks vessels that pose a hazard to navigation but rarely removes vessels.

Various other state and federal agencies may also have some involvement, such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which can reimburse applicants for cost of vessel removal after a storm, or state agencies such as the Division of Coastal Management or Wildlife Resources Commission.

The goal now is to bring together the different stakeholders involved in the issue to see if there are more effective ways to deal with the issue.

In the aftermath of Hurricane Matthew the issue of abandon vessels drifting into the waterways has become an ongoing topic for discussion.

However, the U.S. is not the only place struggling to cope with issues tackled in this survey and report, such as anchoring, mooring and abandon vessels in the waterways.

For example, Canada is also dealing with abandon vessels.

According to a report by The Times-Colonist, “Some of the boats kicked out of the Gorge Waterway by the City of Victoria have turned up in Brentwood Bay, says a local resident who is concerned about the health of the Saanich Inlet ecosystem.”

At least three, possibly four, of the Gorge boats arrived within recent weeks, Michael Simmons, a Brentwood Bay resident and member of the Saanich Inlet Protection Society, said Monday.

The city took action in the Gorge to clear out abandoned, derelict and illegally moored boats, giving them an Oct. 28 deadline to relocate.

Recommendations related to the prevention of derelict vessels

In August 2015, FWC hosted a series of public meetings and participant surveys related to identifying potential ways to improve Florida laws aimed at preventing or removing derelict vessels on State waters. This effort resulted in a series of recommendations which garnered broad public support.

One of those recommendations directly supported the creation of Section 327.4107, F.S.,

Vessels at risk of becoming derelict on waters of this state, during the 2016 Legislative Session. Adoption of several of the remaining recommendations would serve as valuable tools in future efforts to rid Florida waters of derelict vessels. Those recommendations follow:

Place a “hold” on titles of vessels deemed derelict

To ensure that innocent parties are not placed in a compromising position when the owner of a derelict

vessel attempts to sell the vessel to avoid prosecution or vessel removal obligations, this recommendation proposes statutory authorization for the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles to place a “hold” on the title of a vessel deemed derelict when requested by an investigating law enforcement agency. A provision would be made for the title “hold” to be released upon direction from a court or when a responsible party comes forward to take possession of the vessel and remove it from the waters of the State.

• Limit who may renew a vessel registration – To protect the previous owner of a vessel who has sold

the vessel to a person who subsequently fails to transfer title, this recommendation limits who may renew a vessel registration to only the owner(s) of record or a person in possession of a power of attorney from the owner.

• Increased penalties for repeat violations of expired vessel registration– To ensure that vessels that are neglected by their owners receive necessary attention, this recommendation creates enhanced penalties for using or storing a vessel on State waters when the vessel registration is expired by six months or more. Under this recommendation, the second

and any subsequent time an owner is cited for having a registration expired more than six months

, the penalty would be a second degree misdemeanor, which would require mandatory appearance in court or at a formal hearing. The current penalty is a non-criminal infraction, no matter how many times the owner is cited. This recommendation mirrors current motor vehicle law.

• Alternate means of derelict vessel owner notification –

To reduce redundant administrative processes, this recommendation waives the statutory requirement

in Section 705.103, F.S., Procedures for abandoned or lost property, for the owner of a derelict vessel to be notified via certified mail, but only in the circumstance where the owner has received face-to-face notification by a law enforcement officer.

This notification must be documented in writing and would be in the form of a citation/notice to appear for violating Florida’s derelict vessel laws. An exception/waiver should be created for a vessel that has become derelict as a result of a declared natural disaster or a state of emergency. The exception/waiver should last for a time period of 60 days following the declaration. This is intended to allow sufficient time for vessel owners and insurance companies to take action to deal with damaged boats. It would also minimize the likelihood that citations would be issued while reasonable efforts to correct problems are being made by responsible parties.

