-
Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
-
Hello all! We will be performing a website & forum update soon. You may get logged out so now is the time to make sure your email address in your account is correct - go to your account to check it and update it now. Send us a message with your username and/or email address if you need help.
Public vs Private Beach [threads merged]
- Thread starter SoWal Staff
- Start date
John G
Beach Fanatic
I was being sarcastic.I'm not 100% sure what you mean by "all the spoiled owners there" (at BMB). But I can take a guess.
Your point is very well taken. That's why I mentioned what I did in post #60 (click). And BMB is just a "canary in the mine".
If you own your property and wish it to be private, that's your right.
I believe the Andante was one of the first to have done all required by the WCSO SOP. Anyone been down that way recently?
We primarily visit the Seagrove area beaches now, but I grew up going to Blue Mountain beach almost every weekend, so it is still important to me. However, I am concerned about all sowal beaches. No one has bothered us on the beach so far, but I think its coming soon. We use the beachwood villas access and the public access at Watercoler. When the new luxury condo is built by the beachwood villas access, I'm sure signs will go up. They are advertising private beach.
BlueMtnBeachVagrant
Beach Fanatic
John G, I'm in total agreement...there is no outrage by most individuals when they are face to face with LARGE developments such as Seaside, Watercolor, Watersound, Rosemary, etc. Do you remember, Kurt jumped on me ("sort of") about my idea of boycotting these areas and their restaurants and shops in an attempt (not realistic) of bringing the private vs. public beach to the forefront? He mentioned that "friends and neighbors" would be hurt who work in these establishments if they were boycotted. I know I have a point here, somewhere. 
Oh yea, my guess is that many who profess that the beach should be public from customary use probably don't go up against (protest, critique, boycott, etc.) these private developments because they either work there, have friends who work there, know people who own property there, derive business from, on and on.
Oh yea, my guess is that many who profess that the beach should be public from customary use probably don't go up against (protest, critique, boycott, etc.) these private developments because they either work there, have friends who work there, know people who own property there, derive business from, on and on.
BlueMtnBeachVagrant
Beach Fanatic
Several days ago I reposted a comment made by 1st in 59 (click) where he eloquently cast blame on real estate agents and developers as to the current predicament that we all are facing - "selling a dream without a deed" (those are my words). But I want reiterate that the TDC / Walton County are as much to blame for "concealing" the fact that most beaches are in no uncertain terms, private. I didn't make them that way in case some of you want to attack this fact or me.
Over 9 years ago, I posted the following "BMBV's BMB Access Map". Redfish Village was a hot topic back then (and the fallout is now taking place, BTW). As you can easily see in PICTORIAL form, the only public beach is shown in green.
Why does TDC / Walton County make it so difficult for tourists and others to be able to find a similar representation across the entire county? A map like this clears the air as to whether the beach to the left or right of an access is public or private.
I really don't expect an answer as it is obvious to me.
Over 9 years ago, I posted the following "BMBV's BMB Access Map". Redfish Village was a hot topic back then (and the fallout is now taking place, BTW). As you can easily see in PICTORIAL form, the only public beach is shown in green.
Why does TDC / Walton County make it so difficult for tourists and others to be able to find a similar representation across the entire county? A map like this clears the air as to whether the beach to the left or right of an access is public or private.
I really don't expect an answer as it is obvious to me.
John G
Beach Fanatic
BMBVagrant:
The real issue here are the facts as you've stated and that the county has really, really, really, screwed up historically. Why do you think all that money was spent on mail outs to beach front owners PUSHING the re-nourishment? They couldn't even get peoples addresses correct...Thanks Property Appraiser. Is wasn't to Protect those owners from storms, it was to get, to take the beaches from them. How? Because re-nourishment is funded by tax dollars. That makes those beaches "public" by the use of taxes to pay for the sand.
This is consistent along Scenic Gulf, it was re-nourished, and its sure not private (with very few exceptions). I've yet to hear anyone argue that point. What is private are all those deeded beach access / walk overs that many of the properties along Scenic Gulf OWN. Its not as easy to get on to those beaches along Scenic Gulf, as it is along 30a. Thus, the problems we have along 30a is not the same as any on Scenic Gulf, yet its the same county. Each has beach vendors.
When re-nourishment Failed (as I said it would), the customary use argument was created. This was / is Plan B for the county to try and save their butts from future embarrassment. I'm sure it was cooked up about the same time the mailings were going out to non-existent beach front owners at a significant cost to the county.
As for no one going after the large developments / resorts, I feel if anyone wants to cite customary use, you should at minimum be consistent and not give Seagrove, Watercolor, etc., a pass. All or nothing, I'd have a lot more respect for the argument at that point. But is sounds like Blue Mt, Blue Mt, Blue Mt, spoiled rich people, spoiled rich people, etc., ect.
Selective Enforcement is one of the main problems this county has. WCSO does it, Code Enforcement does it, judges do it, it goes on and on. We can't ever be consistent, because its not convenient.
