Anchoring rights - first or later arrivals

[superheat6k]

I know the etiquette is he who anchors last moves first, but is there a formal position on this ? The Colregs state all parties must act to avoid a collision.

What is the Insurer's general attitude to fault if two anchored boats smash into one another ?

Last year at the Bournemouth Airshow I arrived and anchored right on the show centre line at the edge of the prohib zone, with at least 50m between me and my nearest neighbour. By the time the show began I could have walked to Christchurch !

As the tide turned I swang right over the scope of a far smaller yacht's anchor, and he was only 2-3m off my stern and made it clear from his raised voice he had no intention of moving - well nor was I and my davits at one point became perilously close to this a**hole. I figured his forestay would part long before my davits would have been damaged, but I would have moved for the sake of good seamanship, but not before I had given his rig a damn good twang.

So if his rig had collapsed who would have been the wrongest ?

Would it be correct that his forestay would have hit my davits rather than the other way around ?

It was also the case that had I moved, such a manoeuvre in itself would have become quite risky due to the sheer number and density of anchored vessels all around.

For avoidance of doubt in future in likely to be crowded waters out comes the camera panorama mode on the iphone or ipad along with a photo of the plotter screen showing the position.

 

[prv]

I've read of a court opinion that confirms the "first anchorer can ask later arrivals to leave him space" rule, though I think it may have been an American court. I'll see if I can dig up a reference.

EDIT:

OK, this is a quote from the Pardeys' The Capable Cruiser. They were analysing a storm in 1982 which damaged a lot of anchored boats, many of them terminally. A lot of trouble was caused by boats anchoring too close, either blowing down onto each other or blocking the way out to safe water clear of the beach. One of the boats which survived unscathed did so because the owner insisted on his space being kept clear, even though his continually ordering people away embarrassed his wife. The case they refer to was another thirty years before:

In accordance with U.S. Admiralty court decisions, Bill Peterson was definitely acting within his rights. On page 310 and 311 of Knights Modern Seamanship 12th Edition, published 1956, the Juniata decision no. 124―5861 is shown in its entirety. The basic reasoning of the courts was:

"A Vessel shall be found at fault if it
[...]
h - anchors so close to another anchored vessel as to foul her when swinging,
i - fails to shift anchorage when dragging dangerously close to another anchored vessel.
Futhermore, the vessel that anchors first shall warn the one who anchored last that the berth chosen will foul the former’s berth."

It has long been accepted yachting etiquette that the first boat in has the right to ask that others give it not only room to swing, but also room to maneuver out safely. So although Bill Peterson may have offended some people who arrived at the Cape after he did, his actions probably saved his boat.

That's the legalistic view. In practice I wouldn't go round trying to impose it on people.

Pete

 

[Anthony]

I had that happen to me last weekend, someone dropped an anchor in front of me and fell back behind me such that if I swung I would go over the top of his taught (it was a big boat) chain and possibly damage my stern gear. I pointed this out to him and just got abuse and laughed at for my trouble. I ended up moving because having identified a risk I felt obliged to ensure it was mitigated one way or another.

I am no insurance expert but if you saw the potential for an accident and did nothing about it even though it was within your power to do so then then they are not going to thank you for it just because you were there first. I suspect the stand on / who was there first type rules only apply when you are unable to take avoiding action, something all skippers are required to do regardless of who was to blame for creating the situation.

Having to move or take avoiding action in response to someone elses error is the price you pay for being responsible and safety conscious, just like hitting the brakes in a car when someone pulls out in front of you, its frustrating but at least an accident was avoided.

Ants

 

[l'escargot]

I think your difficulty in that situation would be that having identified a potential collision and the steps you needed to take to prevent it you then chose to do nothing about it and allow the collision to happen. This would have been compounded by the fact that from your description it would have been your boat swinging into his and not the other way round. Basically if you had upped and moved only he would have been in the wrong, but if you decided to stay and a collision occurred you would both have been in the wrong.

 

[jfm]

Anthony I see your point but it depend on all the circs IMHO. I fully agree the general rule that the first anchorer has the main rights over the second guy, but I have been that second boat next to you on many occasions. IF the anchorage is busy so nice spots are at a premium, and IF there is no significant expectation that we will swing for the period I'm I intending to anchor, and IF my boat is being manned not abandoned by a crew who disappear in the tender, then I would say I'm perfectly ok to anchor to you side and lay out more chain than you. I do not think I'm required to allow for a swing that is unlikely to happen when I can start my engines to cure things if it does

I'm not saying the circs I've mentioned are the same as the circs you were in. I don't know all of your circs. But I am saying that you need to take account of all the circs in these things

Also, just to be clear, if say the wind shifted after an hour and we became too close, then there arises a gentlemans obligation on the second guy to haul up his anchor and move, thus allowing the first guy to stay put

 

[superheat6k]

