Anchoring rights

boatmike

boatmike

Well-Known Member
Joined
30 Jun 2002
Messages
7,053
Location
Solent
Visit site
In the post "why I don't visit Salcome" several people suggested that harbour authorities don't have the right to charge you to lie to your own anchor. I think this is wrong. Looking up Brian Caldwell's book, "Sea Lawyer" it implies that in a harbour where the harbour master has overall authority under the harbour legislation 1847-1964 and any bye-laws made thereunder he has the right to approve moorings, direct yachts to lie at anchor as he pleases and may remove any yacht anchoring without permission. Any owner disobeying reasonable instruction may also be liable to pay expenses. I believe therefore that if the bye-laws so permit the harbour master may charge you for the privilege of "parking" in his harbour if he sees fit and you really don't have the right to anchor without his permission in the first place. This however would only seem to apply to harbours where a local authority has rights under the legislation, not estuaries or bays where shelter can be found outside of any harbour. It has nothing to do with paying light dues or even upkeep of harbours, even less the provision of facilities for yachts. The authority has the right to use the money however they see fit.
Anyone know any different?
 
Interesting question. I quote from legal advice on the Crown Estate website:

"The common law established some centuries ago that there is a public right of navigation for vessels in tidal navigable waters. It also established that anchoring in the course of navigation is part of the public right."

Full article may be found here
 
Yes but thats a selective quote from an article mainly talking amout moorings and goes on to say the situation even then is not clear. I see they do recognise that harbour rights and legislation and crown estate law are seperate. I think the harbour masters rights are paramount. They certainly are in a place like Portsmouth where the QHM is the authority. Just try anchoring up close to the dockyard entrance and see how long before you are forcibly removed.......
 
I don't think the rights of harbourmasters to regulate anchoring within their domains is in question - the question is whether they have the right to charge. This is not clear.

Of course no mariner has the absolute right to navigate as they wish - navigation is regulated in a number of ways, including by harbour authorities. I await with interest any case in which a vessel, willing to comply with a harbour authority's instructions, has been refused permission to anchor solely on the grounds of refusing to pay for so doing.
 
Anchoring inside a recognised harbour is something different. Harbour rather than a local council who has dropped moorings in a river, two different things.

If I visit an area which is on a sheltered river, like Salcombe and drop my pick, they have no more right to charge me than a car park attendant who finds your car parked somewhere in the same town as his car park.

It is no great surprise the country is not filled with foreign visiting yachts, quite embarrassing really.
 
Actually, I'm going to backtrack a bit here. Ahem. Just been looking closely at some legal texts including the International Convention.

Free anchoring seems only to be protected under internattional law in those parts of territorial waters lying between the low water mark and the 12 mile limit and does not cover the waters inside the starting point of the 12 mile measure where this is a line drawn between two headlands for example or rivers where the seaward starting point of the 12 mile limit is a line drawn betwen the seawardmost banks

Also free anchoring is limited to innocent passage where (Article 18) passage includes stopping and anchoring, but only in so far as the same are incidental to ordinary navigation or are rendered necessary by force majeure or distress or for the purpose of rendering assistance to persons, ships or aircraft in danger or distress

So not quite so clear after all. Apologies.
 
From my research, it would appear that (except in Royal Dockyards) the law is indeed unclear, and will not be clarified until the first case has been taken through the courts. Personally I cant afford that! Meanwhile it would appear that there is a slowly creeping increase in local authorities trying to strangle their boating trade.
 
Are you not labouring under a misapprehension of what you were actually being charged for?
I have always understood that nearly every harbour in the country will charge every vessel that enters it one way or another "harbour dues". I think this is what you were charged in Salcombe - not for the privilege of anchoring. On top of dues you might find yourself being asked for berthing fees (hire of visitor's mooring etc). If you Google harbour dues you will see what I am writing about here.
BTW when you do, take a look at Chichester Harbour's web site which explains how the harbour's administration is paid for. I note the HM is a Lt Col Royal Marines so don't try getting away with not paying there or he might send out those naked bully boys we have been reading about this week!
 
\"anchoring in the course of navigation is part of the public right\"

I agree entirely with this sentiment.

Within 1/2 day of Salcombe there is no end of sheltered spots where one could anchor while the tide changes or the crew are fed.

If you are lucky you might get some shelter from the wind, waves and swell, but not if there is too much South in it.

I think the problem lies when people try to confuse:

"anchoring in the course of navigation" with

"pulling into a sheltered haven where a harbour authority is charged with providing navigation aids so you miss the rocks and the sand bar, staff to run it and facilities for boat owners who want to stay for lunch, a day, a weekend or a month, do repairs or land at pontoons or slipways and claim they should not pay for the pleasure just 'cos they are using their own anchor".

