March of the 423 Zombies

 Zombies - you've seen them in the movies, mindlessly marching on, implacable, unthinking, terrifying, intent on their destination with no thought of what's around them.
The Undead. Much like many of the new boaters heading south on the ICW in fact - unthinking and intent on getting south with no thought of what's around them.

It's said that one of the best reasons for learning to sail is that at the end of the world, you're safe on a sailboat, because zombies cannot swim. I don't know the truth of that, but I do know this - zombies can sail. I've observed them many times on the Intracoastal Waterway, following their predetermined path with no thought, no eyes, for anything but that blue line on the screen they are staring at.

I saw two of them today in fact, motoring one after the other down the ICW in southern Georgia. There they were, at least 75 yards out of the charted channel, following the path that the 423 Zombies are mandated to follow, no matter where it leads, Aids to Navigation be damned!

I am speaking of course of those boaters who have joined the Cult of Sherer, the AquaMaps people,  the 423 Zombies, who believe that their leader, Bob Sherer, can do no wrong.

Now in this case, it might also just be that these followers, these sailors, being Canadian, were reaching out desperately for whatever assistance they could find on their trek south to the sun that long ago deserted the Great White North.

Let's face it, it's a long way from the Great Lakes to south Florida.

The photo shown here is purported to be their demonic leader, but since I have never met the man, I cannot personally attest to that. However, considering the stranglehold he has on their navigational sensibilities, it would take someone this starkly evil and demonic.

I'm told that in a past life, their leader was a corporate executive, so I suppose this picture could easily be one from before he became the leader of the 423 Zombies. Living life as a corporate executive has been known to do strange things to people. Ask any wokester!

By now, most of you have figured out that I'm trolling the sailors who travel the ICW using what have become known as Bob Tracks, a creation of GPX routes by Waterway Guide cruising editor Robert Sherer. 

Essentially, what Bob has done is take a recording of his route along the ICW and transferred it online, making it available for download to his social media group. Once these folks have downloaded the tracks, they can transfer them to their AquaMaps app on their phone or tablet. They then simply follow the charted route. 

Like zombies, never wavering from it.
Now don't get me wrong. For someone entirely new to the ICW, this has some advantages. They don't have to bother learning how to navigate for one thing. I mean, really, who needs to deal with issues of set and drift, plotting, getting a fix, or how to use dividers or understand what all those tiny letters on a chart actually mean? 
It's SO much easier to just follow the blue line laid out in front of you on your tablet.
For those of us with a lot of experience on the ICW - I'm now somewhere around 50 transits - this can be entertaining as you watch a line of boaters follow a path that sometimes takes the long way around, or that avoids an "obstruction", or shoaling, that isn't really an issue.

The other day, I watched one boater directly in front of me go well outside of the channel at the Carolina Inlet to avoid what he was told was a shoal there. I continued on straight, knowing that the "shoal" was at least 8 feet deep at MLW and there was no need to change course.
Here's the chart for this area, with Bob's Tracks in blue. 

As you can see, staying in the middle of the channel will keep you in a minimum of over 8 feet of water at MLW. At high tide, that will be over 12 feet of water, the tidal range here being 4 feet. There is no need to wander outside of the channel, and you would know this if you simply looked at the chart.
Is anyone hurt by diverting as this boater did? No, and if you feel better or safer by mindlessly following someone else's track in this way, go for it.
But as sure as God made puppies, there will come a day when two boaters going in opposite directions are going to meet at that diversion and someone is going to have to do some actual thinking about how and where to navigate their boat to avoid a collision or going aground. 
And this isn't a joke. The outline to using the Bob Tracks discusses this exact scenario, advising boaters that they must pass port to port, that the regulations REQUIRE them to do so. The problem is, if you're so clueless about navigation that you have to use someone else's tracks to get where you're going, you're very unlikely to know the rules of the road.
So if that's all there is, why am I bitching about this? 
Well, today I watched two sailboats coming down the ICW approaching the Kings Bay Naval Base in southern Georgia. That's the base where they keep nuclear submarines, in case you didn't know. The naval patrol boats that guard the base are extremely watchful, and if you come anywhere near the base - as in within 500 feet, they come out to greet you with a sailor standing on the bow manning a deck mounted 50 calibre machine gun. They are not kidding around. When a sub is moving out, all traffic on Cumberland Sound is stopped by the USCG. You're ordered to move to the far side of the channel and if you refuse, as one sport fisherman did years ago, you're pulled over and taken off your boat in handcuffs. 
I was holding my position, waiting for two boaters from my Sail to the Sun ICW Rally to catch up. One had been having fuel problems and was moving very slowly with another of the group covering him. The two zombies were ahead of my two. At one point, the zombies moved out of the channel, leaving two red channel marks to port to avoid a shoal, as noted by the red arrows.

What could go wrong?
These boaters didn't know they were moving into a restricted area. But, they would not have been in that restricted area had they not been following Bob's Tracks. And fortunately, the patrol boat was at the far end of his patrol area when this happened.
Notice, there IS a shoal there, but by staying to center channel, as noted by the green and red markers, you're going to be in over 12 feet of water at MLW. We were an hour off high tide. I was sitting just outside the channel in 18 - 22 feet of water.
So I hailed the zombies as a courtesy to let them know they were out of the channel. One of them called back, Zombie-like, and said, I kid you not: "There's a shoal there and I'm the captain of my own boat." Well, I guess he told me, didn't he?

My response isn't worth repeating verbatim here, but it did involve telling this boater that a captain would have used his intelligence and stayed in the channel since it presented no hazards.
What hazards? You can generally be sure that the marked channel contains no hidden hazards, no sunken boats or debris from a hurricane that hasn't been removed. Outside of the channel, you have no guarantees. I have hit underwater debris when moving outside of a channel, fortunately not doing any damage. I've seen boats damaged in this way. My point is, that garbage is there and presents a hazard. Why push your luck by venturing outside of a marked channel when you don't have to?
Part of this attitude about honouring navigational marks comes from learning to sail, and then becoming a charter captain, in Lake Huron's Georgian Bay and North Channel. In those waters, the bottom is not mud, it's granite, as in "rock hard granite". Make a mistake there and you sink your boat, so I tend to honour navigational marks with a religious fervour. 
The 423 Zombies, and I've seen this in person, follow their leader's tracks exactly. Given that the actual serious problem areas on the ICW number less than a dozen, and then only at low tide, with a very small bit of planning, that's not necessary. You can get by simply by approaching these problem areas at mid to high tide.
That's what I do. Rather than risk a grounding, I plan my approach to places like Little Mud River, Jekyll Harbor, Brown's Inlet and others so that I pass through with lots of extra water under my keel. That gives me a margin for error just in case I fail to pay close enough attention and drift off the deepest water.
An example will be useful here. The Sail to the Sun ICW Rally went through Little Mud River two days ago. Little Mud shoals to about 4 feet at MLW, making it impassable for most boaters.
The day previous to getting there, we ended our day five miles and an hour early, anchoring in Crescent River beside Creighton Island. Got the afternoon off to relax, soak up some sun, do some reading.
We started the next day a bit later than usual, so on arriving at Little Mud River 90 minutes after low tide, we had 2.5 feet of extra water underneath us and a rising tide. Our deepest draft vessel was five feet, leaving a good margin of safety. 

