Public vs Private Beach [threads merged]

BMBvagrant, I apologize for not answering your question sooner, I was tied up all day yesterday. As for historical context, when I was a child, teen and college student we pretty much did whatever we wanted, we had bonfires, parties, camped on the beach and drove on the beach. The county only had 5-6 total deputies and they covered the entire county 24/7 so the chances of actually seeing one outside of DeFuniak Springs was small. From 1984-2000 I worked for Sheriff Quinn McMillian. When I started we had 24 deputies in the county. Except for Mirimar Beach many of the activities on the beach were unchanged and you would have been fired for arresting someone for Trespass on the white sand part of the beach. The only exception to that might have been around SanDestin but I do not remember a trespass arrest there either. There were many Disorderly Intoxication and Minors in Possession arrests though. I also worked for Sheriff Ralph Johnson from 2000-2006 and was County Corrections Director from 2006-2010, when the current sheriff was in office. Johnson changed the policy to arresting individuals for trespass on the beach with a signed complaint and this change was controversial. One captain was demoted and forced to retire in 2004 because he refused to go to Mirimar and arrest an alleged trespasser on the white sand. The captain's defense was that he called the judge and the judge told him no law was being broken. Eventually such an arrest actually occurred in 2007 and the arrested individual, a tourist from Atlanta, pled out in court. The policy reverted to much as it was prior to the Johnson administration after his defeat in 2008. Deputies also worked security off-duty for many developments on the beach beginning with Edgewater in 1988 but enforcing alleged Trespass was not part of the job. Keeping people from coming off the beach and getting in the hot tubs and pools of the various developments was though.

Danny, no worries! Some of us have a life (not me BTW).

You way more than answered my question...much appreciated. And I learned quite a bit about the sheriff's policy "evolution" through the years. It is very interesting that during the 1984-2000 period, the policy was for trespassing claims on the sandy beach to be basically ignored.

So whether or not a beach front private property owner tried to enforce their private property rights, it sounds like the sheriff's policy at that time was to look the other way. Apparently it didn't matter whether or not an owner tried to enforce no trespassing - they received no relief. I can possibly see beachfront owners not even bothering to enforce no trespassing during this period assuming this was widely known as it probably was - they just tolerated it.

When you mentioned the arrest in 2007, it reminded me about the hotly discussed thread "Led Away in Handcuffs". I just spent a couple hours re-reading and still have not reached the end.

Many of the issues discussed here were discussed then. I can at least say that my positions have been pretty much consistent then and now. I saw where I made a reference (as I did on this thread) to the TDC not clearly defining what was public and private beach possibly resulting in the arrest and other incidents. And some others agreed....walking to the end of a public access and not being able to go east or west without going on private property.

It's really worth a read if one is truly interested in this subject. There was an individual (I have no idea who he actually was) that cast blame on certain parties regarding "out of control growth" vs. the beach access problems. Although he partly blamed certain real estate individuals that were posting, I do understand his inference to the entire real estate industry including developers down here. The other blame singled out the county for lack of clarity regarding beach ownership. In my opinion, he was spot-on. Click here for post. (Bob Wells, this might help shed some light on the "problem" we recently discussed.)

After re-reading it, I can't believe it's been almost 9 years!

BMBvagrant, I apologize for not answering your question sooner, I was tied up all day yesterday. As for historical context, when I was a child, teen and college student we pretty much did whatever we wanted, we had bonfires, parties, camped on the beach and drove on the beach. The county only had 5-6 total deputies and they covered the entire county 24/7 so the chances of actually seeing one outside of DeFuniak Springs was small. From 1984-2000 I worked for Sheriff Quinn McMillian. When I started we had 24 deputies in the county. Except for Mirimar Beach many of the activities on the beach were unchanged and you would have been fired for arresting someone for Trespass on the white sand part of the beach. The only exception to that might have been around SanDestin but I do not remember a trespass arrest there either. There were many Disorderly Intoxication and Minors in Possession arrests though. I also worked for Sheriff Ralph Johnson from 2000-2006 and was County Corrections Director from 2006-2010, when the current sheriff was in office. Johnson changed the policy to arresting individuals for trespass on the beach with a signed complaint and this change was controversial. One captain was demoted and forced to retire in 2004 because he refused to go to Mirimar and arrest an alleged trespasser on the white sand. The captain's defense was that he called the judge and the judge told him no law was being broken. Eventually such an arrest actually occurred in 2007 and the arrested individual, a tourist from Atlanta, pled out in court. The policy reverted to much as it was prior to the Johnson administration after his defeat in 2008. Deputies also worked security off-duty for many developments on the beach beginning with Edgewater in 1988 but enforcing alleged Trespass was not part of the job. Keeping people from coming off the beach and getting in the hot tubs and pools of the various developments was though.

