Coastal towns and counties have addressed on the local level managing navigable waters through ordinances that typically grant authority to remove derelict and abandoned vessels and other debris.

The state does not have a formal program or legislation to regulate the removal or disposal of abandoned and derelict vessels, according to the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration’s marine debris program, but there are laws allowing for a person to obtain ownership over abandoned vehicles, including vessels.

There is a general statute, 153A-132, that gives coastal-area counties the authority, by ordinance, to prohibit the abandonment of vessels in navigable waters within the county’s ordinance-making jurisdiction, and essentially treat abandoned vessels in the same manner as abandoned and junked cars. The state first granted Dare and Brunswick counties the authority in 2013 to address abandoned vessels. The general statute was amended in 2015 to include all coastal-area counties: Beaufort, Bertie, Brunswick, Camden, Carteret, Chowan, Craven, Currituck, Dare, Gates, Hertford, Hyde, New Hanover, Onslow, Pamlico, Pasquotank, Pender, Perquimans, Tyrrell, and Washington.

Hyde County Board of Commissioners passed earlier this year an ordinance prohibiting abandonment of vessels in Ocracoke’s Silver Lake and Currituck County board of commissioners adopted in July 2016 an ordinance prohibiting the abandoning vessels in navigable waters.

In 1981, the state General Assembly authorized Beaufort, in Carteret County, to regulate navigable waters within its boundaries. In September of this year, the Beaufort Board of Commissioners approved an ordinance to remove debris from waters in the town’s jurisdiction.

Beaufort Mayor Rett Newton explained that the issue of boater accountability has been ongoing for decades in Beaufort, as well as in other coastal communities, which prompted the town to move forward with its navigable waters ordinance.

“The management of abandoned and derelict vessels, particularly after storms, elimination of gray water and black water discharge, and identification and removal of illegal moorings are some key components of the ordinance,” Newton said in an email response to Coastal Review Online. “This effort is a great first step toward consideration of a more formal — and safe — mooring area and also helps us progress toward the goal of becoming North Carolina’s first publicly-declared Clean Water Coastal Community.”

The ordinance Beaufort commissioners adopted Sept. 24 has “received tremendous support from Beaufort citizens who have frequently seen boats negatively impacting our amazing coastal ecosystems, either drifting up on the Rachel Carson Reserve marsh habitat during a storm or sunk in our waterways,” Newton said. “It is also well-recognized that we have been very fortunate that we have not had a storm push an illegally moored vessel into private and public docks, causing significant damage to the docks and boats that are legally secured to the docks.”

Newton added that the town also received support from the much larger Beaufort boating community that he said abides by established boating laws and regulations.

John Day, Beaufort’s town manager, said that putting this ordinance in place after so many years without regulation meant there was a great deal of accumulated debris, “Everything from fishing gear to illegal moorings, to sunken boats to derelict and abandoned vessels.”

Between approval of the ordinance in late September and Monday morning, 123,958 pounds of debris have been disposed of, mostly from Taylor’s Creek. The total included 11 vessels, seven of which were partially or fully submerged, 34 boat moorings, or unpermitted permanent anchors, and seven car tires.

“We still have one vessel and two large mounds of fishing net to be removed,” Day said, adding that those were expected to be removed next week.

“Fortunately, we were able to begin implementation of the new ordinance with a $67,000 grant from NOAA and a $5,000 contribution from community members to begin the marine debris cleanup effort,” Day said. “We partnered with the Rachel Carson Reserve on the grant, and contracted with TowBoatUS to remove the debris.”

The Beaufort Police Department is responsible for enforcement of the ordinance and has worked closely with TowBoatUS to remove moorings and derelict vessels.

“Beaufort (Police Department) also informed boat owners who were in violation of the ordinance of the new regulations — most complied by moving their boats from the regulated areas. Others relinquished ownership and their boats, which had little or no value, were removed and destroyed,” Day said.

He added that three boats that washed ashore on the Rachel Carson Reserve were removed by the Coast Guard, which also removed all hazardous material, and TowBoatUS towed the vessels to be destroyed.

“Additionally, five boats were slammed into the Duke Marine Lab dock by Florence. Duke paid the town for the removal costs of the boats, and the town exercised its authority under the ordinance to remove and dispose of the boats,” he said.

What has been most surprising about moving forward with the ordinances is the support, Day said. “Unlike many initiatives, I have not encountered any opposition to this effort, only very strong support.”

