Most people above a certain age remember the old MasterCard commercial slogan, "Master the possibilities" - well, it's time we begin Occupying the possibilities. While the movement is growing and evolving, I think its potential lies far beyond encampments in city squares, parks, and town centers, and I don't just mean in terms of specific actions such as Bank Transfer Day or the Oakland strike. This country has a vast network of waterways, long riversides and lake shores, and huge amounts of luxury condominiums, country estates, and financial districts along them, and law enforcement would have considerable difficulties interfering with such a mobile Occupation covering such large territory - particularly if it intersects with supporting land-based movements.
This idea requires watercraft of some kind that is not trivial in cost, but it has the benefit of being both mobile and permanent. If police decided to raid the "encampment," it would be a logistical clusterfuck for them: Imagine their having to corral and tow significant numbers of small boats and rafts. If protesters are knocked overboard during arrests, it would look very bad for police, and provide suitably dramatic video. There is already a nascent move to occupy the frozen lake outside Scott Walker's mansion in the traditional encampment mode, but this could be extended year-round with the addition of boats.
Likewise, I can't overstate the potential for mobility of such an Occupation, especially along large rivers like the Mississippi, or mid-sized regional rivers. There could be significant overlap and mutual cooperation with Occupy movements in riverside or lakeside towns and cities, complicating police jurisdiction across municipal, county, state, and even national borders (at least in the case of Canada - we probably wouldn't want the Southern border involved, given the shit going on down there). As a result, there could be benefits to major Occupy movements such as Occupy Chicago, Occupy St. Louis, and other cities that have lake shores and riversides. Take a look at this map, showing just a few of the rivers and lake shores in a portion of the US and Canada:
Because of the mobility, an Occupation of an entire lake or river could cover significant territory and deploy to various locations for coordinated protests with land-based movements. This is especially potent given the concentration of high-end luxury residences and businesses along waterfronts, and what would likely be the high visibility of concentrated sea-based protests. Of course, if this is undertaken, the organizers would have to be mindful of legitimate safety and security concerns on the part of authorities that govern the seaways, and work with them to ensure that all legitimate concerns are allayed.
Now, granted there is a problem of replacing boats once confiscated, but they don't have to be anything substantial - large numbers of inflatable rafts would do the trick just as well as a solid craft. Further, the police couldn't stop their deployment, because they could be launched from anywhere along the shore and then congregate anywhere along the shore. They could launch from countless different places and then set up shop in one place, or vice-versa.
Think about it - a river/lake Occupy could operate like peaceful Vikings, descending rapidly on to a shore location for a planned demonstration somewhere before the local police could get on the ball and then rapidly redeploying back into the water. Can you imagine the amount of resources cities and towns along these shores would have to commit to being constantly on alert for such protests? Eventually they would just have to throw in the towel and recognize that it's just citizens exercising their rights, like any other ordinary activity. In fact, it would be far harder for them to deal with this than with land-based demonstrations, because waterfronts are long and small craft can be deployed from anywhere along them, and come ashore anywhere along them. The boats and helicopters they'd need constantly patrolling to keep track of it would become very expensive for them.
It's an idea with great promise, and I hope people in a position to explore it in practice do so. Besides, it would be a lot of fun - a lot more fun than camping. Picture it: A fleet of rafts, canoes, and kayaks with oarsmen (and oarswomen) and humorous quasi-Viking art and costumes on some of the protesters coalesces in the water within a few minutes. They row with all their might toward the planned demonstration point, and as they descend on the point, "Ride of the Valkyries" blares from loudspeakers. Police are deployed to the shore and begin moving in to arrest the protesters, who then just return to their rafts. Once the police get their boats deployed to intercept, the fleet spreads out, making it a logistical nightmare to round them up. Just swarm around them and avoid being netted. What are they going to do, open fire? That would look great for them - shooting at unarmed people on an inflatable raft. Shoot tear gas canisters? The Occupiers could just immediately dump the canisters overboard, and they'd be too dispersed for the gas to matter much. Try to board every single raft, canoe, and kayak and arrest its occupants? HA! The strategic position of a waterway-based Occupation is remarkably strong.
