Shifting Sands

I've noticed some people waving the CONSTITUTION as if it will obscure their greed. Reminds me of creeps in DC.

Ultimately they would like to exclude people from nature and that is depressing. The police won't enforce so I foresee rent a cops on the beaches. Won't that be wonderful. Talk about destroying legacy.

it is about excluding all of us from enjoying and using our most treasured and beloved beaches

Bullies kicking sand in our faces.

Shifting Sands

Those power brokers intent on denying the public's right to use and enjoy our beach as we have since time immemorial are determined to paint this as a private property rights issue. Customary Use is not an attack against private property rights, it is an affirmation that regardless of ownership of the sand we all have a right to access, use and enjoy our shared coastal American border.

"No entity, regardless of ownership, may deny or exclude Americans or international visitors from freely and lawfully accessing and using our American beaches from the dune line to the mean high tide waterline." These words should be all that is needed in a Federal or State law.

Private property in the conventional sense, beyond our coastal borders is not in dispute. Reams of legal and layman's arguments have been and are being written to paint non-beachfront owner's use of our beaches as an attack on private property. It is not because our beaches are very different from conventional private property.

We all own private property and the law is clear on American's right to preserve and protect their private property. That is rarely if ever in dispute. The reason this issue IS in dispute is because we have truly shared our beaches for centuries. The claim of exclusion on beaches, couched in private property rights arguments is a fairly recent development in American history.

We have a shared Coastal Heritage on our beaches. Clearly our coasts have value as the closer one purchases to a beach the values are highest. The value and strength of coastal economies depend on the use of our beaches for all. For a finite group of citizens to claim exclusion of our beaches to the rest of all Americans is an affront to all non beachfront owning Americans.

Those powerful and well funded people wanting to change a balance that has existed a very, very long time. bitterly claim their private property is being taken away. No. They purchased the convenience of being steps from the beach and the view. They can't build on the sand and there is no tax assesments directly attached to that sand. It is not private property in the conventional sense as it applies to all other land that is private property.

No, this is not about private property it is about excluding all of us from enjoying and using our most treasured and beloved beaches. Our beaches, the shifting sands of our common Coastal American heritage. Perhaps, besides it not being buildable or taxable it could be argued that the sandy areas our beaches may never be called "private" because the land they purchased is constantly on the move by tidal action, wind and storms. How can they claim ownership and exclusion on shifting sand they can't contain?

If you win this "fight" does that mean that my friends and I can have a picnic in your back yard?

If you win this "fight" does that mean that my friends and I can have a picnic in your back yard?

No, read it again and do a better job of comprehension.

I think it means that if I am lucky (fortunate or rich) enough to own property next to a coastal beach and build an exclusive building with exclusive views then yes, I am obligated to share the back yard with you and your respectful friends. Not only am I morally obligated but I thank my lucky stars every time I look out my windows to a beautiful sunset that only I can see from my exclusive vantage point.

It is amazing to me why anyone would try and relate this issue to property rights and then shame The People for using the beach. If you are one of these people who shame and blame anyone for using the beach then you should at least own it with a real name. I think we would all be surprised to know who is posting this disdain for The People.

Of course Poppaj is legally correct because we are not talking about a conventional back yard but rather the coastal sandy shoreline. My opinions are regarding a fundamental truth of human purpose and our obligation toward good will.

No, read it again and do a better job of comprehension.

I'm sorry. Did I ask you a question?

I'm sorry. Did I ask you a question?

No need to, I gave an answer to a ridiculous question. We can all participate here so learn to deal with it.

Why are you trolling this thread now? Just looking to stir up S again?

Interesting distinction on property rights. If the theory is correct that the beaches should be for all and not private, then the real beef is with the people who sold the beaches in the first place. It's pretty clear that those original sellers (government, early developers) believed the beaches were theirs to sell. All of this bashing and class warfare is just causing more discontent and less liklihood that those who have deeded access will want to share IMO. It keeps everyone all riled up. If both sides focused on encouraging peaceful, respectful, environmentally friendly behavior, we might get somewhere.

Then my friends and I should be able to chill on the beaches behind the multi-million dollar homes of famous people in places like Malibu and Martha's Vineyard, right?

Then my friends and I should be able to chill on the beaches behind the multi-million dollar homes of famous people in places like Malibu and Martha's Vineyard, right?

California's beaches are public. Don't know about Massachusetts. Really, do your research, girl!

Then my friends and I should be able to chill on the beaches behind the multi-million dollar homes of famous people in places like Malibu and Martha's Vineyard, right?

GO for it.