Wrightsville Beach has in place an ordinance, “Abandoned Vessel Unlawful; Removal Authorized,” which states “A. It shall be unlawful for the registered owner or person entitled to possession of a vessel to cause or allow such vessel to be abandoned as the term is defined herein. B. Upon investigation, the authorized town official may determine that a vessel is an abandoned vessel and order the vessel removed.” The ordinance was passed in October 2002 and amended August 2011.

Wrightsville Beach Town Manager Timothy Owens said that the New Hanover County town rarely had to deal with abandoned and derelict vessels until this year. Owens said he couldn’t explain what changed.

Unoccupied, anchored vessels are more common in the summer months. “The town is looking to strengthen its current ordinances and work with other governmental agencies that may have some jurisdiction,” Owens said.

In the nearly six years Owens has worked for the town, most removals have been voluntary, once the owner was contacted or citations written, he added.

Currituck County Manager Daniel F. Scanlon said that over the past couple of years, Currituck has dealt with about five abandoned vessels.

Currituck’s ordinance was adopted to address enforcement and ultimately the county’s right to mediate the issue and attempt to assess vessel owners, Scanlon said.

“The county does not have the resources to address this issue so we always have to contract the work. In order to address potential abuse — we have had a couple of vessels that have been stripped of identification and either set adrift, sunk, abandoned or simply tied up to private property and left — the vessel has to be a hindrance or danger to navigable waters before the county will engage.”

Scanlon added that some of the challenges have been access, both physical and legal, Coastal Area Management Act, or CAMA, regulations and possible environmental impairments.

Brunswick County put in place an ordinance early last year to manage abandoned and derelict vessels.

Capt. Mose Highsmith with the Brunswick County Sheriff’s Office said that when the ordinance was enacted 22 vessels were documented and tagged.

He explained that of those vessels, 14 were removed by the owners, three by the Brunswick County Sheriff’s Office and two by commercial salvage companies. One could not be removed, but was demolished in place by a commercial salvage company to eliminate any hazard to navigation. The remaining two vessels were large shrimp boats that were too costly to remove.

“The current mission of the (Brunswick County Sheriff’s Office) marine patrol, as it relates to abandoned and derelict vessels, is to monitor boats that are discovered at anchor to avoid further abandoned boats,” he said. “This is done daily as part of the normal marine patrol activities.”

There are a handful of situations that would warrant boats to be tagged and monitored: if the boat is anchored or moored in the waterways for 10 days or more; is within 75 feet of another vessel; is aground, capsized, sinking or sunk or in danger of the previous; and if the vessel appears to be neglected and unfit to be used for navigation as intended.

Vessels will also be tagged and monitored when not displaying a Coast Guard-approved anchor light while at anchor after sunset or a valid state registration or Coast Guard-documented number.

Highsmith said that in the year and a half since the ordinance was put in place, the number of abandoned and derelict boats has been substantially reduced.

“The process to get an ordinance enacted and a fully functioning program in place is challenging. There was a substantial financial commitment by the county manager and commissioners to remove a number of boats so that owners were convinced that we were serious. Maintenance of the program, however, is extremely reasonable,” Highsmith said.

“Boat owners are now aware or quickly learn that mooring and leaving boats unattended is no longer an acceptable practice,” he said, adding that communication between vessel owners and maritime law enforcement, including the county sheriff’s office, Marine Fisheries and the Coast Guard, and compliance have greatly improved.

There has been positive response to the ordinance and decrease in vessels in the waterways, Highsmith said. “The boating public has expressed appreciation for the reduction of vessels that create navigation challenges. The citizens with waterfront properties have expressed appreciation (for) the reduction of vessels that create an eyesore to the community. Travelers who use popular anchorages have expressed appreciation for the increased safety and space available for overnight transient vessels and day recreation boaters.”

During hurricanes, owners tend to seek safe harbor for the vessels in a protected anchorage, Highsmith explained, adding that there was an in increase in mooring in the creek adjacent to Fish Factory Road during Florence though most of the vessels moored for the storm were removed immediately after the storm.

“Two vessels remain unattended and we are following the ordinance to monitor and encourage the owners to remove the vessels,” said Highsmith.

The Lockwood Folly River was a safe harbor for many commercial fishing vessels during the storm. All of them were removed and returned to their docks when it was safe to navigate.

“Only one vessel, which was a private cabin vessel, sunk while at its mooring on the side of the river. Brunswick County Sheriff’s Office is in communication with the owner to resolve this situation,” Highsmith said.

He said several steps must be taken before a vessel may be relocated, starting with giving the owner 10 days to respond with a plan to repair or remove the vessel after the boat has been posted as a derelict vessel or a vessel in danger of sinking. The owner then has 20 days to move forward with the plan and complete removal. If there’s no response from the owner or the removal or repair is not completed within 30 days of initial posting, the boat will be tagged and documented as abandoned.

Attempts to contact the owner are made by phone, delivering or posting a notice at the owner’s residence, and certified mail by Brunswick County Sheriff’s office Marine Patrol. If all attempts to contact the owner are unsuccessful, the vessel will be deemed abandoned and sold at public auction. The highest bidder is presented a sheriff’s bill of sale that can be presented to the North Carolina Wildlife Division to enable them to register the vessel.

Read Part 1: Hundreds of Derelict Boats in Storm’s Wake

Read Part 2: State Law Dictates Displaced Boat Response

Second in a series.

There were hundreds of derelict, abandoned and displaced vessels found in coastal North Carolina waterways after Hurricane Florence, and about half remain where they were found, though the hazardous material was removed.

Seven vessels of the 362 flagged by the U.S. Coast Guard were relocated because the vessels were in environmentally sensitive areas and 126 were moved or handled by the owner or a third party, such as a salvage company or through insurance, according to information provided by state Emergency Management, part of the North Carolina Department of Public Safety.

The Coast Guard shared with Emergency Management a little more than a week ago the details on the disposition of the 362 vessels, which were assessed by the Emergency Support Function No. 10, or ESF-10, Unified Command, consisting of the Coast Guard as the incident commander, the state Wildlife Resource Commission and the state Department of Environmental Quality.

ESF-10 Oil and Hazardous Materials Response, when activated, provides federal support in response to an actual or potential discharge and uncontrolled release of oil or hazardous materials.

Keith Acree, public information officer with Emergency Management, responded to Coastal Review Online in an email Wednesday, saying that the state determined which vessels were moved. Pollutants were removed from each boat and some were moved to pre-determined locations by the Wildlife Resources Commission and DEQ. Best management practices were monitored and followed for the duration of the operation, he said.

Coast Guard Chief Jeremy Thomas, incident management division supervisor, said in an interview that the ESF-10 mission was successful.

“The Coast Guard did what the state asked it to do … mitigate pollution threats,” he added.

During the ESF-10 mission, the Coast Guard works for the state and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, he said, adding the Wildlife Resources Commission did a great deal of work to find the owners of the displaced vessels, though not all could be located.

Acree said that the 362 vessels that were assessed by the ESF-10 Unified Command’s Task Force North, composed of Beaufort, Craven, Hyde and Pamlico counties, which assessed 197 total targets, or vessels, and Task Force South, made up of Bladen, Brunswick, Carteret, New Hanover, Onslow and Pender counties, which assessed 165 total targets.

While no vessels were removed by Task Forth North, Task Force South moved seven vessels from environmentally sensitive areas to less-sensitive areas.

Of the Task Force North’s 197 total targets, no ESF-10 action was taken on 47 vessels, which means these boats were assessed and deemed pre-storm derelicts or no oil or hazardous materials were on board. Oil and hazardous material were removed from another 79 vessels, which were returned to the general area where they were found, as long as the location did not present a hazard to navigation. Owners, salvage or insurance managed the mitigation or removal of 71 vessels, which required no further ESF-10 action.

With the 165 vessels marked by Task Force South, no action was taken for 62 vessels deemed to have been in place before the storm or to have no oil or hazardous material on board. Oil and hazardous materials were removed from 41 vessels and then returned to the general area.

Capt. Christian Gillikin of Atlantic Coast Marine Group during a presentation to the Joint Legislative Oversight Committee on Agriculture and Natural and Economic Resources meeting Nov. 13 in Raleigh recommended an assessment and scope of work for the removal and disposal of the vessels that remained in place after the removal of hazardous materials. He also suggested that owners of state-registered vessels carry liability insurance in an amount sufficient to cover any future expenses related to salvage, recovery and damage from storms, operator error and neglect, to keep state taxpayers from being stuck with the bill.

Gillikin explained that Atlantic Coast Marine Group was a point of contact for the removal of derelict vessels after the hurricane for those that involved ESF-10. He told legislators that during a statewide survey performed by the Coast Guard, that the more than 350 vessels were flagged for hazardous materials response. The Coast Guard affixed red stickers to the vessels found to have hazardous material to notify the party responsible for the boat.

Gillikin estimated that about half of the boats could not be traced back to the owners because some vessels were too damaged to find the information, or their registration numbers were incorrect. Also, sometimes when the proper owner is identified, those individuals are unwilling to take responsibility.

The ESF-10 program does not provide for wreck removal or disposal of vessels deemed an environmental threat, he said. That requires simultaneous implementation of another program, EFS-3, which “activates and develops work priorities in cooperation with state governments to further and complete the cleanup process.”