• Additional condition for vessel at risk of becoming derelict -

To further deter the number of vessels stored on State waters that are neglected and are incapable of effective navigation, this recommendation adds a condition to Section 327.4107, F.S.,

Vessels at risk of becoming derelict on waters of this state. This law currently prohibits the anchoring or mooring of vessels on State waters that are at risk of becoming derelict and specifies four conditions that indicate the vessel is neglected or poorly maintained. This recommendation adds another condition that would indicate that a vessel is incapable of effective navigation when the owner or operator cannot demonstrate an effective means of propulsion for the purpose of safe navigation. The recommendation would require a vessel owner or operator to demonstrate, within 72 hours of notification by a law enforcement officer, that:

• For sailing vessels –

there is a working steering system and the rigging and sail(s) are present and in working order, or the vessel is equipped with a functioning motor. These conditions demonstrate that the vessel is capable

of safe and effective navigation.

• For all other vessels –

the vessel is equipped with a functioning motor, controls, and a steering system. These conditions demonstrate that the vessel is capable of safe and effective navigation.

Recommendations related to protecting the marine environment

• Prohibit a vessel or floating structure from being moored to unauthorized moorings

– This recommendation would establish a prohibition for any vessel or floating structure to tie off, anchor or moor to any unpermitted or unlawful objects on or affixed to the water body bottom. This would further deter proliferation of unlawful moorings (such as those affixed to the water body bottom by use of cast iron engine blocks, concrete weights, debris piles, or debris fields). It would also

support efforts to remove this litter from State waters. A penalty is also recommended – the first violation would result in a non-criminal infraction; second and subsequent violations would result in a second degree misdemeanor. An exception should apply to private moorings lawfully owned by an adjacent upland riparian landowner or to private moorings placed on privately owned

bottomland. Unresolved issues for which there are no recommendations The participating local governments in the pilot program actively attempted to address problems associated with stored vessels, inoperable vessels that are anchored or unlawfully moored and used as residences, marine sanitation concerns, and setbacks from shorelines or private docks.

The following are intended to serve as discussion on those unresolved issues:

Stored vessels

Many local governments would argue that the long-term storage of vessels at anchor on State waters has not been sufficiently addressed through statewide public policy. While many of the vessels stored on the water at anchor receive some level of regular attention by their owner(s) or a responsible party,

there are particular concerns over those that are left unattended for long periods.

Those concerns typically revolve around the likelihood that these vessels will become derelict in the future, which usually results in costs to the State, local governments, and other organizations for

removal and clean-up. In some cases, these vessels are not adequately secured, which results in them dragging anchor or breaking free and increasing risk to other vessels and/or maritime property and

infrastructure in the area.

Several of the participating local governments attempted to create tools within their pilot ordinances aimed at resolving issues related to stored boats. Two –Monroe County/cities of Marathon and Key West and St. Petersburg –enacted prohibitions against allowing a vessel to remain on the water in their jurisdiction if there were conditions that indicate an inability to effectively be navigated. This is of particular importance in the event of an impending storm. The City of St. Augustine required vessels stored on their jurisdictional waters to demonstrate operability twice annually by navigating to the city marina to receive a decal, which served to verify operability. Martin County/City of Stuart also required

demonstration of operability for vessels remaining in the program area for more than ten consecutive days. Although a requirement to navigate to a designated point to receive a decal worked well for the City of St. Augustine, a similar requirement established by statewide law would be very challenging to implement. Therefore, the FWC is not recommending a statewide policy requiring such. Instead, several of the recommendations above, if implemented together and used collectively, would serve as a basis for what FWC believes to be reasonable and effective remedies to many of the problems associated with long-term storage of vessels on State waters.

Those specific recommendations include:

• Further protect safety of mooring field users

•Create an anchoring limited area

•Increased penalty for repeat violations of expired vessel registration

• Additional condition for vessel at risk of becoming derelict

• Prohibit a vessel or floating structure from being moored to unauthorized moorings

In the event that some or all of these statewide recommendations are implemented, the issues associated with the long-term storage of vessels on waters of the State should continue to be monitored and assessed to determine if the policies are sufficient.