Sounds like Sheriff Johnson actually tried to protect Private Property while Sheriff Mike has chosen to do the "Walton Two Step" and create obstacles (adding to the clutter on the beach), as well as blaming everyone but himself for this situation.

Let me ask everyone on this list a question; do you actually know anyone that has been prevented from walking East to West along any beach in SoWal?

Simple question. Yes or No.

John G, to be fair, much of the current Walton policy is in line with the Okaloosa policy that was developed by Sheriff Larry Gilbert and enforced by sheriff's Morris and Ashley. If memory serves we were the only county in the panhandle attempting to enforce Trespass on the white sand in the 2000's. So the current policy is in line with our neighbors. In fact, I believe WCSO's policy still leans more towards the property owners than our neighbors.

Sounds like Sheriff Johnson actually tried to protect Private Property while Sheriff Mike has chosen to do the "Walton Two Step" and create obstacles (adding to the clutter on the beach), as well as blaming everyone but himself for this situation.

Let me ask everyone on this list a question; do you actually know anyone that has been prevented from walking East to West along any beach in SoWal?

Simple question. Yes or No.

No

Sounds like Sheriff Johnson actually tried to protect Private Property while Sheriff Mike has chosen to do the "Walton Two Step" and create obstacles (adding to the clutter on the beach), as well as blaming everyone but himself for this situation.

Let me ask everyone on this list a question; do you actually know anyone that has been prevented from walking East to West along any beach in SoWal?

Simple question. Yes or No.

No
Trying to sit below(seaward) the MHWL YES YES all over the beach

Sounds like Sheriff Johnson actually tried to protect Private Property while Sheriff Mike has chosen to do the "Walton Two Step" and create obstacles (adding to the clutter on the beach), as well as blaming everyone but himself for this situation.

Let me ask everyone on this list a question; do you actually know anyone that has been prevented from walking East to West along any beach in SoWal?

Simple question. Yes or No.

No.

No.

Beachfront property owners should have the right to protect their property. Dunes help protect the houses. Before the storms in 2005 there were a lot more dunes and a lot more beach area. The dunes and beach have not built back up as they did in the past. I firmly believe this is due to the number of people on the beaches. Beachfront owners put up sand fence to rebuild the dunes they once had. Without a barrier, many beach goers feel free to climb all over what dunes you do have, sit on your walkover, climb up on the neighbors walk over when they aren't home, etc. The foot traffic keeps the dunes from building. People stomp all over the sea oats and think nothing of it. Many think this doesn't happen very often but it happens numerous times per day especially during tourist season. People will come to the beach and want to sit right at the vegetation line on the dune. Teach them to go sit where the beach is flat and not on the dunes. It would be great to educate the public on these things instead of referring to beachfront property owners as "selfish".

Beachfront property owners should have the right to protect their property. Dunes help protect the houses. Before the storms in 2005 there were a lot more dunes and a lot more beach area. The dunes and beach have not built back up as they did in the past. I firmly believe this is due to the number of people on the beaches. Beachfront owners put up sand fence to rebuild the dunes they once had. Without a barrier, many beach goers feel free to climb all over what dunes you do have, sit on your walkover, climb up on the neighbors walk over when they aren't home, etc. The foot traffic keeps the dunes from building. People stomp all over the sea oats and think nothing of it. Many think this doesn't happen very often but it happens numerous times per day especially during tourist season. People will come to the beach and want to sit right at the vegetation line on the dune. Teach them to go sit where the beach is flat and not on the dunes. It would be great to educate the public on these things instead of referring to beachfront property owners as "selfish".

I agree 100% save the dunes !!!!! BUT YOU only own to the MHWL !! Which is normally 5-15' north of wet sand. Some of your signs are in the wet sand and you signed away your rights to a beach cop/vendor to rent umbrellas
who puts them south of your property line MHWL.
You can't have it ALL just what is deeded.
Where do you want the public to sit ? Public beach accesses are ruled by beach vendors.
#SavetheDunes!!! #savesomesand4me!!

Also I seriously doubt people sitting and walking next to the wet sand have Anything to do with beaches reclaiming sand after the hurricane. Wait till the BIG ONE you'll wish you had agreed to renourisment.

Steelman, your above post is 100% correct. I don't wish to see another hurricane but it will happen. Some new beach front owners have a rude awakening coming and you're right about renourishment.