Gillikin said that under ESF-10 the federal government raises the sunken, damaged or derelict boat after a storm, removes all the hazardous materials and then leaves the wreck for the state to manage the disposal. He gave four examples of vessels that, after removing hazardous materials, were left in place or were sunk again.

“If a vessel was sunk, we used airbags, whatever type of salvage gear we needed, lifted the vessel, all the hazardous materials were removed, and then the vessel was sunk back down,” Gillikin explained.

He said that over the long term, submerged, derelict and abandoned vessels could cause navigation hazards in and around marinas and impact fisheries, cause sea habitat issues, negatively affect public perception of tourism destinations and lead to complaints by nearby homeowners. Vessel decomposition is another long-term environmental effect, he said, using a fiberglass sailboat to illustrate. He said fiberglass will delaminate or fall apart over time.

When Gillikin suggested to the legislators that an assessment be performed at a cost of no more than $50,000, he estimated that about half of the original number of boats remain in waterways.

He said once the assessment has been made of the remaining vessels, a total project cost could be determined. “For example, removal fee would be $395 per foot … if we took an average 32-foot vessel, $395 per foot, would be $12,640.” The total project cost can be more accurately determined after the assessment is completed.

Gillikin said Friday during a follow-up interview that he was waiting to see if funds would be approved by the legislature to move forward with the assessment.

Acree told Coastal Review Online Wednesday that the Unified Command considered implementing ESF-3, “but based on North Carolina law, decided it did not have the authority to remove and dispose of the vessels, which are private property.

“It was their understanding that the legislature has given authority over abandoned vessels to local governments, if those governments decide to pass an ordinance pursuant to NCGS 153A-132(i),” which is called the “Removal and disposal of abandoned and junked motor vehicles; abandoned vessels.”

“Given the decentralized and localized authority for derelict vessels, they believed there were significant legal authority questions related to utilizing ESF-3 by the state,” he said.

Rep. Pricey Harrison, D-Guilford, a member of the Joint Legislative Oversight Committee on Agriculture and Natural and Economic Resources, said in an interview Wednesday that she was shocked to learn the number of vessels flagged during the statewide survey by the Coast Guard after Florence.

Harrison, who also has a home in Beaufort, said she’s noticed that derelict and abandoned vessels have been an issue for some time.

She explained that at the meeting Tuesday, the committee supported recommending that boat owners carry liability insurance to help fund ridding the waterways of the debris.

One point that was discussed Tuesday that did concern her, she said, is that boats were not removed but instead were sunk after the hazardous material is removed.

The General Assembly is scheduled to convene Nov. 27 to consider, among other things, hurricane relief and Harrison said the issue may be raised at that time. If not then, the oversight committee will recommend the issue of derelict and abandoned boats be addressed at a later meeting, she said.

Next: How local officials are addressing the problem

Read Part 1: Hundreds of Derelict Boats in Storm’s Wake

First in a series.

BEAUFORT – Paula Gillikin, central sites manager for the North Carolina Coastal Reserve, was on hand in late October to monitor a salvage company remove a displaced houseboat that Hurricane Florence had washed from Taylor’s Creek onto the marsh of Rachel Carson Reserve’s Carrot Island.

Gillikin oversees the Rachel Carson Reserve, one of 10 North Carolina Coastal Reserve and National Estuarine Research Reserve sites, a part of the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management, under the state Department of Environmental Quality. The North Carolina National Estuarine Research Reserve is managed through a federal-state partnership between the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the state Division of Coastal Management.

After Hurricane Florence, the U.S. Coast Guard during a statewide survey flagged 383 vessels requiring salvage for hazardous materials response. Over the long term, these vessels can affect fisheries and marine habitats, lead to complaints about wreckage and garbage waste and hurt coastal tourism, according to information presented Tuesday to the Joint Legislative Oversight Committee on Agriculture and Natural and Economic Resources.

The presentation noted the Emergency Support Function 10, or ESF 10 – Oil and Hazardous Materials Response, which provides federal support in response to an actual or potential discharge and uncontrolled release of oil or hazardous materials when activated, according to the Federal Emergency Management Agency website.

Legislators in attendance Tuesday agreed with the presenters from Atlantic Coast Marine Group who suggested the state should look into requiring boat owners to carry liability insurance sufficient to cover the state’s cost of salvage and environmental mitigation.

