• Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
New posts

steel1man

Beach Fanatic
Jan 10, 2013
2,291
659
TDC will be issuing citations even as legal proceedings develop. Good for BCC but only because it's election year and appears district 5 up for grabs. They will always appear to be doing right for citizens every election cycle
 

Misty

Banned
Dec 15, 2011
2,769
752
The same Law Firm representing the Goodwins have asked the N.C. Supreme Court to review a decision by the state Court of Appeals from late last year that laid out where the line for public and private meet. The unanimous three-judge decision upheld an Emerald Isle ordinance barring beachfront property owners from putting any beach equipment or structures “within an area 20 feet seaward of the base of the frontal dunes.”

That ruling established that access to North Carolina beaches extends landward from the mean high-water mark over the dry sand beach to the foot of the most seaward dune. Where there are no dunes, the dry sand beach extends to the first line of stable, natural vegetation or to the storm trash line that shows the highest point of a storm tide.

Read more here: www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article98185582.html#storylink=cpy
 

Misty

Banned
Dec 15, 2011
2,769
752
Guest Column NWFL Daily News Saturday Aug 27, 2016 (Nice Letter)

One beach, indivisible:
This is the lifestyle you chose on Gulf

I was fortunate to spend the better part of my childhood growing up on a deep bayou-front property in central Fort Walton Beach. My father, a local attorney, explained to me when I was very young that the family’s property line extended to the bayou’s high water mark.

During the summer months, neighborhood boys wandered over from the nearby boat ramp to fish from our beachfront. Dad never once admonished these boys with their buckets and their nets. Noisy jet skis sometimes encircled the family dock; a few daredevils even “jumped” over it. We accepted it. A drunken boater demolished our dock during an evening incident. Dad rebuilt it. Lost boaters sometimes showed up on our shore. We pointed them in the right direction. An exhausted swimmer sought help at our kitchen window late one evening; Dad rushed the stranger to the emergency room.

I learned the meaning of customary use. While we enjoyed the breathtaking views and sun-soaked activities that the bayou offered us, we did not “own” the bayou or the beachfront because others were regularly exercising their customary use. We inherently understood that ownership of waterfront property was a mixed blessing.

On the other hand, I witnessed our inland neighbors across the road lose their beach access. At the end of the road lay a beautiful, pristine waterfront park, which was available for all in the neighborhood to enjoy. Unfortunately, our neighbors were too busy to enjoy it. Or they forgot about it. Or they did not understand that customary use can be retracted from those who DON’T exercise their rights to the use of certain property. Dad tried to fight it for the sake of the neighborhood, both inland and on the water, but he ultimately lost to a waterfront neighbor juxtaposed to the park, who eventually acquired a very nice piece of land.

I read with a quiet rage Palm Beach Gardens attorney Christina Martin’s plea for beach property owners’ rights to post “Do Not Trespass” signs. Ms. Martin must have been paid well for her guest column in our local paper and for such a heartwarming plea for the Goodwins, the poor beachfront-owning family subjected to “abuse” from beachgoers. Or perhaps her wealthy Palm Beach clients are following the plight of Walton County with interest.

She states that the Goodwins were just exercising their First Amendment rights by posting signs and that we should be thankful to them for calling attention to these rights. The Palm Beach attorney fails to understand the final “blur,” however, or conveniently doesn’t acknowledge it. This blur lies in the fact that such signs hold the power to curb customary usage through their threatening message. These are not simply signs for a lemonade stand or a garage sale. These signs are legal threats that hold the power for damage — loss of customary usage rights — and that is the gray area. Just like our neighborhood park, which was lost to a neighbor already living on the water, these signs could effect such a loss by curbing customary usage through implied threats of legal action.

To the Goodwins, I would like to suggest that you count your blessings each glorious sunset. I believe that I speak for the majority when I say that we don’t really sympathize with you. We see Ms. Martin’s suggestion that we should “thank” you as audacious and off mark. To the contrary, we see ourselves as supporting your way of life through our higher insurance rates, which will help to rebuild your house when a bad storm hits. We see ourselves as supporting your way of life by re-nourishing your sand when higher sea levels could eventually send your home floating into the Gulf. You, in turn, should recognize that beachgoers have been walking these beaches since creation. We are grandfathered in to our very distant greats.

For better or worse, this is the lifestyle you chose, and you should be the ones thanking us for helping you to support it. Ms. Martin, in the popular trend this election year, alludes to Ronald Reagan, “Freedom is Indivisible.” Indeed, let’s not divide our freedom, our children’s freedom and our grandchildren’s freedom to walk a stretch of beach by building a “wall” of signs, chains and barriers to separate generations who freely strolled on the white sands before us.

One beach, indivisible.

Andrea Libby is resident of Niceville.
 
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter