Seawalls

I believe that every point ecopal makes is valid. BMBV, I know you are trying to do your best in a very difficult situation, and you seem to be putting forth a good-faith effort, but you lose me when you talk about how one continuous seawall would be ideal. That just sounds like a disaster and once again, would be solely for the benefit of the gulf front structures, because the beach itself would be in danger of disappearing.

I don't think there's anything wrong with looking into a plan where the state or county would buy out owners on an as needed basis, over time. I read in that Tampa Tribune article SJ posted awhile back where someone suggested not just paying the owners but throwing in some interior land as compensation, and that makes sense too, given that there is so much state owned property along and nearby 30-A.

"I know you are trying to do your best in a very difficult situation, and you seem to be putting forth a good-faith effort, but you lose me when you talk about how one continuous seawall would be ideal. "

This is just my opinion based on the NOW EXISTING myriad varieties of walls that are out there. Seperate your (and my) dislike for walls from the reality of today. I am more of a factual type of person. If I know walls are going up (regardless of all the debate behind them), then I would much prefer continuity in their construction over the somewhat random end products we see now.

"I read in that Tampa Tribune article SJ posted awhile back where someone suggested not just paying the owners but throwing in some interior land as compensation, and that makes sense too, given that there is so much state owned property along and nearby 30-A"

This sounds like a pretty decent idea. If they were to exchange with me, land or land and money, I would have to seriously consider the proposition. NOT A BAD IDEA! Problem is I'm just one person. It's going to be a tough sale, however, to many of the gulf front owners.

Oh yea...
"I believe that every point ecopal makes is valid."
This is the only problem I have with your post. Ecopal's last post simply throws out incendiary comments with no real solutions explored. How do you debate statements like am I going to pay for my neighbor's home when their home is destroyed as a result of my retaining wall. What a load of crap! How many homes have already been destroyed adjacent to NO retaining walls? Any home built after 1985, theoretically, can survive even if completely undermined. AGAIN just look at some of the homes at Gulf Trace, Dune Allen, etc. And for the record, all my neighbors have retaining walls anyway.

Here's what I believe
All this hostility which is directed at gulf front property owners would be better focused on the State of Florida. It is DEP, along with FWL, who says who can and can not have a retaining wall. It's that simple.

Some posters do indeed just rant. Perhaps if they truly understand what they're talking about and truly do love and care for the beach (which I believe - love and care part), then perhaps their negative energies would be better channeled toward making a real difference by writing their congressman and senators. What a novel idea!!!


Otherwise, thanks for the mostly thoughtful post !

To BMBvagrant: It is no surprise to me that you don?t have a response to my questions because you obviously never considered the effects of your seawalls on other people's property and the beach.

SJ said: ?I believe it was I who first brought up the idea of having GF property owners having ID labels on each piece of walkovers and seawall so that when they are destroyed, the County will know who to charge. After thinking about it further, I realize that inland people whose homes may be ripped apart by the same storms Mother Nature sends our way would be in the same category as the GF owners regarding the mess to clean.?

To SJ: I am disappointed in your faulty logic- I will just blame it on too much StPatty?s cheer tonight.
You need to make a distinction between beach walkovers which are built for sound ecological reasons and seawalls which are well known for damaging beaches.
Walkovers reduce beach erosion by providing a way to access the beach without disturbing the dunes & beach. Seawalls are notorious for contributing to beach scouring and are only put in for the purpose of protecting a private property.

You also confuse peoples homes -both inland and beach front homes- with seawalls which inappropriately intrude on the beach
environment. Debris from storm ravaged homes whether inland or beach front are the results of an unavoidable tragedy. You can not say the same of the debris of seawalls.

To SJ: I am disappointed in your faulty logic- I will just blame it on too much StPatty?s cheer tonight.
You need to make a distinction between beach walkovers which are built for sound ecological reasons and seawalls which are well known for damaging beaches.
Walkovers reduce beach erosion by providing a way to access the beach without disturbing the dunes & beach. Seawalls are notorious for contributing to beach scouring and are only put in for the purpose of protecting a private property.