FBB, I agree with you about the lack of respect in discussing this issue. I admit to having to reach down deep to find respect for people who are not honest about who they are and what they represent. I have to reach down even further to find respect for some wealthy person explain that there are winners and losers in this world and the losers just want what the winners have. You seem like a respectful and reasonable person but if you are not aware of this attack on The People (local government, community, society) then you must be disconnected from the working class (those that get dirt under their fingernails) and what is left of the middle class (those that pay a higher tax percentage of income than any other class). Yes, it is hard to be respectful when someone is yelling and screaming about property rights, entitlements and punishments for those that use the beach (any beach) when this has nothing to do with any of that. The subject is the beach or coastal sandy shoreline and not a property owners back yard. It is accurately stated as the "shifting sands" in this thread. Yes, there is a problem with any deed that gives anyone ownership to the MHWL because it is not a fixed point. Blame it on whatever floats our boats literally but the deeds are incorrect. You can bring up all the property rights BS you want but we are NOT talking about a loser's entitlement to use someone else's property. All I am saying is be aware of why people get riled up about this stuff.

Yes I agree that the description of the property in these deeds have legal ramifications. I believe the county got it right with their approval process in their negotiations with St. Joe which allows for a public easement along the beach. I believe that the recent court ruling in favor of the county is hope that this lawsuit will be resolved without involving the issues of customary use or exclusive use in property rights. If the county is successful then these deeds should be modified to allow this public easement on Walton county coastal sandy shorelines. Of course this is wishful thinking on my part.

You mentioned you side with those that keep bringing up the right to exclusive beach use by private owners adjacent to the coastal sandy shoreline. I would disagree with you on both moral and legal grounds. I already explained my legal opinion and admit that it may be wishful thinking. So morally speaking IMO wealth is defined by a control of resources and the gap that exists in the distribution of those resources. The People (working class, middle class) are working just as hard as any BFO who wants exclusive control of this resource. So, I must ask you if you believe that wealthy BFO's worked harder and should be rewarded with exclusive beach use over The People? You don't have to answer my rhetorical question because I respect your personal opinion. Many people believe that economic success is determined by working harder than the competition. I wish that were so but capitalism has been corrupted by a too big to fail, corporate entitlement and tax loophole advantages in our economic system. Trying to justify these advantages is normal human selfishness but will not serve any other purpose. There is a value in human life that goes beyond personal economic success and it links us all together to the very beginning of life which happened in these same tidal zones. No this is not about our property rights. This is about a human purpose that is rooted in the success of life itself.

FBB, I agree with you about the lack of respect in discussing this issue. I admit to having to reach down deep to find respect for people who are not honest about who they are and what they represent. I have to reach down even further to find respect for some wealthy person explain that there are winners and losers in this world and the losers just want what the winners have. You seem like a respectful and reasonable person but if you are not aware of this attack on The People (local government, community, society) then you must be disconnected from the working class (those that get dirt under their fingernails) and what is left of the middle class (those that pay a higher tax percentage of income than any other class). Yes, it is hard to be respectful when someone is yelling and screaming about property rights, entitlements and punishments for those that use the beach (any beach) when this has nothing to do with any of that. The subject is the beach or coastal sandy shoreline and not a property owners back yard. It is accurately stated as the "shifting sands" in this thread. Yes, there is a problem with any deed that gives anyone ownership to the MHWL because it is not a fixed point. Blame it on whatever floats our boats literally but the deeds are incorrect. You can bring up all the property rights BS you want but we are NOT talking about a loser's entitlement to use someone else's property. All I am saying is be aware of why people get riled up about this stuff.

Yes I agree that the description of the property in these deeds have legal ramifications. I believe the county got it right with their approval process in their negotiations with St. Joe which allows for a public easement along the beach. I believe that the recent court ruling in favor of the county is hope that this lawsuit will be resolved without involving the issues of customary use or exclusive use in property rights. If the county is successful then these deeds should be modified to allow this public easement on Walton county coastal sandy shorelines. Of course this is wishful thinking on my part.

You mentioned you side with those that keep bringing up the right to exclusive beach use by private owners adjacent to the coastal sandy shoreline. I would disagree with you on both moral and legal grounds. I already explained my legal opinion and admit that it may be wishful thinking. So morally speaking IMO wealth is defined by a control of resources and the gap that exists in the distribution of those resources. The People (working class, middle class) are working just as hard as any BFO who wants exclusive control of this resource. So, I must ask you if you believe that wealthy BFO's worked harder and should be rewarded with exclusive beach use over The People? You don't have to answer my rhetorical question because I respect your personal opinion. Many people believe that economic success is determined by working harder than the competition. I wish that were so but capitalism has been corrupted by a too big to fail, corporate entitlement and tax loophole advantages in our economic system. Trying to justify these advantages is normal human selfishness but will not serve any other purpose. There is a value in human life that goes beyond personal economic success and it links us all together to the very beginning of life which happened in these same tidal zones. No this is not about our property rights. This is about a human purpose that is rooted in the success of life itself.

I don't see a post by FBB on this thread.