Inoperable vessels being used as residences

Vessels being used as residences and anchored or unlawfully moored on waters of the State were identified as areas of concern for several of the participating local governments. This is of particular

concern when those vessels are inoperable, and when it is unclear if those vessels fall within the statutory definition for “live-aboard vessel,” as defined in Section 327.02, F.S., Definitions. That definition states in part: “Live-aboard vessel” means:

(a) A vessel used solely as a residence and not for navigation;

(b) A vessel represented as a place of business of a professional or other

commercial enterprise; or

(c) A vessel for which a declaration of domicile has been filed pursuant to

Section 222.17.

A commercial fishing boat is expressly excluded from the term “live-

aboard vessel.”

There is no recommendation to specifically address solutions to the issues related to vessels that are stored on State waters and used as residences. Some of those vessels, particularly those that are inoperable and incapable of navigation, may be better addressed through the statutory authority already granted to local governments in Section 327.60(2)(f), F.S. Local regulations; limitations, which provides local governments the authority to regulate live-aboard vessels outside the marked boundaries of permitted mooring fields.

It is clear there are also vessels stored on State waters that are used as residences and are used for and/or are capable of navigation. Such vessels are regulated at the State level, and there is no recommendation to alter this policy.

Marine sanitation issues

Two of the participating local governments – Martin County/City of Stuart and Monroe County/cities of Marathon and Key West –attempted to enact further protections of the marine environment by regulating marine sanitation. This most frequently came in the form of requirements to show

proof of pump-out for vessels with sleeping quarters onboard. Florida’s requirements related to marine sanitation are found in Section 327.53, F.S., Marine sanitation. This law requires marine sanitation devices on vessels 26-feet or longer with berthing facilities, requires holding tanks on certain vessels and floating structures, prohibits discharge of raw sewage, and establishes penalties.

Many marinas on Florida’s waterways offer pump-out services, but there are considerable expanses of State waters where these services are limited. While local efforts to require proof of pump-out have demonstrated varying levels of success throughout the pilot program, attempting to enact such a requirement on a statewide basis would be costly and extremely difficult to implement.

Section 327.60, F.S., Local regulations; limitations, currently prohibits local governments from enacting or enforcing regulations, “Relating to the design, manufacture, installation or use of any marine sanitation device on any vessel.”

Later in this section, it is stated that “Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit local governmental authorities from the enactment or enforcement of regulations which prohibit or restrict the mooring or anchoring of floating structures or live-aboard vessels within their jurisdictions...”

This language contributes to the confusion as to whether or not local governments are authorized to regulate the use of pump-out of marine sanitation devices on live-aboard vessels within their jurisdictions. Because many of the vessels being stored on waters of the State and used as residences are incapable of being used for navigation and are, in fact, “live-aboard vessels” per Section 327.02, F.S.

Definitions, there would be a benefit to clarifying that local governments are authorized to require these vessels to have their sewage regularly pumped-out.

Even though these recommendations may not present comprehensive solutions to issues related to marine sanitation, this topic warrants further consideration in the future, perhaps resulting in enhancements to Florida’s marine sanitation law and/or further expansion of pump-out services around the State.

• Setbacks from shorelines and private docks

–Much discussion has occurred throughout the timeframe of the pilot program regarding the establishment of setbacks, within which anchoring is limited, from private property along the shoreline of waters of the State.

Current law has no such restrictions on State waters. Local governments get complaints from homeowners who dislike vessels anchored in close proximity to their residences, along with the potential property damage resulting from vessels breaking loose during weather events. These are

56 complex issues for local governments that want to regulate anchoring within their jurisdiction, but have no legal means to do so outside of properly permitted mooring fields. Boaters, on the other hand, want to continue to enjoy State waters, which are kept in the public trust, and not be confused and potentially not in compliance, with a plethora of different regulations if local governments are given

the authority to regulate anchoring. They want to continue to anchor where it may be convenient and inexpensive for them with no restrictions on the length of time to anchor. With Florida having the most registered boats in the nation and millions of boating visitors, these differing views have grown through the years.

Two of the pilot communities – the cities of Sarasota and St. Augustine – authorized a setback from either the shoreline or private docks, but these efforts yielded no clear resolution.

While there has been much discussion about this issue, there is still no consensus to establishing a statewide setback that would be practical in every setting in Florida.

There also has been no consensus to giving local governments the authority to establish such a setback on State waters within their jurisdiction.

View the entire report.