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

Dave Rauschkolb

Beach Fanatic
Jul 13, 2005
1,006
790
Santa Rosa Beach
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?
 

Jim Tucker

Beach Fanatic
Jul 12, 2005
1,189
497
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.
 

kayti elliott

Beach Lover
Feb 19, 2014
151
87
34
Freeport
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?
 

mputnal

Beach Fanatic
Nov 10, 2009
2,289
1,799
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.
 

mputnal

Beach Fanatic
Nov 10, 2009
2,289
1,799
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.
 
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter