Back to All About SoWal

Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

Reggie Gaskins avatar
Beach Lover
526,496 views2
upload_2019-4-25_8-30-52.jpeg
When you see a PCB or Destin bumper sticker, what thought immediately comes to mind? Probably same for all of us with any time spent here - nice, but it ain’t 30A! Do you remember why you started renting/visiting here? What was it? Remember when you bought your first 30A property? Why here?
Because it was DIFFERENT, right? Remember the words you used to describe it to family and friends as you invited them here? “Private” “Quiet” “Intimate” “Less crowded”. That wasn’t by accident. The entire genetic code of Sowal beaches is because of the private ownership and neighborhood beach personalities.
You could rent “private beach”. You could buy “private beach”. There wasn’t a free for all frat party atmosphere because of unlimited public beach access on the sands. That behavior was regulated by the privately owned property where such behavior was immediately squelched. And yet, by custom, no one was ever “Kicked off” of private beaches because owners don’t do that unless bad actors abuse the privilege.
Walton County has always had more than 50% PUBLIC beach. Still does. That hasn’t changed. There are now deliberately misleading fear tactics out there with scary words like “Quiet Title” and “Privatization”, neither of which have affected one single square inch of public beach, not one. Yet, the mob mentality, orchestrated by local carnival barkers eager for fame and notoriety, and dollars, have mislead the citizens and deliberately tried to divide the community in a shell game of Customary Use.
The fact is that the county outran the capabilities of local Commissioners to plan for growth 20 years ago, and we haven’t improved that talent to deal with it even yet. So the County, in failing to plan beach availability, tried to illegally claim private property as public, without following the laws requiring judicial oversight. The local Good Ol’ Boys overreached their authority and got caught by the adults in Tallahassee. So they then decides to sue 4,800 of Sowal citizens to take their property. That’s right, your tax money is being spent, and a lot of it, to SUE almost 5,000 of your neighbors, and steal what they agreed to purchase at a premium, and have a deed to prove it.
Don’t blame them please, they didn’t want or ask for this fight. They live here and care for these beaches just like you and me. Go meet them, they are truly the eclectic fabric of 30A. The signs they had to put up are just in defense of this new orchestrated public attack against them.
The bottom line is this: The minute you release the public to occupy all of Sowal beaches, you IMMEDIATELY get nasty Destin and PCB problems. How will you feel about that 30A sticker then? Nostalgic? Me too.

03BC6F35-C70B-476E-8581-BDFB287ECF68.jpeg

Replies

2,312
FloridaBeachBum avatar
Beach Fanatic
#127
Oh wait, Reggie, I misspoke. It appears that everybody on Sowal agrees with your rhetoric. That’s why there are so few members speaking out. Just a couple of numbskulls. Either that, or the rest of the members are enjoying the beach and getting ready for the trump* rally.
Name calling too? BRILLIANT! How can anyone not agree with that logic?
Lake View Too avatar
SoWal Insider
#128
Name calling too? BRILLIANT! How can anyone not agree with that logic?
No, no! I’m saying I’m the numbskull, and maybe Jodi too. I really didn’t grasp the vastness of you and Reggie’s intelligence. I now see that almost nobody else is on this thread because you are RIGHT. No, really! What a grasp of the Facts! What a perfect portrait of the Mob! Your mother must be so proud!

Edited

FloridaBeachBum avatar
Beach Fanatic
#129
No, no! I’m saying I’m the numbskull, ... Your mother must be so proud!
Really? Your are going to talk about family members too? Sad. Juvenile.
Reggie Gaskins avatar
Beach LoverAuthor
#130
No, no! I’m saying I’m the numbskull, and maybe Jodi too. I really didn’t grasp the vastness of you and Reggie’s intelligence. I now see that almost nobody else is on this thread because you are RIGHT. No, really! What a grasp of the Facts! What a perfect portrait of the Mob! Your mother must be so proud!
"Ah, you cursed brat! Look what you've done! I'm melting! Melting! Ohhhhh... What a world, what a world! Who ever thought a little girl like you could destroy my beautiful wickedness?! Ah, I'm going! Ahhh!"
Lake View Too avatar
SoWal Insider
#131
Really? Your are going to talk about family members too? Sad. Juvenile.
I’m saying nothing but good stuff about you and every member of your family. Bum, I think you are a stable genius, and on this thread you are Right. Just the shear number of posts and the word count makes everything you say Right.
Lake View Too avatar
SoWal Insider
#132
"Ah, you cursed brat! Look what you've done! I'm melting! Melting! Ohhhhh... What a world, what a world! Who ever thought a little girl like you could destroy my beautiful wickedness?! Ah, I'm going! Ahhh!"
Bum didn’t want us to get too childish. I’m saying you are Right and now you make fun of me. Sigh...
Bob Wells avatar
Beach Fanatic
#133
And we are back! It makes no difference who is right or who is wrong. Plenty of innocent folks are behind bars because of a BS case was made to a judge or a jury by a prosecutor. Plenty of Guilty are walking free because of an outstanding defense. That said unless you are a lawyer speaking to the Judge/ Jury who will decide this issue you are at this point creating conflict. I appreciate the forum and I really appreciate the idea of expression, what I hate is the context of how many times and how many ways we can say the same thing. I try not to make enemies on here and I know I have a couple but I wonder if we can ever get past are disagreement on this 1 issue that we would ever talk about something else. I was told a long time a go to never discuss religion or politics at the dinner table. Think I will add Customary Use to the list. You all have a fine day.
PoppaJ avatar
SoWal Insider
#134
Vizcaya private property Plat and deeds are public record if anyone would bother to make the effort. Been posted before.
The beach is private property to the Vizcaya HOA members to the MHWL. As is the private property to the west in the photo and to the east. The private properties on 30A have NEVER had tax payer dredged sand, that does not meet BCC white sand ordinance, added or an ECL established.
The easements are public pedestrian easements for access (not to occupy if not invited) to the foreshore (Sheriff's wet sand with no wind) only. Ask Walton beach director Brian Kellenberger or County Attorney if you don't believe this information.
View attachment 76724
Never means, well never. Are you claiming this property has always been private? No where in history was this stretch of beach free of recorded ownership?
FactorFiction avatar
Beach Fanatic
#135
I used to love watching and listening to the debate teams in high school. Funny how they could present opposing facts that supported their position and never once call names or say anything demeaning to each other. There are facts on both sides of this issue that support one position or the other, but not both in most instances. Those of you that aren't interested in an opposing viewpoint, just scroll on by or don't even read this particular thread. Somebody on here made a good point about there being numerous sites that fully and wholeheartedly support the CU position. As far as I can tell the only one that wholeheartedly supports the private property position is the Florida Coastal Property Rights site/FB page. Anyone who has no interest in understanding any other perspective should definitely go to a site where almost everyone agrees with you whether the information is factual or not. If instead, you want to hear both sides and do some research and try to put yourself in the other person's shoes even a little bit, then this thread has been rather interesting. I say interesting for two reasons: 1) Because of the contradictory "facts", which probably means that one of those "facts" is not really a fact (maybe neither is) and 2) Because of the study of human behavior in terms of how people are reacting to opposing viewpoints. I don't know about anyone else, but I have some things to research and I've definitely learned a few things about some member's personalities. Thanks again to SOWAL for allowing a two sided discussion here.
miznotebook avatar
Beach Fanatic
#136
Yes, thanks, SoWal. We have had good discussions on many topics on this site.
Rachael Ashman McKee avatar
Beach Lover
#137
If the Sheriff legally requires you to follow his Standard Operating Procedure before he will come and handle trespassers, you comply. I understand what you’re saying about trespassing shouldn’t be an issue to begin with, but in the interest of doing what the law has asked . Respectfully, it’s done
BlueMtnBeachVagrant avatar
Beach Fanatic
#138
And we are back! It makes no difference who is right or who is wrong. Plenty of innocent folks are behind bars because of a BS case was made to a judge or a jury by a prosecutor. Plenty of Guilty are walking free because of an outstanding defense. That said unless you are a lawyer speaking to the Judge/ Jury who will decide this issue you are at this point creating conflict. I appreciate the forum and I really appreciate the idea of expression, what I hate is the context of how many times and how many ways we can say the same thing. I try not to make enemies on here and I know I have a couple but I wonder if we can ever get past are disagreement on this 1 issue that we would ever talk about something else. I was told a long time a go to never discuss religion or politics at the dinner table. Think I will add Customary Use to the list. You all have a fine day.
And I’m back....

Bob, respectfully, your attempt to defuse this hot topic is a bit entertaining...like an adult trying to break up a playground fight. NOBODY, I mean NOBODY here on SoWal has addressed ANY of the facts that have been presented here by private property rights advocates. I honestly don’t expect anything different - simply because they can’t. And they especially can’t defend their outright lies.

And of couse we ALL know this will settled in court (at everyone’s expense) so that’s obviously not the point in bringing up the facts. The point is that CU followers are being mislead by their leaders who also continue to paint a negative image of BFOs.

What’s also central to this dialogue (at least some of us are trying to have) is the respect thing. It’s totally lacking.

And yes, against your wishes, I will continue to beat this dead horse until someone supporting CU agrees that Daniel Uhlfelder’s inference that BFOs are behaving like Nazis was absolutely totally inappropriate and disrespectful. I’ll add in disgusting. And they should agree that Daniel Uhlfelder (president of FBFA and key representative of ALL Cu folks) should apologize.