FBB, I agree with you about the lack of respect in discussing this issue. I admit to having to reach down deep to find respect for people who are not honest about who they are and what they represent. I have to reach down even further to find respect for some wealthy person explain that there are winners and losers in this world and the losers just want what the winners have. You seem like a respectful and reasonable person but if you are not aware of this attack on The People (local government, community, society) then you must be disconnected from the working class (those that get dirt under their fingernails) and what is left of the middle class (those that pay a higher tax percentage of income than any other class). Yes, it is hard to be respectful when someone is yelling and screaming about property rights, entitlements and punishments for those that use the beach (any beach) when this has nothing to do with any of that. The subject is the beach or coastal sandy shoreline and not a property owners back yard. It is accurately stated as the "shifting sands" in this thread. Yes, there is a problem with any deed that gives anyone ownership to the MHWL because it is not a fixed point. Blame it on whatever floats our boats literally but the deeds are incorrect. You can bring up all the property rights BS you want but we are NOT talking about a loser's entitlement to use someone else's property. All I am saying is be aware of why people get riled up about this stuff.

Yes I agree that the description of the property in these deeds have legal ramifications. I believe the county got it right with their approval process in their negotiations with St. Joe which allows for a public easement along the beach. I believe that the recent court ruling in favor of the county is hope that this lawsuit will be resolved without involving the issues of customary use or exclusive use in property rights. If the county is successful then these deeds should be modified to allow this public easement on Walton county coastal sandy shorelines. Of course this is wishful thinking on my part.

You mentioned you side with those that keep bringing up the right to exclusive beach use by private owners adjacent to the coastal sandy shoreline. I would disagree with you on both moral and legal grounds. I already explained my legal opinion and admit that it may be wishful thinking. So morally speaking IMO wealth is defined by a control of resources and the gap that exists in the distribution of those resources. The People (working class, middle class) are working just as hard as any BFO who wants exclusive control of this resource. So, I must ask you if you believe that wealthy BFO's worked harder and should be rewarded with exclusive beach use over The People? You don't have to answer my rhetorical question because I respect your personal opinion. Many people believe that economic success is determined by working harder than the competition. I wish that were so but capitalism has been corrupted by a too big to fail, corporate entitlement and tax loophole advantages in our economic system. Trying to justify these advantages is normal human selfishness but will not serve any other purpose. There is a value in human life that goes beyond personal economic success and it links us all together to the very beginning of life which happened in these same tidal zones. No this is not about our property rights. This is about a human purpose that is rooted in the success of life itself.

You seem really concerned about people being honest about who they are. I'm a nobody with an opinion but no agenda, but if you want my "real" name how about 'MamaK'. Seriously though, my first name is Kathryn.

ForF you are correct. My bad. I meant my post to be in reply to you. Might have had FBB on my mind though

Please don't take this the wrong way but is there a better reason for using fake names than what has been posted in other threads? You mentioned respectful behavior so it just might help people be more respectful of one another if we use our real names. Again wishful thinking on my part!?!

ForF you are correct. My bad. I meant my post to be in reply to you. Might have had FBB on my mind though

Please don't take this the wrong way but is there a better reason for using fake names than what has been posted in other threads? You mentioned respectful behavior so it just might help people be more respectful of one another if we use our real names. Again wishful thinking on my part!?!

I see both sides of this issue. I did not say that I was taking a side. I said that "All of this bashing and class warfare is just causing more discontent and less liklihood that those who have deeded access will want to share IMO. It keeps everyone all riled up. If both sides focused on encouraging peaceful, respectful, environmentally friendly behavior, we might get somewhere." Both sides are antagonized. That doesn't lead to the best solution in my opinion. Of course, it may not matter at all given that the issue is in the courts.

Kathryn, thank you! I respect your opinions, really! And you are somebody with a valid perspective. The question is how do people with differing perspectives agree to compromise on issues such as this one. It helps to know that we all share common values. It also helps to understand the other side of the issue. IMO the customary use side has made that connection and has offered solutions. Power brokers came in and made the issue about property rights over community good will. These power brokers made this about a class society in which there are winners and losers and why the winners should have control over the resource. If you have children and grandchildren you might should be concerned. Maybe even upset because greed is a real human trait. I am not judging anyone. I am saying that we need to nip this greed in the bud before it takes yet another resource away from The People.

ForF, may I ask if you support exclusive rights to the beach by those with deeds that describe the property to the MHWL?

This will be my last post on this subject. In conclusion I believe there should have been compromise and there was opportunity for it until people were mislead and deceived by the power brokers.

Last post on this subject? Oh well, keep using more paragraphs.

No, this is not about private property it is about excluding all of us from enjoying and using our most treasured and beloved beaches.

If you say so (over and over and over again). By the way, thanks for using mputnal’s phrase “power bookers” again. Got a chuckle from it.

Question to you, Dave: Why did you feel the need to completely rewind the topic clock with the content of your post and start yet another thread? Was the other thread too tainted for your taste because it was initiated by Reggie?

Replace "subject" with thread. Okay, since you are here I guess I have to go back to more paragraphs!

If the weather would turn cooler I would rather be outside getting dirt under my nails so until then lets talk about the power brokers. Who are they? Why are they here? Who hired them? Are they Russian diplomats trying to stir up trouble? Are they wealthy oligarchs? Are they political agitators? So many questions so little time...

I would beg to guess it's the same person, multiple screen names. Likely the same person that watches his webcam all day from 700 miles away and calls the cops when an innocent little kid runs across his 'private' beach.

Who are the 'power brokers', anyway?