Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

FBB, remember there is a lawsuit that will handle the legalities regarding public beach vs private beach. From what I read on this thread there is no compromise on beach exclusion by the BPO's. BTW this forum is social media and ALL of us are posting beliefs or opinions. Our opinions and beliefs of law are irrelevant and subordinate to the court. It does not matter if we are lawyers or brick layers. So, what is relevant in terms of the 30A legacy. First thing that comes to mind is that we now hardly see the beaches because of buildings that are standing where entire ecosystems of sand dunes and beach vegetation. The old 30A had a few single story block buildings and many homes on pilings. These older buildings did not limit access compared to these huge mansions now being built. Therefore a more relevant discussion would involve the laws of nature which is a generalized observation of natural processes? I submit to you the court of public opinion. Your buildings block access, destroy natural processes and the occupants demand exclusive use of the natural resource. Even if you win in court you will lose in the court of public opinion. Why would you choose this path? Common sense would dictate a different path where you have your mansions with exclusive views and share the beach. Your arguments have never made sense to me because this is not a court of law and the thread title only referenced the words "destroy" and "30A" community which are both about natural law.

there is no compromise on beach exclusion by the BPO's

Mputnal, there is a compromise, just because 1 of the 1194 private property parcels owners decide to use their private property rights (#3, the right of exclusion) to limit to friends, family, and renters, doesn’t mean that the other 1193 parcels owners are going to do the same. Each parcel owner is free do determine their own parameters of use (and control density management).The same as it has been for last 100+ years prior to the 2016 Beach Ordinance, which is the FIRST EVER to claim private property rights don't apply in Walton County. You can purchase private property and can determine your own parameters or even donate it to the State of Florida.

this is not a court of law and the thread title only referenced the words "destroy" and "30A" community

You are correct, this thread is not a court of law, but the BCC and FBFA (as co-Planfiff) are suing 1194 parcel owner IN A COURT OF LAW, which has cost $2 Million dollars so far, to remove private property rights (right of exclusion). Since Dave refuses to answer the $50 Million Dollar question, how about you? Has the county proven, or even provided any evidence, that the removal of property rights (right of exclusion) is reasonable, without interruption, or without dispute?

In fairness, I personally believe it has gone to far with all that has been said to really think people would be able to meet without it getting heated.

I’ll organize and pay for the fish fry as soon as our beaches are reaffirmed for customary use and no person may be excluded from any beach in Florida. It might take a long time but then again it might not but in either case it’ll be worth the wait.

Even if you win in court you will lose in the court of public opinion.

1 + 1 + 1 = CU Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy.

Already occurred, IMHO.

FBB, remember there is a lawsuit that will handle the legalities regarding public beach vs private beach. From what I read on this thread there is no compromise on beach exclusion by the BPO's. BTW this forum is social media and ALL of us are posting beliefs or opinions. Our opinions and beliefs of law are irrelevant and subordinate to the court. It does not matter if we are lawyers or brick layers. So, what is relevant in terms of the 30A legacy. First thing that comes to mind is that we now hardly see the beaches because of buildings that are standing where entire ecosystems of sand dunes and beach vegetation. The old 30A had a few single story block buildings and many homes on pilings. These older buildings did not limit access compared to these huge mansions now being built. Therefore a more relevant discussion would involve the laws of nature which is a generalized observation of natural processes? I submit to you the court of public opinion. Your buildings block access, destroy natural processes and the occupants demand exclusive use of the natural resource. Even if you win in court you will lose in the court of public opinion. Why would you choose this path? Common sense would dictate a different path where you have your mansions with exclusive views and share the beach. Your arguments have never made sense to me because this is not a court of law and the thread title only referenced the words "destroy" and "30A" community which are both about natural law.

Somehow, I get the feeling that surfer dude doesn't see himself as someone who's posting beliefs and opinions.

1 + 1 + 1 = CU Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy.

Already occurred, IMHO.