As for Kurt's defense of them (resorts), just look at who runs the adds on his site... It's all hypocritical in its worst form. I'm quite frankly surprised he's allowed much of the posts to continue as in the past people (including me) would be banned. But look at the numbers of viewers and posters. It mean more eyes on advertisement and thus, mo $ mo $ mo $.
The TDC continues to spend money on advertising that is not necessary, unless you want to continue to flood the area with a lower class of vacation renter that spends less money, but creates more demand our local infrastructure and resources. It just won't work and I fear 30a is doomed to become PCB in less than five years. I hope I'm wrong, but just look around at the visitors that are here, they are NOT the same as 6 years ago. Those people saw the writing in the sand and have moved to other vacation destinations that are loving the fact they now get high end, high class tourist that follow rules and respect the property rights of others.
There is not going to be a simple answer here. The county will spend money, may win, may loose. It will be appealed, spend more money, etc., repeat. By the time anything is done, the aforementioned five years doomsday clock to PCB will have struck midnight.
The real issue here are the facts as you've stated and that the county has really, really, really, screwed up historically. Why do you think all that money was spent on mail outs to beach front owners PUSHING the re-nourishment? They couldn't even get peoples addresses correct...Thanks Property Appraiser. Is wasn't to Protect those owners from storms, it was to get, to take the beaches from them. How? Because re-nourishment is funded by tax dollars. That makes those beaches "public" by the use of taxes to pay for the sand.
This is consistent along Scenic Gulf, it was re-nourished, and its sure not private (with very few exceptions). I've yet to hear anyone argue that point. What is private are all those deeded beach access / walk overs that many of the properties along Scenic Gulf OWN. Its not as easy to get on to those beaches along Scenic Gulf, as it is along 30a. Thus, the problems we have along 30a is not the same as any on Scenic Gulf, yet its the same county. Each has beach vendors.
When re-nourishment Failed (as I said it would), the customary use argument was created. This was / is Plan B for the county to try and save their butts from future embarrassment. I'm sure it was cooked up about the same time the mailings were going out to non-existent beach front owners at a significant cost to the county.
As for no one going after the large developments / resorts, I feel if anyone wants to cite customary use, you should at minimum be consistent and not give Seagrove, Watercolor, etc., a pass. All or nothing, I'd have a lot more respect for the argument at that point. But is sounds like Blue Mt, Blue Mt, Blue Mt, spoiled rich people, spoiled rich people, etc., ect.
Selective Enforcement is one of the main problems this county has. WCSO does it, Code Enforcement does it, judges do it, it goes on and on. We can't ever be consistent, because its not convenient.
As for Kurt's defense of them (resorts), just look at who runs the adds on his site... It's all hypocritical in its worst form. I'm quite frankly surprised he's allowed much of the posts to continue as in the past people (including me) would be banned. But look at the numbers of viewers and posters. It mean more eyes on advertisement and thus, mo $ mo $ mo $.
The TDC continues to spend money on advertising that is not necessary, unless you want to continue to flood the area with a lower class of vacation renter that spends less money, but creates more demand our local infrastructure and resources. It just won't work and I fear 30a is doomed to become PCB in less than five years. I hope I'm wrong, but just look around at the visitors that are here, they are NOT the same as 6 years ago. Those people saw the writing in the sand and have moved to other vacation destinations that are loving the fact they now get high end, high class tourist that follow rules and respect the property rights of others.
There is not going to be a simple answer here. The county will spend money, may win, may loose. It will be appealed, spend more money, etc., repeat. By the time anything is done, the aforementioned five years doomsday clock to PCB will have struck midnight.
steel1man
Beach Fanatic
As for Kurt's defense of them (resorts), just look at who runs the adds on his site... It's all hypocritical in its worst form. I'm quite frankly surprised he's allowed much of the posts to continue as in the past people (including me) would be banned. But look at the numbers of viewers and posters. It mean more eyes on advertisement and thus, mo$ mo $ mo $.
Very interesting....thanks for bringing this up...maybe this is why he (Kurt) dropped the old format. His excuse was the old app was always failing ,mine however was fine.
Most didn't like the new format switch, new site isn't even an app at all. It's simply SOWAL Forum in your tablet's memory....with ads.....
The kicker, (which I had missed) is now all about the ads ( moon creek studio llc)
So Mo$ Mo$mo$ is correct.
Very interesting....thanks for bringing this up...maybe this is why he (Kurt) dropped the old format. His excuse was the old app was always failing ,mine however was fine.
Most didn't like the new format switch, new site isn't even an app at all. It's simply SOWAL Forum in your tablet's memory....with ads.....