You also confuse peoples homes -both inland and beach front homes- with seawalls which inappropriately intrude on the beach
environment. Debris from storm ravaged homes whether inland or beach front are the results of an unavoidable tragedy. You can not say the same of the debris of seawalls.

Now don't you go putting words into my mouth, ecopal. :nono1: Perhaps you misread what I have been stating for the past year and a half. No St Patty's for me today.

I am against seawalls along the Gulf for several reasons which I have mentioned numerous times - while still trying to remain objective, I have not changed my opinion.

Regarding unavoidability, you building a home destroyed by a Cat 4 Hurricane is no more unavoidable than a seawall being destroyed by one. Building a seawall is a choice, just as you building a home 1 mile inland is a choice. That is pretty simple math - add it up.

Smiling Joe:

I have indeed read many of your posts. Are you paid a commission per post by Kurt?

From your previous post "....having ID labels on each piece of walkovers and seawall so that when they are destroyed"

After Hurricane Dennis and Ivan, the majority of the debris that I saw accumulated at the "usual" locations were decks and walkovers. To tag every walkover would be a waste since the majority of walkovers were wiped out anyway. Do you really think it cost that much to clean up this debris relative to all the other losses that are typically associated with a hurricane? Don't forget that most of the county walkovers were also destroyed... not to mention some of the "public" facilities, especially near Miramar. All these required clean-up.

Here's a suggestion to the clean-up expense (isn't constructive dialog what this is all about?)....Why not include a $500 "recovery" fee for every walkover permit. Walkovers, by nature of their construction, are dispensible. I think that would take care of your concerns relative to walkovers.

Now about the good 'ole retaining walls...
Many people seem to predict the demise of most of the retaining walls as if they are as vulnerable as walkovers. AGAIN, in my opinion, this is a bad assumption. I do agree that some if not all of the wood retaining walls that were not adequately anchored, will end up being debris. What I can guarantee you is that these owners of the "cheaper" wood walls WILL NOT MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE TWICE. It's too expensive when you add the cost of the wall and sand. The back-fill sand ends up being MORE expensive than the wood wall itself. Oh well, I tried to convince a neighbor of this, but to no avail.

People, who installed wood walls, did so to save money. In their short-sightedness to save money, "corners were cut" with the anchoring system. The anchoring system is everything when it comes to retaining wall strength. So I continue to believe that the wood walls will end up being the majority of the debris.

Oh yea, guess who built the majority of the wood walls?

To BMBvagrant: It is no surprise to me that you don?t have a response to my questions because you obviously never considered the effects of your seawalls on other people's property and the beach.

SJ said: ?I believe it was I who first brought up the idea of having GF property owners having ID labels on each piece of walkovers and seawall so that when they are destroyed, the County will know who to charge. After thinking about it further, I realize that inland people whose homes may be ripped apart by the same storms Mother Nature sends our way would be in the same category as the GF owners regarding the mess to clean.?

To SJ: I am disappointed in your faulty logic- I will just blame it on too much StPatty?s cheer tonight.
You need to make a distinction between beach walkovers which are built for sound ecological reasons and seawalls which are well known for damaging beaches.
Walkovers reduce beach erosion by providing a way to access the beach without disturbing the dunes & beach. Seawalls are notorious for contributing to beach scouring and are only put in for the purpose of protecting a private property.

You also confuse peoples homes -both inland and beach front homes- with seawalls which inappropriately intrude on the beach
environment. Debris from storm ravaged homes whether inland or beach front are the results of an unavoidable tragedy. You can not say the same of the debris of seawalls.

Perhaps you should change your handle to ECHO pal. Your repetitive crap is starting to annoy me. Guess what?? You've have succeeded in the art of ANNOYANCE PUNISHMENT for a gulf front property owner who is simply trying to protect his property by the rules and laws granted to us by the GREAT STATE OF FLORIDA !! Sleep well tonight, young soldier.

Unfortunately, I have a gut-feeling that all these "theories" WILL be put to the test this season...Man v.s. Mother Nature--my money is riding on Mother Nature.