I do this because I heard it with my own two ears.

As you know, I have called out Dave Rauschkolb on this thread regarding this subject...nothing. My guess is he’s hoping it will just fade away.

So much of the noise on the CU side is subjective.

HOWEVER, the above is one ABSOLUTELY CLEAR event in my mind that shows the true colors of many of those supporting CU. And this is from “their leader”.

Emotion.

It’s abundantly clear to me (based on Uhfelder’s statements and others) that the CU proponents are much more emotional and will inflame emotions of their support base, fabricate facts and ignore the truth.

Edited

bob bob avatar
Beach Fanatic
#139
SoWal Rules!
Rachael Ashman McKee avatar
Beach Lover
#140
The Sheriff is not demanding signs. The only reason they would require signage is if you are going to be one of the BFOs who demand that those who transverse their sand or - gasp! sit on it, be arrested for trespassing.

If you are going to be a nice BFO and not harass people who use the beach in front of your house, there is no reason to put up a sign.
I agree with you. But, what was required by the Sheriffs office should be followed.
miznotebook avatar
Beach Fanatic
#141
The county attorney stated last May that if the property is less than five acres and contains a single-family home, a property owner is not required to post any markers in order for low enforcement personnel to enforce trespassing violations.
jodiFL avatar
Beach Fanatic
#142
The county attorney stated last May that if the property is less than five acres and contains a single-family home, a property owner is not required to post any markers in order for low enforcement personnel to enforce trespassing violations.
Correct..that is in keeping with FL Statue Chapter 810.
Rachael Ashman McKee avatar
Beach Lover
#143
The county attorney stated last May that if the property is less than five acres and contains a single-family home, a property owner is not required to post any markers in order for low enforcement personnel to enforce trespassing violations.
Thank you. But the discourse comes from the beginning of signs due to the WCSO SOP of2015.
FloridaBeachBum avatar
Beach Fanatic
#144
And we are back! It makes no difference who is right or who is wrong. ... You all have a fine day.
Bob, there are 4,671 beachfront owners including condos and HOAs owners with beachfront for members and there are about 1,200 private property parcels; including some parcels that are not beachfront like Dave Rauschkolb’s Dragonsky Fly LLC in Seaside that Walton gave notice they were being litigated against.

Could not have said it better than Fact or Fiction [Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy], BlueMtnBeachVag (who has been posting on SoWal since 2006?) [Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy], and Reggie Gaskins [Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy].

You are more informed than most and you have made your position known that you support customary use of private property before. I’d guess many of the 4,671 beachfront owners are not as familiar with the ancient English (not American) doctrine of customary use and only hear the intentional misinformation and unsupported opinions in the public square. Owners read little to none factual information from the local “news” papers and CU FB. Many owners do not want to be on Facebook or social media because of the vitriol and unsupported (intentional?) misinformation. If just one of those 4,671 owners learn sometime from a property owner with real property skin in the game, that'd be great. Thanks to SoWal for the forum to do that.

I do want to know why someone disagrees with the data and facts; or what data or facts do you have for quiet title, dry beach is worthless and not taxed, etc. but all I hear in response is you’re out numbered, you have alternative facts (whatever that is), stop, emotional unsupported opinions, and it will be decided in the courts.

I agree it makes no difference here who is right or wrong. It’s about factual information, some knowledge of the law, and pointing out the misinformation. So I will not be silenced. If you don’t want to read it; don’t and CUnCourt.
FloridaBeachBum avatar
Beach Fanatic
#145
Never means, well never. Are you claiming this property has always been private? No where in history was this stretch of beach free of recorded ownership?
What I said was 30A private properties (east of Topsail State Park) have NEVER had tax payer dredged sand added to private property or an ECL established.
Your question, has this (Vizcaya) always been private or free of recorded ownership? Do you mean never owned by a Governmental entity? Do you want to go back to before there was a USA? I’m not an attorney. Lets discuss only USA since 1776 land patents, not the other multiple foreign countries who claimed land in North America before 1776 or before 1492.

There were US Government Florida land patents in Walton that included all property rights, including littoral rights. Or alternatively, did not exclude any real property rights. Florida defined the littoral property boundaries of the Gulf as the MHWL.

Do a title search if anyone wants to know the title back to the USA land patents. I’ve provided the plat - someone can do the title search from there and let us know if public custom or easements are included. The many Walton beachfront title searches I’ve seen back to the land patents include all real-property rights, including littoral rights and do not include easements or custom rights. If anything like other Walton beachfront title searches back to the USA land patents I’d guess Vizcaya title to 1,036 feet of beachfront has always been privately owned to the MHWL. The owner who platted Vizcaya included a public easement for access (not occupy) to the foreshore (the sand between the MHWL and MLWL). The plat shows a 33 foot and a 68 foot “Beach Access Easement” and “this dedication shall not create any rights of the public of the property shown on the plat ...”.