I don't think it is CU that has destroyed anything. I think it is folks who push a subject, any subject, to the point that there is no longer any useful information being shared. Many have said the same thing over and over to no avail based on comments. I truly believe you and those who are opposed to CU believe what you are saying. I also believe that those who believe in CU believe what they are saying. My point is many people have made pointed attacks on individuals or groups and I believe this would prevent an opportunity for a Beer Summit without the ongoing barbs. I am sure that as some have said that protecting their identity protects them from being picked on or targeted. I wonder if most who use screen names would be such bullies or arrogant if they weren't behind a keyboard. I feel there are always opportunities to build bridges but you have to know who you're handing the hammer to so you don't get hit with it. Just my 2 cents.

SCJ, your question is not for you or me to decide because we are not A Judge or the Judge on duty of the court. This is a thread in a social media forum. It is a court of public opinion. In this court you can hide your identity and be as civil or uncivil as your pea pickin heart desires. The bottom line is that both sides have a principle and those principles have facts. So this thread has become a contest of whose got the bigger...principle. I get the passion on both sides. The problem I have is with our civility. Your side has a valid principle but when you hide your identity while calling out others by name it is completely uncivil and beyond disrespectful. It goes much lower than a passionate belief in a principle. It even undermines the facts of your principle. It is an abuse of power of your principle. I think you would have more success if you would stop hiding your identity. If you really believe in your principle why not back it up with a real name? It does not matter to me what side of any principle you belong to as long as you honor that principle with an identity. I may not agree with Dave on most anything other than public beaches for every human but I do believe he honors his principle of CU.

The problem I have is with our civility. Your side has a valid principle but when you hide your identity while calling out others by name it is completely uncivil and beyond disrespectful. I

REDICULOOUS.

I truly believe you and those who are opposed to CU believe what you are saying. I also believe that those who believe in CU believe what they are saying.

Of course I have to throw in that I believe that “our side” has provided a lot more fact than “your side”. That said, the problem is not one’s belief, really! It is the methodology that one uses to substantiate one’s belief.

You’ve probably noticed I don’t care for Dave Rauschkolb’s and Daniel Uhlfelder’s tactics (I know, an understatement) along with intentionally misleading lies such as beach front owners stealing public beach for $400 via quiet title, their direct attacks and demonization of private property owners such as the Nazi reference, the characterization of beach front owners as mean and greedy and so on.

I don’t think you’ll see the reverse of that other than showing the HYPOCRISY of restaurant owners, real estate industry, developers, county’s coffers, etc. who stand to economically benefit if the 30A area continues to grow unchecked if customary use succeeds. And economic benefit is not one of the justifications for customary use - absolute fact, no argument, no discussion. But FBFA shone a bright light on that issue in one of their videos - just more propaganda to further their view as they attempt to appeal to the ignorant.

Bob, if Dave Rauschkolb and crew argued customary use the way you do, well I would have greater respect for them than I do now. I do understand where the “average citizens” (supporters) of customary use are coming from....I really do. But it’s the tactics used by FBFA and others that bother me.

Besides Dave being a master maker and marketeer of mai tais to the masses, he’s also magnificent at managing media manipulation and manufacturing mistruths. Again, he won’t even denounce something as obvious as the quiet title lies, never mind the Nazi stuff. As long as “whatever” supports his goal, it stands untouched.

I am sure that as some have said that protecting their identity protects them from being picked on or targeted. I wonder if most who use screen names would be such bullies or arrogant if they weren't behind a keyboard.

Whether many CU supporters use their real names or not, their attacks on BFOs seem to be consistent. IOW, I opine that one’s true character comes shining through, whether or not they use their real name and regardless of one’s stand.

Just keep in mind that barrages of facts from BFOs cannot be confused for bullying when offered to counter perpetuated mistruths.

I won’t subject me, my family or friends to the “fringe” by using my real name as I mostly comment on hot issues here on SoWal and am obviously a “minority” being a BFO.

Of course I have to throw in that I believe that “our side” has provided a lot more fact than “your side”. That said, the problem is not one’s belief, really! It is the methodology that one uses to substantiate one’s belief.

You’ve probably noticed I don’t care for Dave Rauschkolb’s and Daniel Uhlfelder’s tactics (I know, an understatement) along with intentionally misleading lies such as beach front owners stealing public beach for $400 via quiet title, their direct attacks and demonization of private property owners such as the Nazi reference, the characterization of beach front owners as mean and greedy and so on.

I don’t think you’ll see the reverse of that other than showing the HYPOCRISY of restaurant owners, real estate industry, developers, county’s coffers, etc. who stand to economically benefit if the 30A area continues to grow unchecked if customary use succeeds. And economic benefit is not one of the justifications for customary use - absolute fact, no argument, no discussion. But FBFA shone a bright light on that issue in one of their videos - just more propaganda to further their view as they attempt to appeal to the ignorant.

Bob, if Dave Rauschkolb and crew argued customary use the way you do, well I would have greater respect for them than I do now. I do understand where the “average citizens” (supporters) of customary use are coming from....I really do. But it’s the tactics used by FBFA and others that bother me.

Besides Dave being a master maker and marketeer of mai tais to the masses, he’s also magnificent at managing media manipulation and manufacturing mistruths. Again, he won’t even denounce something as obvious as the quiet title lies, never mind the Nazi stuff. As long as “whatever” supports his goal, it stands untouched.



Whether many CU supporters use their real names or not, their attacks on BFOs seem to be consistent. IOW, I opine that one’s true character comes shining through, whether or not they use their real name and regardless of one’s stand.

Just keep in mind that barrages of facts from BFOs cannot be confused for bullying when offered to counter perpetuated mistruths.

I won’t subject me, my family or friends to the “fringe” by using my real name as I mostly comment on hot issues here on SoWal and am obviously a “minority” being a BFO.

I choose to use my real name because if you are going to own what you say then you got to put your name on it.

I choose to use my real name because if you are going to own what you say then you got to put your name on it.

I’m amazed you quoted my entire post and the above is all you come up with.

I guess I don’t own my private property because of customary use and now, I don’t even own what I say. You refuse to acknowledge that there may be some nut cases out there. It’s easy to use your real name when you and your posts are not controversial to the overwhelming majority. I’m glad you can own your words and you think I can’t.

Bob, you just lost me as one who thought you might be one of the reasonable ones carrying the CU torch. Let’s leave it at that.

I’m amazed you quoted my entire post and the above is all you come up with.

I guess I don’t own my private property because of customary use and now, I don’t even own what I say. You refuse to acknowledge that there may be some nut cases out there. It’s easy to use your real name when you and your posts are not controversial to the overwhelming majority. I’m glad you can own your words and you think I can’t.

Bob, you just lost me as one who thought you might be one of the reasonable ones carrying the CU torch. Let’s leave it at that.

Wouldn't it be great if politicians could do that also because of all the s**t they take and how family is frequently drug into it.

A few words on name calling and the free and open access and use of our beaches. The small group of Walton County beachfront owners and lawyers driving hard for private beaches have taken to the name game to describe those of us who support open and public use of all of our beaches;. We have been called socialists agitaters, communists, activists and other names I won’t mention here. They have also attempted to minimize overwhelming public sentiment on the matter of public beaches by directly targeting myself and Attorney, Daniel Uhlfelder as the “agitators.” A ridiculous notion, as though we are the only ones who want our beaches to be public.

I want to share a quote by Peter Coyote that cuts at the heart of their tactic to stop anyone who dare challenge them regarding our beloved beaches

“Activist is a word made up by my enemies and if you want to separate someone from the mass of humanity you add an “ist” after their name. The implication is that most people don’t act on their beliefs at all and a small radical subset do. I like to turn It around and say that people who don’t act on their beliefs are hypocrites. I am engaged with my life, I’m not thinking that I am like an activist. I drink water, I want the water to be clean. My kids breath air I want it to be clean. I want the food I eat not to be poisoned. I want the animals to have a fair break because I am interdependant with them.” ….that is being engaged, not activism.” Peter Coyote

And to add to this, I want to go to our beaches unrestricted as I always have. I want my kids to have the same that I have had. And I admire those thousands of people in our community and other neighboring communities who have acted on their belefs and convictions to take a stand to ensure our beaches remain OUR beaches.