Oh, and about that statement: "Any home built after 1985, theoretically, can survive even if completely undermined"

BEFORE: OCT 23, 2005

AFTER: OCT 25, 2005

To SJ:

Seawalls do not equate with peoples homes. People need to live in a house somewhere. It is a necessary impact on the environment. Peoples homes can be in the way of mother nature anywhere whether it is by a tornado, earthquake, forest fire etc.

In contrast a seawall is a deleterious and unnecessary intrusion of the beach ecology. Therefore the debris of seawalls is an additional negative consequence of their inappropriate installation and thus deserves a more severe level of scrutiny than debris from someone's home.

To SJ:

Seawalls do not equate with peoples homes. People need to live in a house somewhere. It is a necessary impact on the environment. Peoples homes can be in the way of mother nature anywhere whether it is by a tornado, earthquake, forest fire etc.

In contrast a seawall is a deleterious and unnecessary intrusion of the beach ecology. Therefore the debris of seawalls is an additional negative consequence of their inappropriate installation and thus deserves a more severe level of scrutiny than debris from someone's home.

Make up your freakin' mind...
The walls will fail and cause debris.
The walls will survive and cause my neighbors home to fall in.
Which is it ??

You actually brought a smile to my face. I'm starting to enjoy this!! So much for the annoyance factor. :funn:

Shelly,

These are indeed scary pictures. Was this house weakened with elevated waves hitting the structure directly? I would estimate the home in the picture is sitting only about 16 feet above sea level. It is very easy to imagine a 15 foot storm surge with waves riding on top of that just battering the hell of the house. On the other hand, the other 3 adjacent homes in the background appear to be still standing on their pilings. Keep in mind that Navarre Beach is also a barrier island that truly shifts about over time.

We at Blue Mountain Beach obviously sit much much higher than Navarre Beach and it is ALL that land we are trying to preserve from the "cake knife" cutting action of the "virgin" yellow sand bluff (as opposed to recently developed pure white sand dunes within the last several centuries) after each tropical storm and hurricane.

I know you are just referring to homes surviving that were built after 1985 regarding pilings and newer construction techniques. One question, just because this home is sitting on pilings, do you truly know when it was built? I'll admit it looks younger than 20 years.

But I don't think one can compare Navarre Beach with, let's say, Blue Mountain Beach (in my strong opinion). The homes at Navarre's elevation were directly subjected to brutal conditions. Had my land not disappeared below my structure, we would have suffered absolutely no damage after Dennis.

Thanks for sharing the pictures and provoking some thought!

Shelly,

As I was looking at more of the pictures you referred to, I found http://www.pbase.com/kennywilder/image/55240052

This house is the one you see in the far background of the one you referred to. It appears to be standing perfectly straight. Bottom line, a properly designed home CAN withstand undermining even at this low elevation.

I just hope that "we are not put through the test".

I did misspeak a bit above. I don't really believe you should pay to fix an undermined neighbor's house, especially if you are following the rule of law, but I agree that all of ecopal's concerns are valid, as to what will or may happen during the next major storm. Seawalls/retaining walls are very likely to affect neighboring structures without them in a negative way, based on all the evidence, though I guess in your case everyone around you is armored this may not apply to you specifically.

I'm not an argumentative person. I'm just lamenting. And by the way, in "eminent domain," gulf front owners would not have a choice. It's defined as "expropriation of private property without the owner's consent" in return for "just compensation." As ecopal says it is risky to own gulf front. We have all seen it in the past couple of years. To protect the entire area some people just might have to lose their property, again on an as-needed basis.

Shelly,

As I was looking at more of the pictures you referred to, I found http://www.pbase.com/kennywilder/image/55240052

This house is the one you see in the far background of the one you referred to. It appears to be standing perfectly straight. Bottom line, a properly designed home CAN withstand undermining even at this low elevation.