This tactic also brought us to Jekyll Creek, another challenging area, later that same day at just after high tide, with 8 feet of extra water to safely get to the marina.
Planning is the key to comfortably and safely transiting the ICW, or any body of water. Take all the factors into consideration, and then time your passages to avoid problems, even if it means knocking off early the day previous. Running into the sunset until you can barely see before stopping is for delivery captains who know what they're doing, and fools who think they know.
I've been a delivery captain and run late when I had to, but I ain't no fool. And yes, I do take a look at Bob's Tracks, just as I check the online NOAA charts and other information in difficult areas to be sure I've not missed anything. I just don't follow the tracks religiously. They simply aren't that vital for all but the aforementioned problem areas on the ICW, and then, largely for newbies to the ICW.
Here's another thing I've noticed, and I'm quite surprised to see it.
My B&G chartplotter is in for repairs, so I've been using AquaMaps (without the tracks downloaded) in its place. I usually only use AquaMaps for planning purposes, as I like a properly designed chartplotter at the helm.
Why you ask? A tablet or phone will shut itself off if it gets overheated in the sun and won't restart until it has cooled down. 

Imagine that happening while you're in the middle of navigating through a difficult area - suddenly, no charts! I've had my phone shut down while using it at the helm for music, leaving me having to sing to entertain myself. If you've heard me sing, you know that's not a good thing!
Anyhow, AquaMaps is quite the nice program, and I'm impressed with its features, including the ability to download hydrographic charts of the bottom so that you can be aware of shoaling and make plans for it. 
Another feature are the Waterway Guide anchorages that can be downloaded to the charts, allowing you to find a decent anchorage at the end of the day. But - and this is a problem - I've noticed that several of the anchorages shown are in marked channels. If you've been boating for any length of time, you know you aren't supposed to anchor in a marked channel, such as the one in this photo shown by the arrow.

What these "reviewers", whose names I've redacted, seem to be unaware of is that at the end of this river is a fleet of shrimpers out of Darien, GA, who use this river regularly, day and night. And clearly, whoever chose to put this anchorage up isn't paying attention to the details either.
This is not a proper anchorage, it's a marked channel in which anchoring is not permitted.
And it's not the only one marked like this, so be aware.

Do I use Bob's Tracks? As I admitted above, yes, I do. I review them as I do all the available information in order to plan my day's passage, because smart boaters use every little piece of information they can get. I just don't get all Zombie like over them, and neither should you, and I don't refer to them at the helm because my planning doesn't require that.
If you don't know or haven't learned how to navigate, contact your local Power Squadron, Coast Guard or sailing schoool and learn how. It's not all that difficult, and it gives you an incredible burst of confidence to know that, should your chartplotter ever fail while underway (it's happened three times to me!), you're fully capable of finding your way to your destination safely without it.

(Full disclosure - I was a cruising editor for over ten years for Waterway Guides. I have never been a zombie and the only dead flesh I eat is a medium rare strip loin!)

Engine Install Update...Day One.

Here's what's happening.... I picked up a low hours 3GMF from a friend in the Keys, complete with transmission. It also comes with a Balmar alternator and smart regulator worth nearly what I paid for the engine.
The engine's mounts are in good shape, so that's $500 I won't need to spend.
An instrument panel came with the engine, but not the proper wire harness, so I'm looking for that - the same harness is used on these engines: 2GM, 3GM, 3GM30, 3GM30F, 3GMF, 4JH2-DTE, 4JH2-E, 4JH2-HTE, 4JH2-TE, 4JH3DTE, 4JH3-HTE, 4JH3-TE, 4JH-DTE, 4JH-E, 4JH-HTE, 4JH-TE, 4LH-DTE, 4LH-HTE,4LH-STE,4LH-TE. If you have one, please get in touch with me, thanks! 
This is a fresh water cooled engine - the old 2QM20 was a raw water engine, so hooking it up will be a little different, but not a lot as the inlet is in the same position on both engines. Same with the exhaust.
I will change impeller, oil filter and thermostat before putting the engine in the boat, since it's much easier done on a bench. Fresh oil in the engine and transmission. The antifreeze is clean and doesn't need replacement. The oil filter looks new, but for $8.72, what the heck. Live large!
Yesterday, I started on removing the old 2QM. The toughest part was getting started as I don't really like greasy, dirty work - note the look on my face
Two of the four engine mount bolts came off with minimal issues. The third is proving to be a problem - I needed a second 15/16th wrench or a 15/16 socket and a swivel. I'll be on the hunt for those shortly. The fourth mounting nut came off today as easily as the others. And naturally, it's that third one that's hardest to get at.
What's left after all this is unhooking the throttle and shift cables, water and exhaust hoses, and the electrical connections. All easy stuff and all done except for the alternator and the shaft coupling, which I've loosened but not fully removed yet. (Note to self: take lots of photos so you know what goes where later.)
The old mounting system I built 20 years ago will come out to be replaced by a new one. I made a few mistakes with the old one that I now have a chance to correct, simplifying engine alignment.
Next, remove the old engine, clean out the engine bay, install new soundproofing, tidy up wiring and remove old wires that aren't needed. 
I'm looking forward to the install, since it won't be all grease and dirt, the engine space will be clean, the bolts will be fresh and new, not rusted - and coated liberally with anti seize against future work. Being a smaller engine, the new one won't be as difficult to work with for tightening up bolts and attaching cables, etc. All in all, other than cleaning up, the worst is over with. I hope!
I'll share photos of Yanni once I get him out of the boat. If anyone is interested, I'll send him to a new home for you to rebuild. He comes with a nearly new alternator and starter, stainless steel exhaust elbow, new oil filter and fresh oil, new alternator belt, new impeller and if you want new mounts, I've got brand new aftermarket mounts as well at a wholesale price. I can also include a spare starter and an 80 amp alternator that I've got in storage. 
Now, back at it. Enough playing around!

Announcing the Passing of Yanni the Yanmar...