Prior to 2016 I have never been kicked off a beach nor had I known anyone who ever had in Walton County. And, that we would have the audacity to stand together and speak our beliefs and challenge those who would exclude us from our beaches. If there ever was an issue that crushes our political divide this is it. The Polls are clear, both conservatives and liberals lean strongly on the side of public beaches and every politician in Florida knows it. The people of Florida will not stand for anything but full and fair use of all of our beaches and labeling us to try to divide us on the issue won’t work. As if calling us names will shut us all up. Nope.

Let me tell you my fellow Republican friends who stand up for Customary Use don’t appreciate being called “socialist agitators” and other labels and names. If you must call us names, ”dedicated, vocal beach lover” is more apropos. Or just “beach lover” will do. You can’t separate us from the mass of humanity or more appropriately, the majority of beach lovers by adding an “ist” to minimize our voice. No matter what you want to call us we are engaged, dedicated and determined beach lovers and we will be heard.

It never even occurred to me that "activist" was a negative term. This country has gone crazy with language, labeling, political correctness, etc. I guess that comes along with a terrible education system and hyperactive social media.

Carry on Dave and appreciate you standing up for your beliefs and the rights of millions.

A few words on name calling and the free and open access and use of our beaches. The small group of Walton County beachfront owners and lawyers driving hard for private beaches have taken to the name game to describe those of us who support open and public use of all of our beaches;. We have been called socialists agitaters, communists, activists and other names I won’t mention here. They have also attempted to minimize overwhelming public sentiment on the matter of public beaches by directly targeting myself and Attorney, Daniel Uhlfelder as the “agitators.” A ridiculous notion, as though we are the only ones who want our beaches to be public.

I want to share a quote by Peter Coyote that cuts at the heart of their tactic to stop anyone who dare challenge them regarding our beloved beaches

“Activist is a word made up by my enemies and if you want to separate someone from the mass of humanity you add an “ist” after their name. The implication is that most people don’t act on their beliefs at all and a small radical subset do. I like to turn It around and say that people who don’t act on their beliefs are hypocrites. I am engaged with my life, I’m not thinking that I am like an activist. I drink water, I want the water to be clean. My kids breath air I want it to be clean. I want the food I eat not to be poisoned. I want the animals to have a fair break because I am interdependant with them.” ….that is being engaged, not activism.” Peter Coyote

And to add to this, I want to go to our beaches unrestricted as I always have. I want my kids to have the same that I have had. And I admire those thousands of people in our community and other neighboring communities who have acted on their belefs and convictions to take a stand to ensure our beaches remain OUR beaches.

Prior to 2016 I have never been kicked off a beach nor had I known anyone who ever had in Walton County. And, that we would have the audacity to stand together and speak our beliefs and challenge those who would exclude us from our beaches. If there ever was an issue that crushes our political divide this is it. The Polls are clear, both conservatives and liberals lean strongly on the side of public beaches and every politician in Florida knows it. The people of Florida will not stand for anything but full and fair use of all of our beaches and labeling us to try to divide us on the issue won’t work. As if calling us names will shut us all up. Nope.

Let me tell you my fellow Republican friends who stand up for Customary Use don’t appreciate being called “socialist agitators” and other labels and names. If you must call us names, ”dedicated, vocal beach lover” is more apropos. Or just “beach lover” will do. You can’t separate us from the mass of humanity or more appropriately, the majority of beach lovers by adding an “ist” to minimize our voice. No matter what you want to call us we are engaged, dedicated and determined beach lovers and we will be heard.

Apparently, both Alan Osborn’s uncovering of many damaging facts to the county’s BCC inept efforts to manage this county, one of which was Taylor Engineering reporting on CU at the BCC meeting yesterday that the ECL line in Walton (Effectively also the MHTL) is actually currently under water, has Dave in crazy defense mode this morning.

Although I’d like to respond to Dave’s original post, they don’t allow facts or adult discussion on Walton’s echo chambered censorship “Divisioning” page. They just censored a war hero this morning for speaking the truth. Go figure.