I just hope that "we are not put through the test".

sitting here on the boat (on the tmobile data card and it is working great with 3 bars! - left at 1 am - "got ready couldn't wait any longer screw it lets go" - and had a waffle instead of an omelet ), positioned behind the island in the 'snake', just waiting for the fish to come by, looking at the beautiful canal and bayside, it almost seems like you folks are talking about something on another planet

when we put the boat in this morning, and all the way down here, nature has healed itself except for a fallen tree or so that is still visible

the only things that haven't healed over are the human piles of crap that still show the entropy that comes from age and time

It is so beautiful down here, why would you want to ruin it in the first place by building a blooming house on it - I vote the feds make the whole coast (everything south of the southernmost main road) a greenway-type park then raze, landscape and replant - it would be so beautiful, but i guess its too late, the brown sand is already there, and in a year or two the beach will be more than likely be gone or littered so badly with debris that you can't even see what's left of it

It just makes me so sad - enough of this crap, I say all the private TDC's should sue the county for letting people build gulfwise of the main road in the first place, make it a greenway and boot 'em all out for 10 cents on the dollar

what? "Bottom line, a properly designed home CAN withstand undermining even at this low elevation."

wait a minute! ez, is that you? your 'annyoance factor' is rising beyong mine! (didn't think that was possible)

I'm turning this thing off before I throw it in the water

mmmmm....salty water

tiny little waves lapping the side of the boat

the other half snoring very quietly below

a perfect mai-tai with fresh pineapple

a fine day even if it does rain

I just don't care anymore

screw your retaining wall, it isn't even a seawall in the first placeprobably backfilled it with brown sand and broken septic tanks

Walton Sun:

The Walton County Board of County Commissioners voted to move forward with a habitat conservation plan grant application.
The grant would help in obtaining necessary incidental take permits for 241 property seawall applicants.
Following Hurricane Dennis, which made landfall July 10, 2005, the Walton Board of County Commissioners was authorized through Department of Environmental Protection to approve temporary armoring. Federal law required there be permits for the incidental taking of wildlife habitat caused by the structures.
Before an incidental take permit is issued, a HCP must accompany the request.
Homeowners have three options, which include waiting for the federal government to ?take some action,? applying for individual take permits or having the county and homeowners work together, County Attorney David Hallman said.
The county is exploring the option of creating a unified incidental take permit application.
Environmental consult- ing firm Ecological Associates estimated it would cost approximately $250,000 to prepare a combined HCP for Walton County residents and may take a number of years.
However, the county and citizens have not decided how they want to proceed with permit application.
Since the county can facilitate the grant money, commissioners decided to move forward with the grant application. The deadline is April 1.
?I hate to see this deadline pass and there?s not opportunity for assistance,? Commissioner Larry Jones said.
Some homeowners have expressed increasing frustration with the hurdles involved in the process of securing their homes.
?I don?t understand. There?s nothing left on our beach that looks like a living creature, except humans,? homeowner Vera Streiff said, who spent more than $100,000 restoring her home following Dennis. ?All we want is to follow the rules and they keep coming up with another bureaucratic demand.?
Attorney Gary Shipman, who represents some beachfront property owners, believes there should be more investigation into other options, including the county applying for a permit that would cover the entire shoreline. As it stands, the county is only looking to permit existing armoring structures.
?I think there should be more discussion on why they aren?t discussing a blanket plan,? he said.
The county will continue to discuss options with homeowners.
?I do think there is an opportunity for everyone to come together,? Hallman said. ?We can satisfy environmentalist groups and homeowners and it in a way that isn?t unfair to the taxpayer.?
Lorna Patrick, a wild life biologist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife, said the county is moving in a positive direction.
?So far, so good. Things seem real positive right now,? she said.
Hallman said at this point anyone who constructed seawalls should have some type of legal representation.
?If you haven?t talked to a lawyer yet, I?d be real nervous,? he said.

Smiling Joe:

I have indeed read many of your posts. Are you paid a commission per post by Kurt?

From your previous post "....having ID labels on each piece of walkovers and seawall so that when they are destroyed"

After Hurricane Dennis and Ivan, the majority of the debris that I saw accumulated at the "usual" locations were decks and walkovers. To tag every walkover would be a waste since the majority of walkovers were wiped out anyway. Do you really think it cost that much to clean up this debris relative to all the other losses that are typically associated with a hurricane? Don't forget that most of the county walkovers were also destroyed... not to mention some of the "public" facilities, especially near Miramar. All these required clean-up.