Edited

Bob Wells avatar
Beach Fanatic
#146
You are correct and because it is going to the Court I have bowed out of the conversation. I have also said that as the Courts will be deciding I will be accepting of that decision.

Bob, there are 4,671 beachfront owners including condos and HOAs owners with beachfront for members and there are about 1,200 private property parcels; including some parcels that are not beachfront like Dave Rauschkolb’s Dragonsky Fly LLC in Seaside that Walton gave notice they were being litigated against.

Could not have said it better than Fact or Fiction [Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy], BlueMtnBeachVag (who has been posting on SoWal since 2006?) [Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy], and Reggie Gaskins [Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy].

You are more informed than most and you have made your position known that you support customary use of private property before. I’d guess many of the 4,671 beachfront owners are not as familiar with the ancient English (not American) doctrine of customary use and only hear the intentional misinformation and unsupported opinions in the public square. Owners read little to none factual information from the local “news” papers and CU FB. Many owners do not want to be on Facebook or social media because of the vitriol and unsupported (intentional?) misinformation. If just one of those 4,671 owners learn sometime from a property owner with real property skin in the game, that'd be great. Thanks to SoWal for the forum to do that.

I do want to know why someone disagrees with the data and facts; or what data or facts do you have for quiet title, dry beach is worthless and not taxed, etc. but all I hear in response is you’re out numbered, you have alternative facts (whatever that is), stop, emotional unsupported opinions, and it will be decided in the courts.

I agree it makes no difference here who is right or wrong. It’s about factual information, some knowledge of the law, and pointing out the misinformation. So I will not be silenced. If you don’t want to read it; don’t and CUnCourt.
FloridaBeachBum avatar
Beach Fanatic
#1471
Thanks Bob. Seriously. Stay in the conversation. I think you just have a different perspective than beachfront owners with real-property skin in the game. Many just want to know what legal or factual basis do you or anyone support the legal doctrine of private property customary use? "Just because I believe it" is not a very supportable (or valid legal) answer. Fact or Fiction did say something about debates that made me dream.

Me and James Lince in an on-line debate of property rights and the history and doctrine of custom in Walton County with Dave Rauschkolb and Daniel Uhlfelder and an impartial 3 judicial judge panel. Winner take all!

Walton’s attorney David Theriaque makes $425 and hour. There are about 25 owner attorneys making lets say $400 and hour ($10,000 and hour). If private property owners prevail; could save Walton tax payers million$.

Alas I guess we will have to pay our attorney surrogates to debate for us. CUnCourt.

To find out more about property rights and customary use misinformation go to the, open for anyone and be respectful, Florida Coastal Property Rights FB page.
Florida Coastal Property Rights
or read James Lince opinions based on the law and verifiable facts about common customary use misinformation. For the full post go to FCPR FB.
James Lince Rebuttal.jpg

Edited

bob bob avatar
Beach Fanatic
#148
Thank you. But the discourse comes from the beginning of signs due to the WCSO SOP of2015.
No one is required to put up a sign on the beach. EVER. Let's drop this stupid argument. We are not idiots.
Reggie Gaskins avatar
Beach LoverAuthor
#149
Objective discussion happening. Love it. Bob Wells, we all agree, we will all be governed by litigation outcome. Think about this y’all; We continue to state facts here because the entire CU public argument is based on mistruths. Imagine this - A court decision not favorable to CU, which is what I predict. Will the public truly accept it without knowing these facts? We all know what that nightmare looks like, don’t we? See more detailed factual CU discussion at Editor's Opinion: Maybe Political Satire isn't for you? Or Maybe it's just for you!

Edited

MRBS avatar
Beach Lover
#150
Seems that the thrust of that blog article at Editor's Opinion: Maybe Political Satire isn't for you? Or Maybe it's just for you! is that the ugly signs, chains, etc., are expression of political satire. Really? Or is that satire also? I get the feeling that the folks opposed to CU in this thread are just trying to goad pro CU folks into making comments that can be used in the opposition's lawsuit. Maybe not but I have a suspicious mind.
Reggie Gaskins avatar
Beach LoverAuthor
#151
Seems that the thrust of that blog article at Editor's Opinion: Maybe Political Satire isn't for you? Or Maybe it's just for you! is that the ugly signs, chains, etc., are expression of political satire. Really? Or is that satire also? I get the feeling that the folks opposed to CU in this thread are just trying to goad pro CU folks into making comments that can be used in the opposition's lawsuit. Maybe not but I have a suspicious mind.
Me thinks you indeed have suspicious mind.
The Logic in the article is this - PP signs are a result of #occupythebeach militant activists threatening homeowners. It was a defensive move against a mob offense.

Checking your forum account

Please wait while we verify your forum account.

New posts