Since this thread here is receiving over 500 views a day now of diverse viewers, it’s better here, anyway.

The “small” group of BPO’s fighting the lawsuit against them, numbers in the thousands. For those keeping score, that’s about 1,000 restaurant table turns. AKA not “small”.

If you’re really interested Dave, a man in a T-shirt provided me with hundreds and hundreds of social media screenshots quoting “Beach Lovers” threatening to;
Lynch BPO’s
Burn BPO’s houses to the ground
Physically assault and violently hurt BPO’s
Plant used hypodermic needles on BPO’s beach
Gather large groups and loudly intimidate on BPO’s properties (FBFA Director)
Publicly publishing employer info, out of state property addresses, business interests, etc... for the stated purpose of direct personal harassment against BPO’s families (FBFA Director)
Deface BPO’s property at published addresses (FBFA Director)
Dump trash and vile objects on BPO’s property (FBFA Director)
Challenge WCSO to trespass violators from BPO property (FBFA Director)

Care to view them here?
I can’t verify the sources, they won’t talk about it. But we can sure present those pictures for the public to digest and decide for themselves? Maybe make CU T-shirts with their screenshots?

So, that threatening source, is that an agitator? An Activist? A “Beach Lover”?

This thread was also written by a true Beach Lover. You see, a true beach lover is interested in actually protecting the beach from abuse, overuse, pollution, defacing, damaging the delicate ecosystem, harm to turtles, destroying vegetation, dune damage. For those BPO’s inhabiting their homes, this is their daily mindset and mission. Every. Single. Day. Not just on weekends or holidays. True Beach Lovers in South Walton don’t want the Destin or PCB atmosphere CU would create. BPO’s must stand on the first line of defense, constantly on guard FOR the community, AGAINST that destructive onslaught.

There are a couple loud and obnoxious BPO’s that are the unfortunate extreme. Luckily, less than a handful. But they have no followers. Most of us want the beach the way it was. Respectfully enjoyed by all; Republicans, Democrats, Socialists, Marxists, even lawyers! The public harassment and lawsuit caused the signs and behavior. Oops, didn’t think that through, huh?

But honest, open, and trustworthy discussion is necessary for success. And no, my alias is not there to hide. My facts are sound. You still haven’t discussed even one Dave. Readers here have widely noticed that. They no longer accept your excuse of talking with an alias.

And... The alias is there to protect my precious loved ones and associates from the vulgar activities of “activists” and “agitators” as described in paragraph 3.

Lynch BPO’s
Burn BPO’s houses to the ground
Physically assault and violently hurt BPO’s
Plant used hypodermic needles on BPO’s beach
Gather large groups and loudly intimidate on BPO’s properties (FBFA Director)
Publicly publishing employer info, out of state property addresses, business interests, etc... for the stated purpose of direct personal harassment against BPO’s families (FBFA Director)
Deface BPO’s property at published addresses (FBFA Director)
Dump trash and vile objects on BPO’s property (FBFA Director)
Challenge WCSO to trespass violators from BPO property (FBFA Director)

Where does this group meet and what time is the next meeting?

There has been more than enough name calling to go around and it isn't limited to one side. I wish we could all go back to peaceful co-existence. I wish we would all devote the time and energy that goes into bickering and fighting into a campaign for beach etiquette and for protecting our beach ecosystems and wildlife. CU supporters, keep showing 1950s usage if you want, but it isn't reality. Even in the 70s, I never saw people set up daycamps on the beaches I frequented (public ones I might add), they didn't stay all day, they didn't play loud music or smoke. Common courtesy still existed. Like it/agree or not, no real effort was given to resolving issues before the CU ordinance was implemented. IMO, it wasn't done correctly. It should have been done in court in the first place IF done at all. When the CU ordinance was implemented, it was done without sufficient time to educate and without sufficient resources (meaning code enforcement) to enforce the CU "rules." That was a sure way to further the conflict. This whole situation is a clusterf*** that could have been avoided with some actual collaboration, education, and preparation for enforcement. A clear case of jumping from the frying pan into the fire. BTW, there is nothing inherently wrong with "ist" on the end of words. I'm an environmentalist and would gladly be labeled an activist for peaceful co-existence on the beach.