Gillikin, on that brisk Saturday morning in late October while standing watch over the vessel relocation, said that the large-scale salvage company, Resolve Marine Group, had been working with the Coast Guard on vessel removal for the post-Hurricane Florence FEMA-funded effort. She noted the company’s expertise and equipment to protect the environment from pollution threats.

“The company uses what we call a number of environmental best management practices wherever they can,” she said.

The crew from Resolve spent the morning situating large, ship-launching airbags under the houseboat to inflate and then lift the vessel for removal, with the goal to limit further damage to the sensitive habitat.

“We’re making really careful decisions about what we’re doing with vessels,” Gillikin said.

Coast Guard Petty Officer 3^rd Class Brandon Hillard, who spent time with Gillikin on Carrot Island during the salvage operation, explained that the state requested the Coast Guard relocate several vessels that were displaced or sunken in environmentally sensitive areas.

The Coast Guard worked with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, DEQ and other agencies including NOAA, and Resolve to provide federal oversight, personnel and portable work spaces.

“The Coast Guard-contracted salvage group provided crews, air boats, barges, excavators, salvage equipment, dive teams, tug boats and a 225-ton crane,” Hillard said. “The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission provided wildlife officers and law enforcement boats to supervise the operations, and the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality provided personnel, expertise and boats.”

Sarah Young, public information officer with DEQ, said that of the 10 reserve sites, vessels are most often grounded at the Rachel Carson and Masonboro Island reserves, given the proximity of these sites to heavily used waterways and local anchorages.

“Vessels commonly come ashore at one or both of these sites during storm events, including hurricanes, nor’easters, and king tide events. If vessels are displaced in larger numbers, it is usually associated with a hurricane,” she said.

The burden on state resources varies depending how the vessel was displaced, Young said.

“For example, vessels were removed from the sensitive habitats of reserve sites post-Hurricane Florence primarily through FEMA hurricane response funding for the declared disaster,” she said. “If a vessel is displaced outside of a declared disaster, the state uses more resources, including staff time and sometimes funds to hire a salvage company to remove the vessel if it has officially been abandoned.”

There are several steps that must be taken to have the vessels removed from the reserves.

The reserve first collects information about the vessel and its location, especially if it’s in a sensitive habitat, and often works with municipalities and the Wildlife Resources Commission to find its owners, determine their salvage plans and to advise them that salvage should be conducted to minimize environmental impacts, Young continued.

“If the owner is unresponsive and gives up interest in the vessel, the vessel can eventually be removed from the reserve property if funding resources are available. However, this process can be a long one because the state does not have a specific policy that governs removal, disposal, and dedicated and sustained funding to support such efforts,” she said.

Young explained that the state has granted authority to counties and towns to pass ordinances related to waterways within their enforcement boundaries. “Fortunately, some reserve sites are located within local jurisdictions that have specific ordinances about handling abandoned vessels, which makes the process of removing them more efficient.”

Young added, “Displaced vessels are a management challenge for the reserve sites, as they often damage habitat and can pollute the environment.”

Hillard said that the Coast Guard acted in support of the state, under the ESF 10 mission, “to oversee the mitigation of pollution from those vessels that were sunken or displaced in the disaster-declared counties after Hurricane Florence.”

The mission of ESF 10 is to prevent, minimize or mitigate the release of pollutants and hazardous materials in the environment, which sometimes includes vessel relocations as determined by the state.

As the federal on-scene coordinator for the ESF 10 mission, the Coast Guard supervised the response to pollution threats aboard these vessels, Hillard explained. “In support of the state, the Coast Guard then verified through documentation that the removal of pollutants was complete.”

These pollutants included gasoline, diesel, oil, flares, fire extinguishers and chemical containers.

“Vessels that were actively discharging pollutants such as fuel were, of course, a top priority to be mitigated,” Hillard said.

The state then decides how and when the vessels themselves may be removed if they are not claimed.

Hillard said that the ESF 10 Unified Command, which is made up of state and federal agencies including the Coast Guard, was given up to a $10 million mission assignment through FEMA and has acted in support of the state to mitigate pollution threats, but not to remove debris.

“Salvage is a complex operation and many factors can affect the cost of operations, such as the size of vessel, sensitivity of habitat, amount of pollution on the displaced vessel, ease of access to the vessel, assets available and weather conditions during operations,” he said.

The state may determine certain vessels to be in an environmentally sensitive area and prioritize removal of those vessels if they are unclaimed and cannot be removed by an owner, marina, harbormaster or other government entity, Hillard said. “This is to help ensure that fragile habitats in those environmentally sensitive areas are protected from further damage over time.”

Legislative reporter Kirk Ross contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

• Part 2: State Law Dictates Displaced Boat Response