Interestingly enough, "16 Beach Neighborhoods" are advertised by South Walton. In spite of the fact that they all boast the beautiful white sand, there are considerable differences that set them apart. One size really does NOT fit all on a number of controversial topics. Building dunes is not only legal, but encouraged. There are guidelines published to assist with maximizing the building of dunes. I, personally, have never seen anyone put "sand/snow" fencing down to the water line. Anyone who does that is likely to lose their sand fencing to an angry surf during just a regular storm, let alone a tropical storm or hurricane.

Regarding beach access and use, some constructive dialog on a number of controversial beach oriented topics might lead to resolution of or compromise on at least some of the issues. I see and hear many complaints about vendors. I wonder how much of the backlash from "private property" owners was created by the influx of so many vendors claiming to serve the public and tourists? That doesn't mean that there aren't places for vendors to be appreciated and successful, but they need to be properly vetted and staged.

There is also the problem with enforcement that has been mentioned many times in this forum. I can't help but believe that the tremendous increase in signs has almost everything to do with the Walton County Sheriff's Office SOP. How can people possibly know if they are settling on private property if there is nothing to indicate where public ends and private begins? My whole life (which is pretty lengthy), my family and friends have visited clearly marked public beaches in Santa Rosa, Okaloosa, and Walton Counties. I thought that was what everybody did. Now, I see that my family and friends may have been an anomaly. I can understand the desire for more public access and public beach, but I can also appreciate why people who have paid premium prices for property that included the beach (in addition to paying high taxes and insurance) would not appreciate having the public and tourists act as though they are entitled to the same benefits FREE that the property owner has paid dearly to call their own. Perhaps, I am just an optimist, but it seems to me that reasonable people could establish some guidelines that most people (property owners, inland residents, and tourists) could live with without spending hundreds of thousands of dollars litigating issues that just drive the citizens of Walton County apart and cause the tourists to questions whether this is the place to vacation.

Interestingly enough, "16 Beach Neighborhoods" are advertised by South Walton. In spite of the fact that they all boast the beautiful white sand, there are considerable differences that set them apart. One size really does NOT fit all on a number of controversial topics. Building dunes is not only legal, but encouraged. There are guidelines published to assist with maximizing the building of dunes. I, personally, have never seen anyone put "sand/snow" fencing down to the water line. Anyone who does that is likely to lose their sand fencing to an angry surf during just a regular storm, let alone a tropical storm or hurricane.

Regarding beach access and use, some constructive dialog on a number of controversial beach oriented topics might lead to resolution of or compromise on at least some of the issues. I see and hear many complaints about vendors. I wonder how much of the backlash from "private property" owners was created by the influx of so many vendors claiming to serve the public and tourists? That doesn't mean that there aren't places for vendors to be appreciated and successful, but they need to be properly vetted and staged.

There is also the problem with enforcement that has been mentioned many times in this forum. I can't help but believe that the tremendous increase in signs has almost everything to do with the Walton County Sheriff's Office SOP. How can people possibly know if they are settling on private property if there is nothing to indicate where public ends and private begins? My whole life (which is pretty lengthy), my family and friends have visited clearly marked public beaches in Santa Rosa, Okaloosa, and Walton Counties. I thought that was what everybody did. Now, I see that my family and friends may have been an anomaly. I can understand the desire for more public access and public beach, but I can also appreciate why people who have paid premium prices for property that included the beach (in addition to paying high taxes and insurance) would not appreciate having the public and tourists act as though they are entitled to the same benefits FREE that the property owner has paid dearly to call their own. Perhaps, I am just an optimist, but it seems to me that reasonable people could establish some guidelines that most people (property owners, inland residents, and tourists) could live with without spending hundreds of thousands of dollars litigating issues that just drive the citizens of Walton County apart and cause the tourists to questions whether this is the place to vacation.

Agree, but why don t the owners just put up their Private Beach signs East to west along their southern property line aka MHWL. Then public would know they can't go north toward the residence.. End of problem.......

Agree, but why don t the owners just put up their Private Beach signs East to west along their southern property line aka MHWL. Then public would know they can't go north toward the residence.. End of problem.......

The MHWL for a property survey is done at a specific point in time. Using that line across 365 days can end up with the line IN the water, in the wet sand, or in the dry sand. If the surveyed MHWL on a property is in the water or near the water, signs are not practical placed at the surveyed MHWL. Near the vegetation line or at some reasonable distance from the wet sand (maybe 30-50 feet?) might be more feasible. What would be even nicer is to figure out some ways where signs on each property are not necessary, but perhaps groups of properties are marked by a relatively modest sign on each end. MHWL properties tend to be grouped, not always, but a lot of the time. Of course, the best of all worlds would be that everyone who used the beach was considerate and respectful and property owners felt like they could share their property without sacrificing rights in the long term.