Here's a suggestion to the clean-up expense (isn't constructive dialog what this is all about?)....Why not include a $500 "recovery" fee for every walkover permit. Walkovers, by nature of their construction, are dispensible. I think that would take care of your concerns relative to walkovers.

I do not disagree with your assessment of the walkovers and storm debris -- for those same reasons, I have changed my opinion on charging for debris removal of walkovers (BTW,it is my understanding that the TDC pays for this clean up of the beaches, and that $$$ comes from bed tax), and I think you add a great suggestion of a recovery fee of some sort for things such as walkovers. Can you imagine the red tape involved in sorting through piles of debris like I saw at Oyster Lake last year to try to identify and take an accounting of the debris? That alone would cost more than it is worth.

Yes, Kurt pays me $100 per post, but he is way behind on his payments - close to $1 Million . Actually, he pays me in all the free SoWal.com stickers that I can put on my car, and he says that you, too, can be paid to post. :funn:

Oh yea, guess who built the majority of the wood walls?

Ooooh, I know, I know! The same County Commissioner who dumped all of the illegal sand on the beach, then had the County pay him to hall some of the illegal sand off the beach. He happens to be the same Commissioner who has the the name of fish eggs. RO.

Just Vote NO RO!

To SJ:

Seawalls do not equate with peoples homes. People need to live in a house somewhere. It is a necessary impact on the environment. Peoples homes can be in the way of mother nature anywhere whether it is by a tornado, earthquake, forest fire etc.

In contrast a seawall is a deleterious and unnecessary intrusion of the beach ecology. Therefore the debris of seawalls is an additional negative consequence of their inappropriate installation and thus deserves a more severe level of scrutiny than debris from someone's home.

I do understand that people need to live in a house, but it is a choice that I make to live close enough to the beaches, that my house may be destroyed by these strong storms. Do you disagree? I mean, couldn't I decide to live in Defuniak Springs where the chances of my house surviving a Cat 4 storm would be much better? We all make choices in life, and we must learn to suffer the consequences of making bad choices. There are no wrong choices in life, only choices. The good or bad rests only in the minds of the beholder. ;-) I think you are speaking with an angry and frustrated tone. Remember to breathe.

I understand your position, there is no need to repeat it again, and again, and again, like Shelly often does with Real Estate. We simply have a difference of opinion on a minor thing as labeling each piece of debris.

Shelly,

These are indeed scary pictures. Was this house weakened with elevated waves hitting the structure directly? I would estimate the home in the picture is sitting only about 16 feet above sea level. It is very easy to imagine a 15 foot storm surge with waves riding on top of that just battering the hell of the house. On the other hand, the other 3 adjacent homes in the background appear to be still standing on their pilings. Keep in mind that Navarre Beach is also a barrier island that truly shifts about over time.

Keep in mind that SoWal is also a barrier island due to the Intercoastal being cut through on the north side. It just has spots of higher elevations than most barrier islands.

I'm not an argumentative person. I'm just lamenting. And by the way, in "eminent domain," gulf front owners would not have a choice. It's defined as "expropriation of private property without the owner's consent" in return for "just compensation." As ecopal says it is risky to own gulf front. We have all seen it in the past couple of years. To protect the entire area some people just might have to lose their property, again on an as-needed basis.

Well, if the gov't is going to take the land, they better do it quickly while the prices are at the..., how much was the discount Shelly, 40%? :funn:

Well, if the gov't is going to take the land, they better do it quickly while the prices are at the..., how much was the discount Shelly, 40%? :funn:

BMBVagrant says: ? Make up your freakin' mind...
The walls will fail and cause debris.
The walls will survive and cause my neighbors home to fall in.
Which is it ?? ?

to BMBvagrant: All of the above

BMBVagrant says: ?Perhaps you should change your handle to ECHO pal. Your repetitive crap is starting to annoy me. Guess what?? You've have succeeded in the art of ANNOYANCE PUNISHMENT for a gulf front property owner who is simply trying to protect his property by the rules and laws granted to us by the GREAT STATE OF FLORIDA !! Sleep well tonight, young soldier.?