Hi everyone - it's been a couple of years since I blogged here, and sometimes, as any writer will tell you, you need to break away, get a fresh vision, and that's something I've been working on.
Now that I've got that, I've been looking for a good place, a suitable "event", to start writing this blog again. This current event ought to get us off and running!   

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

All good things must come to an end... now before anyone panics, I'm not buying a trawler! Relax, let me tell you what's going on.

My unstoppable, tough little Yanmar 2QM20 that has been powering me between four countries and over 40 trips on the ICW, has passed on. Bit the dust, made its last passage, thumped its last thump. History, done for, fini. After well over 50,000 miles, it has sipped its last ounce of diesel.

And of course, it failed in the worst possible location, halfway between Beaufort SC and Charleston SC - with NO marina for miles. Heck, there was no human life for miles.
Fortunately, there was a cell signal, so I call my insurance company to send out a towboat. Because of the distance to the nearest marina, they asked me to sail further north to meet the towboat .... leaving me to explain the realities of sailing on the ICW on a completely wind-less day.
Let me check with management about that, Anna (the gal on the phone with me) says. Ten minutes later, it's organized.
The problem now is to find a marina. Every Charleston marina is full up, and even if they weren't, they won't accept a boat arriving under tow.
At this point, I actually thought my problem was with the starter. I didn't realize until yesterday that the engine had seized up. So I explained to the dockmaster at Bohicket Marina, about 14 miles away, that I would only be there for one to two days depending on how fast the new starter arrived.
"Nope", says he, not a chance. So - although I've actually been to Bohicket Marina before and it's nice, they are off my list of recommended stops because they showed no courtesy to a boater in need.
Another marina, one who was more polite about things, suggested checking with Ross Marine (https://www.rossmarine.com/), a boatyard a few miles to the south of Charleston, and that's where we went, to my great good fortune. It's a boatyard, and they've just decided to accept DIY boaters at their facility. More about this later, but if you need to know now, contact them and ask for Tom.
So the lovely lady at the other end of the phone at DB Electrical, who I admit I sweet-talked something awful, got my starter to me the next day, despite taking the order at 4:30. Astounding service!
I installed the starter, and got the same problem - CLUNK-click - but no "whirrrr" and then the sound of the diesel firing up. Clearly, something else was wrong.... I went below, cleaned up the grounds and connections, hit the button - CLUNK-click again.
Went below, had a wild thought, pushed the decompression levers down and tried to spin the engine, which should have been easily done by hand.
Nothing. Wouldn't budge. That meant my problem was much worse than I had thought. That clanking noise I heard when the engine shut down was not the starter self destructing at all. I wasn't leaving this place in the immediate future, at least, not in Gypsy Wind.
So, to fast forward to now, I've put out feelers for a new engine and have several good possibilities turn up in the last 24 hours.
I plan to remove this engine over the next few days while I decide on the new one, clean up the engine bay, tidy up wires and plumbing, install new soundproofing, redo the engine mounts to correct mistakes I made on the original installation and then fit in the new engine.
Shouldn't take more than a few hours, maybe a day? Sure, that sounds good.
So stay tuned here, I'll keep everyone up to date on this latest adventure.
In the meantime, one of the engines I came across, which won't work for me because I want to go to a more modern, lighter and smaller engine, belongs to Kimberly House, in central Florida.
It's a Yanmar 2QM20 and it's too big for her boat's engine space. She needs to sell this engine before she can get a different one, so if you can help her out here, please do so.
I will say this for the 2QM20 - they are a fabulous engine and as long as you're ok with the size and weight of it compared to a more modern engine, they will go virtually forever. Mine has easily over 15,000 hours on it and has only ever needed to have a fuel line repaired in 16 years.
That's because they were originally built as a tractor and industrial engine, so they were built to be bulletproof. Someone will buy my old engine to rebuild it and likely get another 15k hours of adventuring out of it.
There's a part of me that says, yes, just put in another one, and that's tempting because it would be so easy to do it that way. But getting more space in the engine room and losing about 100 pounds from the back of the boat is a strong incentive to switch. Besides, as anyone who knows me will tell you, I never do things the easy way! That would be, well... too easy!
Stay tuned to this space for updates on the new Yanni  Jr. installation. And someone please buy Kim's engine from her! Contact me via email or messenger for details.

Boating Organizations are Failing Us

Earlier this week, I sent a letter to the leaders of the boating organizations and businesses that are supposedly representing us in Florida with regards to the anchoring legislation. I have not heard back from them about the concerns I brought up. 

Those organizations include the Seven Seas Cruising Association, the Marine Trawler Owners Association, the American Great Loop Cruising Association, Boat US and Waterway Guide.
Why should this concern you? 

It's because I wrote to them about significant issues in the anchoring bills currently in front of Florida’s legislation, including two major issues I have not yet brought up in public until now.  (Portions of that letter are excerpted in this blog post.)
These boating groups that you support financially are failing to represent your interests by not fighting to stop HB 1515 and S 1946, which are the Anchoring Limitation Area bills. 

One of the leaders in this group has told me that they don't like these bills, but that they are the best we can get so they are going along with them. That's a winning strategy if I've ever heard one.

These bills as written will keep you from being able to anchor for more than 30 days out of six months in designated areas, areas determined by local governments. And you can 'bet your bippy' that those will be areas that are ones boaters have found to be both safe and convenient.

So why are these groups not fighting these bills? It’s because they think, wrongly imo, that these bills won’t affect cruisers. And as I said, it's because they don't believe that they can stop the legislature from enacting them. 

That attitude is exactly how we got FL § 327.4108 and lost the right to anchor in Sunset Lake, Miami Beach, and Middle River, Fort Lauderdale in 2016/17.
 
Fine, you say!
I never anchor more than a couple of weeks in any one place anyhow. 
Great! And what happens when that one month in six gets reduced to two weeks, or one week, or 72 hours? That's what will happen as local jurisdictions start using the new laws. They'll ask for more and more restrictions on boaters until all our rights to anchor are gone, until we return to the mess that we had prior to 2007.

Can't happen? 
Uh, yes, it can. Why do you think we had Florida § 327.60? It was to prevent the patchwork of different local laws that we had prior to 2007 where places like Melbourne and Fort Lauderdale had 72 hour anchoring limitations. 

We were promised by the legislature that local authorities would not be permitted to enact local ordinances - and now we're right back to that.
Regardless of anything else, that simply isn't right. But there's worse, much worse, in these bills. Be afraid.

There are serious problems with this legislation

HB1515 has some huge problems associated with it. For starters, the FWC who will be tasked with implementing and enforcing it are concerned. More than one senior staff at the FWC has told me quietly that they do not have the resources - fiscal or personnel - to take on the requirements of HB 1515. 