I'm not particularly defending Salcombe Authority, the attitude or the charges, but I could not defend for a moment a position like that of ShipsWoofy which appears to be one of general defiance.

To those I would invite them to claim the right of "anchoring in the course of navigation " at the nearest convenient spot. Salcombe for instance is provided with a wide bay between Bolt Head and Prawle Point, and potentially even better shelter at Hope Cove and just round Start Point. None of which require a further 30 minutes diversion up the ria.

For those who may want to put to shore without the risk of the dinghy getting overturned, fill with fuel or water, or simply be assured of a settled nights sleep, I would urge them to play fair and stump up the dues, or they will surely become more expensive.

But don't be a freeloader claiming to be on a moral crusade.
 
Presumably this would mean that you have a right to anchor to wait for a tide or to shelter from bad weather [or even wait for a fair wind] but not to visit a pub?

Perhaps what we need is a marine equivalent of the "mass trespass" such as the bobble-hats had years ago on Kinder Scout.
 
Yes, that's pretty much it, so far as I understand the "right of innocent passage", from the big ship point of view.

There are places where the Crown does not own the seabed below low water mark. These are more numerous than one might imagine, as early monarchs liked to reward keen subjects for, eg, sending the odd ship to fight the French, in the Middle Ages, by giving them something that cost nothing, like seabed.

In these places, anchoring is more likely to be accompanied by a bill.
 
without having studied the detail, or with the benefit of professional knowledge, my simple view is that I can't believe that the Salcombe HM would proactively seek to charge for anchoring without being pretty sure of his rights. The Harbour commissioners would surely be giving him directions on this.

So even though I would be as irritated as anybody else about being approached, I wouldn't waste my energy and blood pressure getting into an argument about it.
 
"Made by virtue of powers conferred on the Council by virtue and in pursuance of the provisions of the Pier and Harbour Order (Salcombe) Confirmation Act 1954 and of the Harbours Docks and Piers Clauses Act 1847 and of all other powers enabling them in that behalf."This seems to cover their reasons

PBO oy YM had an article on this recently - where they said that Newtown creek had no such power
 
Re: Salcombe Anchoring rights

Salcombe probably do have a right to impose a reasonable charge for anchoring - we all have the right NOT to anchor or visit Salcombe when we see unreasonable charges.
Someone also mentioned the Commissioners for the Crown Estates, now thats a quango that really does need to be exterminated, in my humble opinion.
 
I think that is getting near the hub of the matter. Salcombe is a working commercial harbour regulated by a recognised authority. Newtown Creek is a shallow puddle in the sheltered waters of the Solent. I don't think "harbour dues" are valid in Newtown but they are in Salcombe. I think the charges in Newtown always were (and probably still are) a voluntary levy when anchored and the charge if you pick up a bouy is for use of the mooring. If you don't want to pay there is a perfectly good anchorage just outside where the holding I always find is better than the soft constantly ploughed mud inside.... And I think the poster who said It's harbour dues not an anchoring charge has it spot on. A charge for using their harbour.
 
[ QUOTE ]
"Made by virtue of powers conferred on the Council by virtue and in pursuance of the provisions of the Pier and Harbour Order (Salcombe) Confirmation Act 1954 and of the Harbours Docks and Piers Clauses Act 1847 and of all other powers enabling them in that behalf."This seems to cover their reasons


[/ QUOTE ]
Not necessarily. You can easily quote something official that appertains to the subject, but is inappropriate for the specific charge on the basis that nobody else will bother to check. That doesnt mean there is legal justification.
 
[ QUOTE ]
a slowly creeping increase in local authorities trying to strangle their boating trade.

[/ QUOTE ]

OMG - it is very slow then 'cos I have been paying harbour dues (and that's what all this is about) since the early 1950s when I first started to sail, and I was told then by the owner of the yacht I sailed in that it was the norm for many years before that, probably pre WW1.
 
Agree.

I could display a large notice on the pulpit that quite truthfully claimed

"Anchored by virtue of rights conferred by the Merchant Shipping Act 1995 and rights acquired by virtue of common law and all other statutory and applicable civil law provisions currently prevailing in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland"

They may still want to charge me, though /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

S
EU citizen traveling with "durable partner"
Replies
18
Views
780
AntarcticPilot
AntarcticPilot
T
Notices to Mariners - Week 51
Replies
4
Views
528
Shaz77
S

Share this page

Top