Dave Rauschkolb, is name calling is all you and CU believers have to add to your CU beliefs? Any facts, laws, supporting CU?
#249 Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

Here are the just a few of the CU believers' descriptions of beachfront owners - just on this thread.
“Komrades”. Despicable. "condescending and derogatory". Propaganda. "ridiculous ... ridiculous and silly." "full of it. bombardment of total and complete BS". "narcissism, anger management problems, and delusions of grandeur ... angry buffoon". "dishonest ... dishonest and disrespectful ... propaganda". "morally right ... arrogance ... bullshit ... insulting ... propaganda". There's more but I think you get the idea. Or called anyone cowards or questioned anyone's morals; “ ... is morally wrong and anti-human ...”
#732 Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

Have you filed any retaliatory police reports lately, that took a month of the Sheriff's deputies time to find not valid, like you did against beachfront owner James Lince? How about all the nice and factual antisocial media about private citizen Mike Huckabee?
#195 Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
#203 Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

Where does this group meet and what time is the next meeting?

I'm sure that you think your post is funny, but have you ever considered the possibility that some BPOs might find the idea of CU advocates joining a group to harm others to be a little threatening? I guess not. All the CU people are just little teddy bears aren't they?

I'm sure that you think your post is funny, but have you ever considered the possibility that some BPOs might find the idea of CU advocates joining a group to harm others to be a little threatening? I guess not. All the CU people are just little teddy bears aren't they?

Absolutely, and they have said that. There have been comments posted on here the reasons they use screen names. Many anti- CU want us to believe what they say but choose to not sign their names. They indicate it is because they fear the Pro CU folks and are only protecting their names, families and businesses. Can you imagine how this would play out with Dave R and Daniel U using screen names. It is easier to be a bully or to intimidate someone when those who try to do so do it behind a screen name. I own my words, the good and bad, but my name is on it.

FBB, I am confused. Are those quotes from BMBV or CU supporters. Or maybe Reggie Gaskins. Please add the word hypocritical to your negative word list.

Reggie, It is amazing at how low you will go to discredit people in this community. I would not want you to have any such power to exclude anyone from the beach. Yes, I know you will believe that is blasphemy.

I wish there were a way to turn back the clock and start over with this thread but me thinks it would not matter. If people are going to hide their name and post a bunch of stuff then that has to be who they are in person. I no longer think a community fish fry and debate will help us with our civility...

We are just on two sides of an issue, on opposite planes. We might just have to agree to disagree, no need for a tissue.

I say what I stand for and I stand for what I say. But that's just me while you hide, hide away.

I am but one of many voices in control of mine, those others they control their own, some nice, others not so refined

When you come out of the shadows your words ring clear. Step out into the open, I can assure you there's nothing to fear here.

Show yourself, speak for yourself, credibility will be the inevitability.

Bob, I have never understood why anyone would use a "fake" name and then makes the same statements over and over until it becomes some kind of mind numbing string of agenda driven ranting. Is it just me? Then they justify the fake name because they feel threatened by those who use a real name! Makes no sense!!! Why would someone who uses their real name be threatening at all? It seems more likely that people who use fake names are more likely to be the one who is a bully...

Bob, I have never understood why anyone would use a "fake" name and then makes the same statements over and over until it becomes some kind of mind numbing string of agenda driven ranting. Is it just me? Then they justify the fake name because they feel threatened by those who use a real name! Makes no sense!!! Why would someone who uses their real name be threatening at all? It seems more likely that people who use fake names are more likely to be the one who is a bully...

Which Bob? Bob Wells or Bob Bob?

I would like to suggest to all BPO's that you should not feel threatened because a few people are trying to create a narrative that suggests otherwise. The People I see on the beach are just wanting to enjoy a beautiful natural resource. It makes them happy. As for as rules of behavior go it is pretty simple: treat others like you want to be treated AND treat the resource with respect.

Oh, sorry! Bob Wells. I know who Bob Wells is but not sure about Bob Bob

Which Bob? Bob Wells or Bob Bob?