They were unable to complete the survey required of them in HB 1221 (2019) and now the legislature is considering adding even more to their workload? How will that work out?

The FWC does not want, and cannot handle, the extra responsibilities mandated by the bill. They will be in favor of any effort put forth by the boating associations put forth to kill it.

Secondly, and again this is from the FWC, there is no data available, no survey, for any county in Florida on the extent of the “navigable waters” of the state. That being the case, there is no valid or legal way they can permit 10% ALAs because they simply don’t have the data to determine just how big 10% actually is.

Yes, some county can say that their proposed area is clearly less than 10% and yes, they could clearly be correct about it, but without the data showing what the facts are, those claims cannot stand. Florida doesn’t even have a legal definition of “navigable waters”, although they are trying to create one in the legislation. But, this lack of data is too big a weakness to be papered over.

Anything that any county does to create an ALA will be subject to a legal challenge demanding that the county present proper studies justifying their request, including a legal definition of what constitutes “navigable waters” - a state issue. If the bill does pass, it will be years before any community can get an ALA, provided that there is an entity willing to sue. And I assure you of this, there will be one, the Cruisers Rights Network of North America. 

Gulfport found that out the hard way last spring. We won’t back down.

Local governments will not want to spend the money on dealing with these lawsuits, or with doing the requisite surveys to authorize their ALAs, and the FWC has neither the funds nor resources to deal with doing the surveys.

These weaknesses are exploitable - provided these organizations wish to exploit them to defeat this bill. And so far, they have not.

But there is still far worse here: a Constitutional Violation of your rights

HB1515 states the following: 

(b)1. For a vessel in an anchoring limitation area under subsection (2), upon an inquiry by a law enforcement officer or agency, a vessel owner or operator must be given an opportunity to provide proof that the vessel has not exceeded the limitations described in subsection (2). 

Such proof may include any of the following: 

a. Documentation showing that the vessel was in another location at least 1 mile away within a period of less than 30 days before the inquiry. 

b. Electronic evidence, including, but not limited to, navigational devices or tracking devices that show the vessel was in another location at least 1 mile away within a period of less than 30 days before the inquiry.

2. If a vessel owner or operator fails or refuses to provide proof that the vessel has not exceeded the limitations described in subsection (2), the law enforcement officer or agency may issue a citation for a violation of this section.

Two lawyers and an out of state legislator have said to me that in their opinions this section violates the federal Constitution’s concept of "presumption of innocence”. For our purposes here, the definition of “presumption of innocence” from an online legal dictionary is useful, and is essentially the same regardless of which source you choose:

“Presumption of innocence: A principle that requires the government to prove the guilt of a criminal defendant and relieves the defendant of any burden to prove his or her innocence.”

Is there any reason that this has not been brought up to the various committees examining this bill? Isn’t this something vital that our associations would want to address?  

What the law currently requires of a person charged under HB 1515 is that they go to court to prove their innocence, if they could not do so when offered the opportunity by the LEO at the time of writing the citation. And that, to any thinking human being, is the exact opposite of “presumed innocent”. 

Now, would you like to know why this bill is written in this manner? It’s because it is absolutely impossible to get a conviction without having monitored the boat in question for the entire thirty days. 

All the individual charged has to ask the officer in court is the following: 

“Sir/Ma’am, did you observe this boat continuously for the past thirty days?”
You did not? Then please, Sir/Ma’am, provide this court with proof that the boat in question did not leave the ALA for thirty days.”

END OF STORY right there. It is the prosecution’s legal obligation to provide proof of guilt. It is NOT the accused’s obligation to prove he left the ALA before the 30 days was up. There can be no conviction and NO way of forcing anyone to move their boat without significant legal issues arising to the prejudice of the acting authority.

Let us consider this point: shouldn't this very important issue be brought up with the boating group members? This one thing alone will kill HB 1515 at this late date. It's central to the entire bill. 

I won’t even get into how the way this bill is to be enforced is basically an intimidation tactic, one that will force boaters to leave rather than fight for what is theirs: the right to remain legally anchored.

Oh, What the Heck, Let’s Go There.

So, you tell me, if the boater is over thirty days in one place… they need to move on. They won't be harassed if they’ve not been anchored there that long.

Sorry, here’s what will really happen, because I’ve seen it happen way too often, including to myself back before 2007 when I was in Fort Lauderdale’s 72 hour anchoring bylaw area. 

The law rolls up in his/her police boat and demands you prove you haven't been there for 30 days. For whatever reason, you cannot prove this and you are forced to move, or you get a citation to appear in court. Most boaters of course will simply move on, they don't want the fight. That's what I did in Fort Lauderdale.

Can't happen, won't happen, you say? 

Sorry, but it will. Here’s what I’ve personally observed in the past. 

In 2007, an assistant city attorney in Melbourne blatantly told me that she would charge boaters under their local 72 hour ordinance, regardless of the terms of Florida Statute 327.60, and let the accused appear in court to prove her wrong. I stopped that from happening and forced Melbourne to stop enforcing their local ordinance.

In 2016, Miami Beach attempted to enforce their illegal anchoring bylaw. Working with a local boater, Dr. Tenzer, a group of us put a stop to that. Tenzer got a financial settlement from the City for his legal costs.

In the spring of 2020, the Chief of Police in Gulfport FL lied outright about the issue of their illegal enforcement of 327.60. As you all know, the CRNNA stopped the enforcement of their illegal ordinance.

Just a few weeks ago, the City Attorney in St. Petersburg tried to BS me about whether their police were attempting to enforce their local, illegal anchoring ordinance, which they were doing. We ended that practice there also.

If you believe this can't happen, you're mistaken. As I’ve just demonstrated, it can, it has and it will again. 

It’s happening now in fact. Some of you have told me of several jurisdictions that are using illegal ordinances to intimidate boaters and move them on. The CRNNA can’t deal with these communities yet as we don’t have the evidence we need to stop them. And for the record, we do this work quietly, respectfully and seeking to gain the co-operation of the local authorities in eliminating enforcement of these illegal ordinances. We’ve been successful in every case, although St. Petersburg did require a second warning before they got the message.

Bottom line here as we know is that local authority listens to their local taxpayers, not the individual boater, and really, what would you do as the boater in this situation? Take the ticket and go to court, or move on? We all know the answer to that one, don’t we?

HB 1515 will affect every cruiser traveling in Florida who chooses to anchor. This kind of behaviour from local law enforcement was the case pre-2007, it’s been the case all along, and it will be the case going forward, but it will be far worse without the protection of 327.60. 

So What Can I Do?

First of all, if you're a member of one of the above organizations, contact your executive and ask them why they aren't acting on these issues. 