Interestingly enough, "16 Beach Neighborhoods" are advertised by South Walton. In spite of the fact that they all boast the beautiful white sand, there are considerable differences that set them apart. One size really does NOT fit all on a number of controversial topics. Building dunes is not only legal, but encouraged. There are guidelines published to assist with maximizing the building of dunes. I, personally, have never seen anyone put "sand/snow" fencing down to the water line. Anyone who does that is likely to lose their sand fencing to an angry surf during just a regular storm, let alone a tropical storm or hurricane.

Regarding beach access and use, some constructive dialog on a number of controversial beach oriented topics might lead to resolution of or compromise on at least some of the issues. I see and hear many complaints about vendors. I wonder how much of the backlash from "private property" owners was created by the influx of so many vendors claiming to serve the public and tourists? That doesn't mean that there aren't places for vendors to be appreciated and successful, but they need to be properly vetted and staged.

There is also the problem with enforcement that has been mentioned many times in this forum. I can't help but believe that the tremendous increase in signs has almost everything to do with the Walton County Sheriff's Office SOP. How can people possibly know if they are settling on private property if there is nothing to indicate where public ends and private begins? My whole life (which is pretty lengthy), my family and friends have visited clearly marked public beaches in Santa Rosa, Okaloosa, and Walton Counties. I thought that was what everybody did. Now, I see that my family and friends may have been an anomaly. I can understand the desire for more public access and public beach, but I can also appreciate why people who have paid premium prices for property that included the beach (in addition to paying high taxes and insurance) would not appreciate having the public and tourists act as though they are entitled to the same benefits FREE that the property owner has paid dearly to call their own. Perhaps, I am just an optimist, but it seems to me that reasonable people could establish some guidelines that most people (property owners, inland residents, and tourists) could live with without spending hundreds of thousands of dollars litigating issues that just drive the citizens of Walton County apart and cause the tourists to questions whether this is the place to vacation.

Well said.

The MHWL for a property survey is done at a specific point in time. Using that line across 365 days can end up with the line IN the water, in the wet sand, or in the dry sand. If the surveyed MHWL on a property is in the water or near the water, signs are not practical placed at the surveyed MHWL. Near the vegetation line or at some reasonable distance from the wet sand (maybe 30-50 feet?) might be more feasible. What would be even nicer is to figure out some ways where signs on each property are not necessary, but perhaps groups of properties are marked by a relatively modest sign on each end. MHWL properties tend to be grouped, not always, but a lot of the time. Of course, the best of all worlds would be that everyone who used the beach was considerate and respectful and property owners felt like they could share their property without sacrificing rights in the long term.

To everyone:

That is one beautiful, articulate statement!

I wish I could just stop there but I can't. I now "tremble in fear" if I were to see someone setting up on our private beach. If I run them off, then I'm viewed as a bad neighbor. If I don't run them off, then I'm haunted by the concept of customary use and the associated requirement of uninterrupted use to validate it.

I've said many times in the past that I have never ran anyone off of our beach. BUT I'm not saying others in our area have not. It's difficult to tell a public straggler from an invited guest. Who wants to run up and down their beach all day long asking everyone where they are staying, assuming they were giving you an honest answer?

But the above bolded succinct statement from FactorFiction is exactly why most everyone has been taking such measures as signs, security guards, chains, etc., to make sure that the property is protected from any public use.

My greatest fear regarding all of this is for my and my neighbors' property to become inundated by the "public" to any degree like the private beach immediately to the east and west of BMB Regional access. It would definitely compromise my "quiet enjoyment of private property" as well as my paying guests that WE have enjoyed for so very long. This would compromise our rentals and ultimately our value. It can't be separated.

Agree, but why don t the owners just put up their Private Beach signs East to west along their southern property line aka MHWL. Then public would know they can't go north toward the residence.. End of problem.......

I can see right through this ridiculous question and obviously won't add anything else to the one answer so far.

How about stating or agreeing "for the record" that the 3 accesses on Blue Mountain Road to the west of the regional access are indeed available for use by the general public? Would that be asking too much for you to correct your previous assertion(s) that they are privately owned?

Call me crazy, but I thought you wanted more public beach for the public.

Why would you post such misleading statements?

steel1man, as much as it greatly pains me, I do fully agree with you regarding eliminating vending from public beaches.

If we SHARE this view, it must be RIGHT! Right? Right.