Dear BMBVagrant: If I am being repetitive it is because it is obvious from your responses that you still don?t get it. I suggest you reread all my posts as a remedial exercise. Frankly I don?t think your problem is cognitive but an emotional denial of reality.

I find your responses inappropriately arrogant, angry and condescending. Also, your self righteousness is nauseating.

How one responds to criticism is a good test of character. It quickly unveiled yours.

In addition, just because something is ?allowed? doesn?t make it right. You have to use some personal judgment and take responsibility for it and and be prepared to suffer the consequences. It is inconsistent to condemn the government in one instance and then in the next use them as an excuse for your actions.

*

sitting here on the boat (on the tmobile data card and it is working great with 3 bars! - left at 1 am - "got ready couldn't wait any longer screw it lets go" - and had a waffle instead of an omelet ), positioned behind the island in the 'snake', just waiting for the fish to come by, looking at the beautiful canal and bayside, it almost seems like you folks are talking about something on another planet

when we put the boat in this morning, and all the way down here, nature has healed itself except for a fallen tree or so that is still visible

the only things that haven't healed over are the human piles of crap that still show the entropy that comes from age and time

It is so beautiful down here, why would you want to ruin it in the first place by building a blooming house on it - I vote the feds make the whole coast (everything south of the southernmost main road) a greenway-type park then raze, landscape and replant - it would be so beautiful, but i guess its too late, the brown sand is already there, and in a year or two the beach will be more than likely be gone or littered so badly with debris that you can't even see what's left of it

It just makes me so sad - enough of this crap, I say all the private TDC's should sue the county for letting people build gulfwise of the main road in the first place, make it a greenway and boot 'em all out for 10 cents on the dollar

what? "Bottom line, a properly designed home CAN withstand undermining even at this low elevation."

wait a minute! ez, is that you? your 'annyoance factor' is rising beyong mine! (didn't think that was possible)

I'm turning this thing off before I throw it in the water

mmmmm....salty water

tiny little waves lapping the side of the boat

the other half snoring very quietly below

a perfect mai-tai with fresh pineapple

a fine day even if it does rain

I just don't care anymore

screw your retaining wall, it isn't even a seawall in the first placeprobably backfilled it with brown sand and broken septic tanks

I like you.

You paint a perfect picture of your day today. I too love boating, fishing, looking at beautiful surroundings, beer (not mai-tai's), etc.

However, your "perfect mai-tai's with fresh pineapple" and the sun have found their target. You are obviously pissed and delirious.

What part of my quote "Bottom line, a properly designed home CAN withstand undermining even at this low elevation." is not true as it relates to the context of the post? If you THINK that I'm implying else other than the logical observation that was in the discussion at the time, you're ABSOLUTELY wrong.

The POINT (remember we discuss to make points and share views), was that EchoEchoPal asked if I was going to pay for my neighbor's house when it is destroyed by increased erosion caused by my wall. I stated that if it was a house built after 1985, then theoretically it should survive regardless (THIS IS D.E.P. LOGIC, not mine!!!).

Then SHELLY shares some pictures with us from Navarre Beach showing how a house that we assume is built after 1985 has indeed collapsed. Then I showed her where there were other houses adjacent to this one that were much much larger, actually survive. It was just that picking one "example" (house that failed in her picture) and then saying it's the norm is not fair in any arguement.

The remaining homes that are still standing with minimal damage, support "D.E.P.'s" position (not mine) that post 1985 can survive even if completely undermined. NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS. I'm just the messenger. READ the DEP rules regarding retaining walls in between your mai-tai's.

Regarding that damn old dark sand....
AGAIN and AGAIN the title of this thread is SEAWALLS !!! Quit muddying (PUN REALLY INTENDED) up the water with all this dark sand crap. Somehow, you and a few others seem to imply that all retaining wall owners are responsible for the actions of a few. MOST of us truly resent that (but coming from you, I don't take it too seriously). Why don't you simply do some research, and simply EXPOSE those who you think are "ir"responsible. If you're right you will (based on your tone) receive immense satisfaction. If you're wrong you'll simply just get sued for slander.