Here's what you'll get back from them.

They'll tell you I don't know what I'm talking about, or I'm wrong, or I'm an idiot and you should just ignore me. 

Please tell them, from me, that if they believe any of that then they should explain why, to me, instead of ignoring what I've said, so I can give you the correct information. Tell them also that they were wrong in 2016/17 and they are making the same mistake now - trusting the legislators to not go back on their word.  

Secondly, demand that they address these issues before we lose our rights to still more anchorages in Florida. They were, all of them, wrong in 2016 and 2017 and they are doing the same thing now. These groups are your groups if you pay dues and they are supposed to do what you want.

Third, and this applies to everyone, you need to right now contact the members of the Florida legislature about these issues and kick up a fuss. Send emails and even more importantly, phone them. Make it clear to their staff, since you likely won't reach the member, that you are concerned about the significant problems these bills have.

Next, contact your boating and local media, particularly if you live in Florida. Explain to them why you are concerned. 

Finally, share this blog post with everyone you can. More than just boaters need to be concerned when the error in the bill is a violation of your Constitutional rights.

You can follow this issue on the CRNNA's Facebook page for up to date information.

We have only a few days to stop this from happening. 

If you don't take action immediately, you can expect these bills to pass. I promise you that if we don't act now, within three to five years, there will be huge areas in Florida where you will not be able to anchor overnight, if at all. 

I wish I was wrong - but I'm also wishing I'd spoken up in 2016 when the original mistakes that lead us to this point were made by our boating organizations.

The people running our boating groups think they are right, they think they are doing the proper thing here. Bless them, their hearts are in the right place, but they are not doing what needs to be done and that has to change.

It's time to get angry and speak out. Today. Right now. We don't have any time left. If you're a  boater and don't want to lose your right to anchor in Florida, act now.

Share

The Lies About Anchoring Limitation Areas

 

If you've been following the anchoring issues in Florida this year, you're aware that the legislature has six (count 'em!) bills on the issue in front of them. All six of those bills threaten to take away significant anchorages, and even your right to anchor at all in the state.

A lot of attention has gone to HB (House Bill) 639, which started out quite benignly, even adding some much needed powers to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission's ability to deal with derelict boats. It was then amended to include a '90 day and move' limitation on anchoring in Monroe County, the Florida Keys. Once you're boat had been in the same location for 90 days, you had to up anchor and move, according to some accounts, as much as five miles away.
That of course would cause incredible harm to the Keys' workforce and economy. Many Keys residents  live aboard as there is no affordable housing in the Keys - well, not if you aren't a tourist, or very, very wealthy. On top of that, all the marinas are full (and that's presuming they're affordable which for many they aren't) and the moorings are also full.
As a result of the pushback from Keys' boaters, 639 has been amended to require that Monroe County install 300 moorings in the Key West area to accommodate those who would be affected by this bill before the 90 day limit can be enforced.
The end result, should 639 pass, is that the situation is now in the hands of local politicians and boaters. Keys' boaters are organized, and able to fight for their rights, and local politicians are aware of the issues. The likelihood of these moorings being installed anytime in the near future is fairly low, so that threat seems to be over. For now.

HB 1652/ S1337 are bills that would have ended overnight anchoring in several locations in North Miami, as well as North and South Lakes in Hollywood, and in Lake Sylvia in Fort Lauderdale. Those last three are important 'staging' anchorages for cruisers heading to the Bahamas or further south.
Fortunately, these two bills are moribund and have not seen any committee action to move them forward.

The last two bills, HB 1515 and its companion in the Senate, S 1946, in my opinion present the real threat to boaters and cruisers.
These are the so called 'anchoring limitation area' bills which amend Florida Statute 327.4108. They propose to allow county governments in Florida to limit anchoring to 30 days in any designated "anchoring limitation area" - defined as up to 100 acres and to a maximum of 10% of a county's navigable waters. 
There are significant problems with these bills. Disregarding the fact that these bills are a violation of the promise boaters were given in 2007 when Florida statute 327.60 was created, to wit, to disallow local governments any authority to enact anchoring legislation, there is no definition of "navigable waters".
The FWC has advised us that there is no data for any Florida county as to how much water is "navigable". There is in fact no definition of "navigable" in the bill, although an amendment, withdrawn, did attempt to make such a definition.
In addition to that, the FWC has informed me that they simply do not have the manpower to conduct the requisite surveys that would determine this information.
So tell me if you would, how do we know when that 10% limit has been reached in any county? We don't, we can't know, can we? On top of that, just what portions of the water are navigable? How do you define "navigable"? I and others have not been able to find a definition of the term in the Florida statutes.
Is it six inches, navigable for a canoe or SUP? Is it three feet, navigable for small powerboats? Or is it six feet and more, a depth useable to the vessels which this legislation will affect, since canoes and SUPs generally don't anchor overnight.
This being Florida, I won't say they never do, because, well, we're talking about Florida.
But it gets even more egregious, if you can imagine that. These bills state the following:

(b)1. For a vessel in an anchoring limitation area under subsection (2), upon an inquiry by a law enforcement officer or agency, a vessel owner or operator must be given an opportunity to provide proof that the vessel has not exceeded the limitations described in subsection (2).
Such proof may include any of the following:
a. Documentation showing that the vessel was in another location at least 1 mile away within a period of less than 30 days before the inquiry.
b. Electronic evidence, including, but not limited to, navigational devices or tracking devices that show the vessel was in another location at least 1 mile away within a period of less than 30 days before the inquiry.
2. If a vessel owner or operator fails or refuses to provide proof that the vessel has not exceeded the limitations described in subsection (2), the law enforcement officer or agency may issue a citation for a violation of this section.

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this violate the Constitution? Isn't there this concept called "presumption of innocence"? Since when is it a citizen's obligation to prove s/he is innocent to avoid getting a citation?

That I am aware of, the only groups that are opposing these two bills are the National Marine Manufacturers Association and the Marine Industries Association, and of course, the Cruisers Rights Network of North America, of which I am president.
The other boating organizations/businesses involved in this issue - the Seven Seas Cruising Association, the Marine Trawler Owners Association, the American Great Loop Cruising Association, Boat US and the publication, Waterway Guide (full disclosure, I worked as an editor for WG for over 10 years) are all in favour of these bills.

Beyond what I've noted above, just what other issues are there with these bills? 

I'm glad you asked that.
Florida statute 327.4108 is the bill created in 2017 that ended our right to anchor overnight in Sunset Lake and most of the Venetian Causeway in Miami Beach, and Middle River in Fort Lauderdale. You can read more about that fiasco here.