After hunting for an appropriate smiley for steel1man I noticed this:



10 years ago I used to see in the above picture 2 kids playing beachball and 2 kids building a "selfie".

Now, it's possible that I see 2 individuals legally occupying space in state owned lands just south of the MHWL and 2 other individuals trespassing on dry sand property north of the MHWL who are jeopardizing our legal defense of uninterrupted use and should be asked to leave so that we don't lose the quiet enjoyment rights to our private property to customary use.

I'm just kidding. Don't pick it apart unless you're kidding.

I agree 100% save the dunes !!!!! BUT YOU only own to the MHWL !!.....

....You can't have it ALL just what is deeded......

Finally a love fest. Are you saying you finally see things my way?

....Wait till the BIG ONE you'll wish you had agreed to renourisment.

Now brace yourself. Make sure you're holding on to something and take a deep breath. Ready?
.
.
.
.
Really ready?
.
.
.
.
I fully agree with you if the dry sandy beach is reduced to the point that it cannot be enjoyably used. By the way, I'd say in terms of erosion, we had 2 BIG ones (big enough) back to back + tropical storms and the beach recovered, not fully of course, but quicker than anyone thought.

Peace and love be with you.

The dunes and beach have not built back up as they did in the past. I firmly believe this is due to the number of people on the beaches.

If you mean that too many dunes have been destroyed and replaced by buildings and that more people come here then you are right. If you mean that the number of people recreating on the sand has anything to do with it is just wrong. The amount of beachfront development has destroyed the ecosystem and the ability of the beaches to repair themselves. Just look at the state of the beaches in the state parks compared to areas where dunes have been replaced by buildings.

If you mean that too many dunes have been destroyed and replaced by buildings and that more people come here then you are right. If you mean that the number of people recreating on the sand has anything to do with it is just wrong. The amount of beachfront development has destroyed the ecosystem and the ability of the beaches to repair themselves. Just look at the state of the beaches in the state parks compared to areas where dunes have been replaced by buildings.

Mike, FWIW, I agree for the most part - probably surprisingly to others. And of course and unfortunately, much of this observation is in hindsight by most. And our area is not unique to many of America's coastal communities.

I know you didn't bring it up, but this particular discussion is probably more appropriate for another thread.

Mike, FWIW, I agree for the most part - probably surprisingly to others. And of course and unfortunately, much of this observation is in hindsight by most. And our area is not unique to many of America's coastal communities.

I know you didn't bring it up, but this particular discussion is probably more appropriate for another thread.

Bay-grunt who die and made you queen??

I previously mentioned a link to a post from 2007 in the thread, "Led Away in Handcuffs". In my opinion, it's worth reposting it below in its entirety as it very accurately hits the nail on the head regarding a significant part of the "blame" on the current situation.

From 1st in 59 on July 15, 2007:

The problem didn't start with the owners of private beach areas. It started with real estate agents and developers - people like Bobby J & Smiling Joe. When they're selling property down here, one of the perks they love to trumpet is access to the beach. Some developers advertise it before they even have beach access. Examples of that practice are legion on this site.

I doubt even a handful of realtors in the interest of full disclosure are honest enough to tell potential purchasers what "access" really, legally means. Wouldn't that kill a deal instantly if they said, "Yes, you have access, but I need to explain to you that the beach on either side of the access is privately owned and you might not be able to use it?" Ever done that Bobby J or Smiling Joe? I bet not. The profits are better when the buyers have this idylic vision of "their" beach.

I think there's been a lot of incomplete disclosure going on down here for years by knowing real estate agents and developers. They're the ones that have created the problem by over-developoing and over-selling areas that are already congested. And then they want to smugly turn around and blame the Commissioners as the problem for not stopping them. When the tourists come and rent these properties and are crawling over each other on the beaches and spilling over onto private beach property, Bobby J and Smiling Joe stick their chests out as defenders of the very problem they helped create. Please!

Perhaps a stall or even decline in growth is a good thing for the community and the health of the beaches? The only downside I can see is that it gives realtors like Bobby J and Smiling Joe too much time to genreate endless self-righteous, self-serving posts. Maybe a class action suit brought by all the cheated buyers against some of these unscrupulous realtors/developers would do more good than a silly 60's style sit in.

Bay-grunt who die and made you queen??

steel1man, is this the best you can come up with to throw smoke on your false claims of the 3 public beach accesses on Blue Mountain Road that you claimed are private that I'm calling you out on? Trying to diminish my posts and positions with juvenile gibberish is just is not helping your "cause" in my opinion. And honestly I don't know what your cause is anymore.