Anthony I see your point but it depend on all the circs IMHO. I fully agree the general rule that the first anchorer has the main rights over the second guy, but I have been that second boat next to you on many occasions. IF the anchorage is busy so nice spots are at a premium, and IF there is no significant expectation that we will swing for the period I'm I intending to anchor, and IF my boat is being manned not abandoned by a crew who disappear in the tender, then I would say I'm perfectly ok to anchor to you side and lay out more chain than you. I do not think I'm required to allow for a swing that is unlikely to happen when I can start my engines to cure things if it does

I'm not saying the circs I've mentioned are the same as the circs you were in. I don't know all of your circs. But I am saying that you need to take account of all the circs in these things

Also, just to be clear, if say the wind shifted after an hour and we became too close, then there arises a gentlemans obligation on the second guy to haul up his anchor and move, thus allowing the first guy to stay put

I think the issue in my particular case arose because the guy in the 22' yacht (the later arrivee) simply didn't realise the swing circle of a 40' Mobo laying 5x scope, and therefore probably thought I was fouling his circle, and in consideration of the sheer volume of vessels anchored could not tell who arrived when. Not sure that relieved him of his obligations, but I suppose explained his attitude when I nearly sat in his cockpit.

 

[Floating Preferably]

I think the issue in my particular case arose because the guy in the 22' yacht (the later arrivee) simply didn't realise the swing circle of a 40' Mobo laying 5x scope, and therefore probably thought I was fouling his circle, and in consideration of the sheer volume of vessels anchored could not tell who arrived when. Not sure that relieved him of his obligations, but I suppose explained his attitude when I nearly sat in his cockpit.

That makes perfect sense, there are times when subjects like this should be covered on Scuttlebutt too, to assist our mutual perspectives , and problems.

 

[l'escargot]

Apart from the 18 foot difference in boat length the swinging circle of both boats on 5 x scope wouldn't be that much different. Nothing hard to understand just because his boat is smaller.

 

[Searush]

Apart from the 18 foot difference in boat length the swinging circle of both boats on 5 x scope wouldn't be that much different. Nothing hard to understand just because his boat is smaller.

While that is a completely true statement, it is also possible, even likely, that the lighter boat may not have been using 5x scope. I frequently use only 3x scope with chain as I am in an area of large tides and 5x 12-13m is more chain than I can easily handle or carry. Chain is weight is more apparent & effective on a small boat too, even when a lighter gauge is used.

The current at HW is considerably less than that at half tide when 3x12m is approx. 6x 6m. Clearly there are issues with this approach in strong wind and large waves, but I try to avoid anchoring in such conditions &, if needs must, I can always add an Angel weight and a long bit of rope.

 

[l'escargot]

While that is a completely true statement, it is also possible, even likely, that the lighter boat may not have been using 5x scope. I frequently use only 3x scope with chain as I am in an area of large tides and 5x 12-13m is more chain than I can easily handle or carry. Chain is weight is more apparent & effective on a small boat too, even when a lighter gauge is used.

The current at HW is considerably less than that at half tide when 3x12m is approx. 6x 6m. Clearly there are issues with this approach in strong wind and large waves, but I try to avoid anchoring in such conditions &, if needs must, I can always add an Angel weight and a long bit of rope.

There are always variables and they aren't dependant on the weight of the boat, just conditions. Even in a larger boat, in benign conditions and a crowded anchorage I probably wouldn't bother with 5 x scope if I was just doing a lunch stop and staying on board. I wouldn't see it any differently whether I was on a motor boat or a sailing boat, large or small, with the correct size ground tackle for the size of boat.

 

[Anthony]

Anthony I see your point but it depend on all the circs IMHO. .... I do not think I'm required to allow for a swing that is unlikely to happen when I can start my engines to cure things if it does

Sorry I did not make it clear that his chain was laid very close down the side of me, less than my boat length, and I had to start my engines and motor away from his chains withiong 5 mins of him laying it to prevent me going over the top of it and possibly snagging my stern gerar on it. We get a strong sea breeze here every afternoon and it was already blowing when he arrived thus his boat was already pulling his anchor chain quite taught.

 

[Bat21]

Sorry I did not make it clear that his chain was laid very close down the side of me, less than my boat length, and I had to start my engines and motor away from his chains withiong 5 mins of him laying it to prevent me going over the top of it and possibly snagging my stern gerar on it. We get a strong sea breeze here every afternoon and it was already blowing when he arrived thus his boat was already pulling his anchor chain quite taught.

I believe the correct response to such un-seamanlike behaviour is to prepare to re anchor, in doing so one should deploy a kedge so that it snags the offending chain, wait for a suitable moment to retrieve your kedge from the crown of the offenders anchor then re anchor yourself.

 

[hlb]

I had a boat anchor close to us. He asked me to put fenders out, in case he hit me!!!