Essentially, the legislature lied to boaters in 2016 and we lost the right to anchor overnight in those three areas. The boating groups dropped the ball on this, and we cruisers pay the price.
The current anchoring bills posit that ALAs (anchoring limitation areas) will be a maximum of 30 days out of six months. My question - and it should be yours also - is this: how long before 30 days becomes 15 days becomes one week becomes 72 hours?
How long before some county is given the right to ban all overnight anchoring? You know it's going to be demanded, and given what happened in 2017, how can any county or city be told 'no'? The precedent has been set.
How long before we return to the "wild west", as the late Claiborne Young called it, of a patchwork of anchoring rules across Florida?
Answer to all of the above? Not long at all.
The way these bills are written, the FWC is tasked with approving these ALA's. They have already indicated to myself and others that they don't want, and cannot handle, the additional workload of these bills. That is before adding in the requirement of surveying navigable waters and proposed ALAs, which they would be required to do to approve these new restrictions.
Oh, and have I mentioned that these bills clearly violate the Public Trust Doctrine, which states that the waters of the state of Florida are held in trust for the use of all?

So what would these bills actually do to cruisers like you and I? 

Essentially, communities that want to eliminate anchoring in residential neighbourhoods will use them to remove boaters, shepherding them into areas that do not offend the homeowners. It is guaranteed that these locations will not be suitable for anchoring and will be inconvenient for shore access or local amenities.
But, you say, I can anchor for 30 days!
Yes, you can. Then the law rolls up in his/her police boat and demands you prove you haven't been there for 30 days. For whatever reason, you cannot prove this and you are forced to move, or get a citation to appear in court. 
Can't happen? I had an assistant city attorney in a major east coast city tell me, back in 2007, that she would charge boaters under their local ordinance regardless of the terms of Florida Statute 327.60 and let them come to court to prove her wrong.
In the summer of 2020, the Chief of Police in Gulfport FL lied outright to me about the issue of their illegal enforcement of 327.60.
Just a few weeks ago, the City Attorney of a major Florida west coast city tried to BS me about whether their police were attempting to enforce their local and illegal anchoring ordinance. 
So don't tell me it can't happen. It can, it has and it will. These people listen to their local taxpayers, not you and I, and really, what would you do? Fight, or move on?
This will affect every cruiser traveling in Florida who chooses to anchor.

In other words, these two proposed bills, 1515 and 1946, are a mess. They should be voted out of the House as poorly considered, poorly researched, and damaging to everyone's interests. While they seem reasonable at first glance, they are anything but.
Furthermore, they will be amended as time goes on to permit more, and more restrictive, limitations on anchoring. They will eliminate valuable anchorages that cruisers depend on to travel through Florida on their way to the Bahamas and elsewhere, or just to hang out in for a night or three as they explore the state.

Oh, but your boating organization - the SSCA, MTOA, AGLCA, Boat US, the Waterway Guide - they say it's all good, don't worry, be happy?
With the exception of the Waterway Guide, which was not then involved, they were all wrong in 2016, and all of them are wrong again today. Let me repeat that - they were all wrong. They blew it.
That statement is not going to make me any friends in that group - but since they can't stand me anyway because I don't fall in line with how they want to play this game, it's no loss. Someone has to speak the truth.
If you are a member of one of these organizations, you need to contact your president and fellow members and acquaint them with the facts as I've laid them out.
I promise you, they'll tell you I'm being a fear monger. They said that back in 2016. They'll tell you I don't know what I'm talking about.
They said that too back in 2016.
Demand that they show you where I am wrong. They can't. I've already seen them try. 
We have very little time left to fight back against HB 1515 and S 1946. You need to step up and make your concerns known to your boating organizations, to your fellow boaters and to the legislators.
We have the emails and an email responder set up at the CRNNA's Facebook page for you to contact the legislators. Join us there for more information. Share this blog post far and wide with your groups and on your FB page so that other boaters become aware of what's going on. Even if you're not in Florida, you can speak out, you can help.

Lastly, what will the CRNNA do should these bills pass? We do have a plan, which will be to challenge these bills in court. According to lawyers I've spoken with, these bills are very vulnerable to a legal challenge on numerous fronts. I'd rather not have to go that route, so let's do what we need to do and stop these bills now.

Fighting the Good Fight - Meet CRNNA

A friend called me up in mid March to tell me about the hassles that he and others anchored out in Gulfport FL were experiencing. Seems that the City of Gulfport was enforcing a 72 hour anchoring ordinance and threatening to ticket them and impound their boats if they did not move outside of Gulfport's jurisdiction.
In other words, same same ol' as usual in Florida. Problem is, such ordinances are illegal under Florida statute 327.60. No municipality can enact or enforce any anchoring ordinance on a non liveaboard vessel. So the City of Gulfport was acting illegally. They even handed out a ticket to one boater.
I made some phone calls and asked some questions, did some research, spoke to the City Manager, City Attorney and Chief of Police, and got the usual runaround. They told me that in their opinion, they were acting legally. I told them, and got Boat US to tell them, and even got the FWC to tell their marine officer, that they were wrong.
Over a month went by and nothing changed. The only way to deal with this was to sue the City. Thus, the Cruisers Rights Network of North America was born - www.CRNNA.com - a non profit organization.
The CRNNA's purpose is to defend the rights of boaters, and to educate boaters, the general public and the authorities about the realities of the boating and cruising life. To demonstrate that we aren't all crack addled, mindless bums one step up from living under a bridge.
We held an online fund raiser that was a huge success, hired a lawyer and are now working the legal process. We've moved to have the ticket dropped, and included the filing of a motion to declare the City's ordinance unconstitutional with notice to the State Attorney General. We have the support of the FWC in this also, and they have been most helpful.
Future plans are to take this victory - because that will be the outcome - and start on educating every coastal city in Florida that they cannot violate the laws to get rid of what they see as a problem. Following that endeavour, we plan to start looking at our boating community, and find solutions to the derelict problem, and the problems created by people living on boats who simply should not be there. We will also be involved in the discussions about future legislation in Florida.
In other words, a lot to do. (We could use your help if you wish to get involved, see the details below).
But what about the other organizations? Well - the SSCA is a spent force, they've got enough internal issues surrounding just surviving as an organization that they can't deal with outside issues. Boat US and the MTOA and AGLCA are involved, as they have been in the past, but it's important to remember that they don't get down in the muck and fight, as we are doing in Gulfport. The CRNNA on the other hand is designed to function both in an advisory capacity as regards legislation, and as an 'enforcement arm' for boaters' rights should that be required.
If you'd like more information - and there's lots more I haven't told you - go to www.CRNNA.com, and also to our Facebook page.  And please, sign up on our Facebook page. The more people we represent, the more impact we will have with the people we deal with, and the better we can look out for your rights on the water. If you're interested in becoming active in our work, email me at Cruisers Rights.