The kicker, (which I had missed) is now all about the ads ( moon creek studio llc)
So Mo$ Mo$mo$ is correct.
miznotebook
Beach Fanatic
John G, I'm in total agreement...there is no outrage by most individuals when they are face to face with LARGE developments such as Seaside, Watercolor, Watersound, Rosemary, etc. Do you remember, Kurt jumped on me ("sort of") about my idea of boycotting these areas and their restaurants and shops in an attempt (not realistic) of bringing the private vs. public beach to the forefront? He mentioned that "friends and neighbors" would be hurt who work in these establishments if they were boycotted. I know I have a point here, somewhere.
I recently took a walk on the beach from east of Rosemary Beach along all of that community's beachfront and onward to the west. I didn't see any private beach or no trespassing signs at Rosemary Beach, but apparently all their walkovers are private, so you can't get on or off the beach at Rosemary unless you are an owner or guest. I'm not sure what the situation is for the other large developments.
BlueMtnBeachVagrant
Beach Fanatic
John G, all your points are spot-on!
But...
In my opinion, Kurt deserves our full respect and appreciation for the service he provides. Yes he makes money. It's America the last I heard, And, as far as I know, he has never tried to quash any posts when he personally disagrees with them.
On the other hand, I have tried to moderate my posts somewhat when it comes to attacking certain individuals who are and have been very hypocritical regarding private property rights as I assume they are friends of his. But it's getting harder and harder with a 3rd real estate agent from the same agency who, as I and others see it, is part of the problem described by 1st in 59's post. I listened to her talk to the BCC and just cringed.
Is it hypocritical to accept money from these "private developments" and on the other hand take a position that the beach should be public based on customary use (or lack of)? Maybe. But I'm sure Kurt would accept money from me advertising our property as private beach front. So I think he's equal opportunity. Just follow the money!
With all that said, you just have to love the super accurate targeted ad that has been showing up on the side bar.
But...
In my opinion, Kurt deserves our full respect and appreciation for the service he provides. Yes he makes money. It's America the last I heard, And, as far as I know, he has never tried to quash any posts when he personally disagrees with them.
On the other hand, I have tried to moderate my posts somewhat when it comes to attacking certain individuals who are and have been very hypocritical regarding private property rights as I assume they are friends of his. But it's getting harder and harder with a 3rd real estate agent from the same agency who, as I and others see it, is part of the problem described by 1st in 59's post. I listened to her talk to the BCC and just cringed.
Is it hypocritical to accept money from these "private developments" and on the other hand take a position that the beach should be public based on customary use (or lack of)? Maybe. But I'm sure Kurt would accept money from me advertising our property as private beach front. So I think he's equal opportunity. Just follow the money!
With all that said, you just have to love the super accurate targeted ad that has been showing up on the side bar.
Last edited:
John G
Beach Fanatic
Miz: I believe that's exactly how it should work. Anyone can walk, unmolested, East and West along the entire beach. Access and walk Overs are completely PRIVATE and I don't think anyone's trying to argue any "Customary" use there. I hope not.
As long as people aren't back packing in supplies from East or West and "setting up camp" on Rosemary's beach, there's no issue. Same for others.
See, we are drilling down to the real issue. The Private Property Homes with the beaches are much closer to Public Accesses. Some homes are flanked on either side by public access both an easy walk. When tourists find the small strip in front of the access occupied, they feel entitled to move East or West and "set up camp" on Private Property.
Add to that this new breed of tourist that brings glass, leaves trash, etc., and its easy to see where once tolerant beach front owners are now not so tolerant.
This protecting their beach is really nothing more than a necessary response. Necessary beacuse our County has succeeded in marketing to a lower class of clientele and refuses to enforce code and law upon them when in the wrong.
BMB Vag: As for the Realtors, they are just as bad as lawyers. Talk out of both sides of mouth. One side will sell you a $2 million home with a Private Beach, but later that same day, over cocktails, the same agent will buddy up with friends and family and support Customary Use. Talk about an Ethical delemia...
Go to an open house on the beach and ask whomever is there some questions....its fun and you'll be amazed at the info you get. It's all about the sale.
As long as people aren't back packing in supplies from East or West and "setting up camp" on Rosemary's beach, there's no issue. Same for others.
See, we are drilling down to the real issue. The Private Property Homes with the beaches are much closer to Public Accesses. Some homes are flanked on either side by public access both an easy walk. When tourists find the small strip in front of the access occupied, they feel entitled to move East or West and "set up camp" on Private Property.
Add to that this new breed of tourist that brings glass, leaves trash, etc., and its easy to see where once tolerant beach front owners are now not so tolerant.
This protecting their beach is really nothing more than a necessary response. Necessary beacuse our County has succeeded in marketing to a lower class of clientele and refuses to enforce code and law upon them when in the wrong.
BMB Vag: As for the Realtors, they are just as bad as lawyers. Talk out of both sides of mouth. One side will sell you a $2 million home with a Private Beach, but later that same day, over cocktails, the same agent will buddy up with friends and family and support Customary Use. Talk about an Ethical delemia...
Go to an open house on the beach and ask whomever is there some questions....its fun and you'll be amazed at the info you get. It's all about the sale.