As you drift about in your boat, don't forget to put suntan lotion on, as I know you're going to be TOTALLY absorbed in all that good DEP reading that I suggested and just forget where you are.

By the way, I'm not EZ. ;-) I wouldn't hire him based on my meeting with him and some other reasons. By the way, I guess you must know, since you are "ONE" with the beach, he was "fired" by the large project owners he was involved with.

Be safe.

I do not disagree with your assessment of the walkovers and storm debris -- for those same reasons, I have changed my opinion on charging for debris removal of walkovers (BTW,it is my understanding that the TDC pays for this clean up of the beaches, and that $$$ comes from bed tax), and I think you add a great suggestion of a recovery fee of some sort for things such as walkovers. Can you imagine the red tape involved in sorting through piles of debris like I saw at Oyster Lake last year to try to identify and take an accounting of the debris? That alone would cost more than it is worth.

Yes, Kurt pays me $100 per post, but he is way behind on his payments - close to $1 Million . Actually, he pays me in all the free SoWal.com stickers that I can put on my car, and he says that you, too, can be paid to post. :funn:

I'm glad you are the one that mentioned that TDC (and the beach clean-up) is funded with the bed tax. I thought about mentioning this "small" fact but of course I'm completely biased at destroying the beach - therefore some of those out there would not believe me.

Kurt, you owe me 2 cents (commission) for the posts so far. I need these funds so that I can continue to give everyone else my 2 cents.

Thanks, SmilingJoe for being level-headed.

BMBVagrant says: ? Make up your freakin' mind...
The walls will fail and cause debris.
The walls will survive and cause my neighbors home to fall in.
Which is it ?? ?

to BMBvagrant: All of the above

BMBVagrant says: ?Perhaps you should change your handle to ECHO pal. Your repetitive crap is starting to annoy me. Guess what?? You've have succeeded in the art of ANNOYANCE PUNISHMENT for a gulf front property owner who is simply trying to protect his property by the rules and laws granted to us by the GREAT STATE OF FLORIDA !! Sleep well tonight, young soldier.?

Dear BMBVagrant: If I am being repetitive it is because it is obvious from your responses that you still don?t get it. I suggest you reread all my posts as a remedial exercise. Frankly I don?t think your problem is cognitive but an emotional denial of reality.

I find your responses inappropriately arrogant, angry and condescending. Also, your self righteousness is nauseating.

How one responds to criticism is a good test of character. It quickly unveiled yours.

In addition, just because something is ?allowed? doesn?t make it right. You have to use some personal judgment and take responsibility for it and and be prepared to suffer the consequences. It is inconsistent to condemn the government in one instance and then in the next use them as an excuse for your actions.

*

Stop taking EXLAX and take a chill pill! The only consequence I'm suffering right now is the same old simple-minded crap you contiuousy throw on this thread.

"I find your responses inappropriately arrogant, angry and condescending. Also, your self righteousness is nauseating."

I just slit my wrists.

If beach front owners (or any of the rest of us for that matter) lose their home as many Katrina victims did, FEMA will relocate them/us to a nice FEMA trailer village. Or if you are really lucky you might get to go to the Houston Astro dome which is personally recommended by Barbara Bush.

Also, why would the government buy beach front property that has been washed out to sea? Flood insurance does not cover the land your dwelling sits on. If they did it would be considered as distressed and blighted property and no beach front owner should expect the government to give them the property value of when it was a viable property.

In New Orleans eminent domain maybe used to take buildable land from owners at a fair price for the common good. How is it in the common good to give a beach front owner full pre-hurricane property value to a lot that is no longer there?

Well, if the gov't is going to take the land, they better do it quickly while the prices are at the..., how much was the discount Shelly, 40%? :funn:

That's Monty's estimation....me?...I just put my low-ball offer on the back of a business card and walk away.