For anyone planning on going south from the Great Lakes this year, some great news. According to the New York State Canal Corporation, locks will begin opening on July 4. The current schedule, according to the gentleman I spoke with, is subject to change, but it will be possible to transit through the locks to the Hudson River during the summer. In other words, all of you Great Lakes boaters will not have to give up your tropical cruising dreams! The updated schedule can be seen here, at Canal Corp.

I've not promoted this year's Sail to the Sun ICW Rally as heavily this spring due to the coronavirus issues, including the now resolved potential for problems getting through the Erie Canal. Now that that is no longer an issue, it's time to start planning your trip south this winter. If you'd like a Rally brochure, go to Sail to the Sun Information, fill out the form and I'll get a brochure to you right away.
This year's voyage will begin on October 20 out of Hampton VA, and end in mid December in Miami Florida. All of the past year's fun events will be included - the Pirate's Rum Distillery tour, the visit to the Beaufort Maritime Museum to learn about Blackbeard, the St. Mary's Thanksgiving Dinner, the dinghy raftups, shrimp boil, pig roast at Dowry Creek - plus all of the group dinners, docktail parties and fun times.
All of your route planning is done for you, taking away the stress of worrying about currents, shoaling and provisioning. Also your dockage is pre-arranged for the Rally - something you can't do on your own as marinas typically don't want to reserve during the snowbird season.
It's the most fun on the ICW, so if you're heading south, don't miss out! Just ask any past Rallier what they think of the Rally and you'll be signing up before they're done talking!
If you don't know a past Rallier, here's a video that gives you a sense of what the Rally is about.

Bonus edition - Two Rants!!! Georgia On My Mind, and West Marine Dinghy Design

YESSIREE FOLKS, STEP RIGHT UP, NOT ONE BUT TWO RANTS TODAY FOR THE PRICE OF ONE!
I can hear everyone's heart going pitter pat with this announcement - not one, but two of Wally's world famous rants. This will be epic. Sit down, grab some popcorn and your favourite adult beverage, and enjoy!

Georgia On My Mind...

As many of you know, I've been involved in the Georgia anchoring debacle since late May when it became publicly known that the state wanted to create anchoring permits, charge people for anchoring, and limit where they could anchor. The cancer that we have been dealing with in Florida is metastasizing northward, sorry to say.
What really gets my goat however, is how this came to be. The original complaint which led to the DNR creating this horrendous legislation allegedly came from a judge who claimed to have observed someone pumping sewage overboard from their boat. This information came to me through a political source and was trustworthy, but not quite on the money. Here, publicly for the first time, is how this monstrosity, HB201, was conceived.
This bill got its birth because a GA judge, former Brunswick Judicial Circuit Chief Judge Amanda Williams, was upset over an old Navy vessel legally tied to a dock near her office building. She made a complaint to her House Rep, Don Hogan that a boat anchored out was pumping waste overboard. So she lied about the boat if this is true, and can anyone please tell me how she knew the boat was pumping out anyhow?  Hogan, fyi, sponsored HB201, probably dealing with the DNR to create it. I'll get back to this point.
GAMBA, Georgia Marine Business Association, became involved. Why, when and how isn't entirely clear, but there appear to be significant connections between Williams and marina operators who are GAMBA members.
Now Williams,  who was the source of the original complaint, isn't your typical upright and honest judge. She was formally removed from the bench some years ago and very nearly faced jail for serious charges - see this - Former Judge Booked and Released on Bond
That is not the worst of it however, not from where I stand.
One of the beneficiaries of her brand of justice was the son of the current owner of a Georgia marina. Quite a few years ago, he was placed in a drug court diversion program, over the protests of the district attorney, for his offences. Nonetheless, successfully completing the program ensured that the participant would not have a criminal record, which I'm sure you agree is a substantial benefit. Don't get me wrong - if someone completes the program and stays on the straight and narrow, I'm all for it. It's a good thing, but that's not the point here.
This marina stood to gain from this legislation that this judge wants, and in particular the 1000 foot rule, because it eliminates an anchorage that they object to adjacent to their marina.
That being said, there is no evidence that the man's family interceded on behalf of the erring scion. Perhaps the judge is just a kindly soul and did this on her own. A favor was done, solicited or not. A debt was created, acknowledged or not.
Next, the president of GAMBA, Charles Waller, would receive a significant benefit from the 1000 foot setoff that was proposed. It would eliminate a USCG anchorage that is adjacent to his marina that he apparently finds problematical. Without any valid reason that I can see, I would add.
Again, there is no evidence to substantiate this motive, but I do have emails from GAMBA that alluded to this issue and Waller's problems with it.
Was this why GAMBA was so keen on this legislation, because two of their members stood to benefit from it? Seems likely, but I doubt we'll ever know for sure, and GAMBA is all on the side of cruisers' rights now.
Anyhow, what we are seeing is that Hogan got a call from Williams about someone pumping overboard from the ex-Navy boat, and then got together with the DNR to deal with Williams' issues. Along the way, members of GAMBA saw that they could benefit from this legislation and got behind it.
The bill got passed with no studies, no public input, nothing. Only one vote against it.
Then we, the boating public, found out about this at the end of May and raised a huge stink. GAMBA reversed its position, with Exec Director Amy Thurman telling the media that GAMBA wasn't supporting, never supported, the 1000 foot rule. Unfortunately for Ms. Thurman, I have the emails from her to prove she said exactly the opposite, that in fact, GAMBA strongly supported the 1000 foot setoff proposal.
Then - the judge who I'm told was the complainer showed up to speak at the DNR hosted public hearing in Brunswick last week. She made a lovely little speech, but never told us who she was. 

However, a cruiser at the meeting was a retired FBI agent - I just love that touch, lends drama to the whole thing - and he busted her for her deceptions the next day in a post on the Save Georgia's Anchorages Facebook page.
Since then, we've determined that the boat in question was behind her office, not her home. How did we do that? Her state House Representative Don Hogan, the bill's sponsor, made specific reference to it in his talk that night.
It appears quite likely that House Representative Hogan was fed a line of crap about what was actually going on, was given a considerable amount of bad or dishonest advice from a number of people, including some at the DNR, and trusted people he should not have to do the right thing. It didn't help Hogan that the complainer was someone of significant influence, not just any upset waterfront property owner. Talk about caught between a rock and a hard place.
So what happens next, now that the old boys (and girls) network has been caught out?
The Save Georgia Anchorages group (see their Facebook page here) is now working with the various members of the Georgia legislature to ensure that HB201 is brought back before the legislature in the 2020 session to be properly amended. We are also preparing a presentation for the Coastal Committee Board of the DNR, to ensure that cruisers' issues are properly presented to them before any new rules are put in place. And we need your support in this work.
What can you do to support this? It's important that the DNR be aware that boaters object very strenuously to HB201. You can make your views know by writing to Kelly Hill, Coastal Resources Division, One Conservation Way, Brunswick, GA 31520 <Kelly.Hill@dnr.ga.gov>
Talking points, sample letters and other useful information are available at the Save Georgia Anchorages page. Please join us in defending your rights to anchor in Georgia.