There could be a somewhat different version of this that could apply to ocean coastlines, but that's another kettle of fish altogether given the relative lack of exposure, and the dangers posed by waves, the impact on (and by) sea life, etc. Anyway, I really hope someone with the means and opportunity takes a look at this idea and considers it further, because the more I think about it, the more attractive it looks to me. It seems like one of those ideas that doesn't really occur to a 21st century person at first, and then seems silly, and then seems like it might work in a few limited cases, and then, as you consider it more and more, begins to look like it might actually have truly staggering potential.
Let's think about it some more: You're Occupying a waterway on your raft. You get hungry. You row to shore at a convenient point. Deflate the raft. Roll it up. Put it in your gear. Get food. Take care of business in the restroom. Go back to the shore. Reinflate the raft. Redeploy. Voila - many of the logistical difficulties of Occupy camps are rendered moot. The possibilities look great, IMHO. Severely inclement weather? Come in, then go back out as soon as it abates. There are so many advantages I'm surprised this hasn't happened already. In fact, I'm going to be downright pissed if no one tries this. This is too good an idea not to explore.
I'll do a little bit of initial leg work myself, just to show that this is doable on paper. First, the cost of a decent inflatable raft that could handle consistent use in a natural waterway seems to be in about the same cost range as decent tents - in the low hundreds. The most expensive one on the Amazon page for inflatable rafts is one designed to be used with motors, and is $600, but there's a non-motormount 4-person raft at $256 with two oars included. Kayaks are in about the same price range. If you don't care about capacity or robustness, inflatable rafts can be as little as $20, and are available in toy stores and places like Target (if you're not against shopping there) - which means you could essentially have dozens of them lashed together and move between them like lily pads, although this would compromise mobility. Of course, nothing says you can't use kayaks and high-quality inflatables for rapid mobility, and only deploy the toys to create temporary working space.
Adult Life vests range on Amazon between $8 to $40. I don't know what to search for to find out how much emergency hypothermia treatment kits cost, but I don't imagine they would be exorbitant, especially since there only have to be a few for the entire group. And since these would be near major cities most of the time, no special communications equipment would be needed for emergencies - cellphones should be enough under most circumstances. Filters could be used to drink the water, and even the very best ones designed for use in jungles and swamps aren't that expensive. There is an additional advantage to being over fresh water that land-based Occupations typically don't have: You can bathe regularly, at least if the water isn't freezing. Fishing might also be worthwhile on some lakes and rivers, for people who aren't vegans or vegetarians, and fishing gear is affordable if you don't go crazy with it.
Now, you would never get permission for something like this - it's hard enough getting permits for traditional demonstrations. But as long as you're not hurting anyone, disrupting waterway traffic, compromising legitimate security perimeters, or polluting the environment, you would be fully within your rights. Furthermore, as I've noted, it would be extremely difficult for authorities to enforce a ban on Occupation of waterways, even though they would be most likely to officially take a hard line. This is an ideal convergence of circumstances: Maximum stubbornness by authorities with minimum capability for them to enforce their decisions. Furthermore, it would make the land-based Occupations seem stodgy and traditional by comparison, perhaps taking some of the heat off them.
As far as my range of competence allows me to look - admittedly not very far - this seems doable. And it also seems strategically advantageous, tactically advantageous, and probably quite interesting to the media if it were undertaken on any significant scale. It would be something truly new, and not at all like past demonstrations. There have been boats with protesters now and then, and groups like Greenpeace or whale rights activists that operate on water to interdict other boats, but never a movement that bases itself in inland waterways and conducts rapid-strike protests through water-based deployment. I can't stress enough that even at the speed of rowing, the unimpeded nature of the waterway means they could probably move much faster than demonstrators who march or even try to drive somewhere in large numbers.
And these wouldn't be static encampments - they would be constantly moving, interacting with multiple cities, counties, and even states, descending rapidly on given locations and driving the dynamism of land-based counterparts. They could protest the lakeside mansion of some CEO one day, and the next be drowning out some 1%er waterfront restaurant with chanting, all without permits and without the authorities having much ability to stop it. It would be the most kinetic version of Occupy, and as far as I can tell, it can be done.