Is This Any Way to Build a Dinghy? NO!

I just launched a West Marine inflatable after selling my 10 foot aluminum, which I now sorely miss. But hey, I got a great price for it.

Now there's nothing really wrong with the new inflatable, but there is ONE thing that drives me nuts, and it's the same thing I hated about the first one of these I had ten years ago: the drain plug.
Just how hard is it to design a properly functioning drain for these little boats? Apparently, VERY hard.

The first one of these I had had a fancy design with a lever, a screen, all sorts of little doodads to it as you can see from the photo. I am absolutely certain that the engineer who designed this monstrosity was overhyped on caffeine on a Monday morning. There is no other rational excuse for this thing. Ok, maybe LSD or magic mushroom, but other than those...

The problem is, it caught every single piece of debris in the dinghy, and plugged up. And when it plugged up, as often as not it would then bugger up the drain so that the drain leaked water into the boat.
So we have a drain that won't drain when you need it to, and lets water into the boat at all other times. To fix it involved removing it from the boat, disassembling, cleaning and then reassembling and reinstalling it. Sometimes that was a weekly occurrence - but only when it wasn't happening every other day.
So I eventually sold that boat, bought the aluminum, and then a few months ago, moved back to a new inflatable sportboat from WM. It does not have the same drain. If anything, this one may be worse.
It doesn't have the fancy engineering. It's some kind of rubber flap, kind of a one way thing that supposedly keeps water from entering your boat, provided the plug is in place. We'll return to the plug in a moment, but suffice it to say, if the plug is in place, the flapper isn't needed.
The problem is, the drain doesn't allow water out of your boat unless you continuously 'tickle' it with your finger. Why? I presume it's because minute particles of debris plug it up. At least the old design, bad as it was, needed a visible piece of crap to bugger it up.
Then, it takes forever to drain because of the flapper valve, and because it keeps plugging up with tiny, invisible pieces of crap.
Now, to the drain plug. This rubber beauty goes in the outside of the drain hole and is attached to the boat with a piece of string. If you lose one - which according to my extensive survey of Sportboat owners who were in Marsh Harbor on April 22 - takes 4. 873 days on average, it will cost you $20.95 US to replace it.

That's right. An Achilles Rubber Self Bailer Drain Plug with String (Part #ACHC441B), a 1 3/8" plug that is guaranteed to be lost will cost you more than three Kaliks at Snappas. That's just wrong.  So if you're smart like me (ignoring that I was dumb enough to lose the stupid thing in the first place), you go to the local hardware store and get a rubber chair tip for $2.44 (but $5 in Marsh Harbour) which fits perfectly, AND you have a choice of beige or black. It's all about style, baby!

So, I'm asking West Marine CEO Ken Seipel to get involved here.
Ken, I know this isn't your fault, you've only been there since last December. But please - tell these engineers that designing a functioning drain plug for your inflatables is NOT rocket science. It's not.
Here's how you do it.
You drill an oversized hole low in the wooden transom of the dinghy. You then fill the hole with fibreglass resin, let it cure, then redrill the hole to fit the $20.95 goldplated drain plug. You put the drain plug INSIDE the dinghy, where it won't get broken off and sink into the depths. You use something more durable than a piece of "string" to attach it to the boat.

If you want to save your customers some money, you use West Marine part Model # 375493, pictured to the left, which retails for $10.99 but that, because of its design, is unlikely to be lost. I know, because I had one in my aluminum boat for 6 or 7 years. Never had a moment's problem with it.
Uh, full disclosure here - I bought it at a competitor's place of business for $5.95. Sorry.
Please, Mr. Seipel, just do this before I buy my next dinghy. I don't know if I can stand the frustration of dealing with another overdesigned, underperforming drain plug. You can do this, Sir, and I and thousands of Sportboat owners beg you to do this.Thank you.

Ok, enough ranting, on to happier things. The Fifth Annual Sail to the Sun ICW Rally is moving along well, and we're half full now. Our departure date from Hampton will be October 21, one week after the end of the Annapolis Sailboat Show. Our anticipated arrival in Miami is December 12, after eight weeks of fun and adventure on the not so high, but imminently comfortable, safe and enjoyable, seas of the ICW.
During that eight weeks of fun and frolic, there will be shrimp boils, a blue crab feast, a visit to a rum distillery for the pirates amongst us, dinghy raftups, dinners out, dinners onboard, and an all round great time for all. We're even considering an alligator bbq...yes, you read that right: gator burgers and steaks, done by a professional chef.
If you want more information, or a brochure on the Rally, or even a free copy of my free ICW ebook, or all three - go to the Sail to the Sun ICW Rally page and you can request it from there.

Bonus Rant #3 - The Last Straw

Some time ago, nine year old Milo Cress created a first-world fuss over straws. By his calculations, suspect at best, and as reported by USA Today: "as Cress began to dig into research on plastics and the environment, he noticed there wasn't much data: "I couldn’t find anything on our use of straws in the United States," he said. 
Gee, really? In all of history, nobody studied straw usage? I can't believe it, there has to be some useless little university researcher out there who had nothing better to do with $50,000 in grant money than to figure out what the story was behind straws.
So Cress determined the status of straws through a truly questionable study - about the kind of thing you'd expect from a precocious but misguided pre-teenager.He called straw manufacturers himself, asking what they estimated to be the straw market in the United States per day. Some gave him a yearly estimate, which he divided by 365. "Others gave an estimate of around 500 million straws," Cress said. "That was the number that I stuck to, because it seemed to be around the middle of what they were saying.""
That's his research. On this sort of thing do our fates turn - a nine year old's guess at something of minimal importance in the greater scheme of things.
So of course, following the young lad's revelations, everyone got all eco correct and decided to ban plastic straws. Good move, right?
Well, have you ever tried to drink a great thick milkshake - the only proper way to have one - through a paper straw? You end up with your lips caved in from sucking so hard, the staff at the Steak and Shake or Sonic Drive In laughing at you as they watch on their video monitors. How humiliating is that?

All of this over a 9 year old boy's unproven and unprovable contention that we use too many straws.