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

wrobert

Beach Fanatic
Nov 21, 2007
4,134
575
61
DeFuniak Springs
www.defuniaksprings.com
Okay, silly me, running for office, and here I am going to start a thread on a very controversial issue. Oh well, never been accused of being scared or smart for that matter. I would like to learn more about this though. So please, no attacking me for discussing things.

I was born in Florida, grew up on the beach, so it was never a big deal to me. Few people lived down there, and I always just went and did whatever I wanted so never really ran into the private/public issue. Now I am hearing so much.

I understand the point of the landowners. They purchased, in good faith, and were sold, what they felt is a private beach. They paid very good money for that land and continue to pay way too much money in taxes, if you ask me for the land. Now most of the beach has been sold to one concern or another and access is starting to be an issue. For most locals, I imagine it is not nearly that bad, most of you seem reasonable and I am sure just walk along or use the beach in a responsible way. What I keep hearing are the stories of people pitching tents up next to the dune lines and partying to all hours, leaving trash, and just generally making it where the landowner can not enjoy their property. And one bad experience does tend to cause people to react to the extreme. So landowners seem to be trying to take steps to protect their property.

I understand the point of the non-landowners. The beach is something that has been customarily enjoyed for years. And the vast majority are not doing anything to interfere with the landowners property, yet the public is being denied access to something that they have always used.

But this is where it gets confusing to me. If the government declares customary use is okay, does that not take the land from the private property owners? How does that affect the value of the land? I am sure private beach is worth quite a bit more than public beach. What about liability for that section of the beach? Do we just apply customary use to the beach itself and not other areas of the county?

Well this is something to discuss.
 

TooFarTampa

SoWal Insider
It sure is! :wave:

What I keep hearing are the stories of people pitching tents up next to the dune lines and partying to all hours, leaving trash, and just generally making it where the landowner can not enjoy their property. And one bad experience does tend to cause people to react to the extreme.

If this is truly the main issue, and why battle lines are being drawn, I think it would be appropriate for owners of private beaches to post signs notifying beachgoers that they are on private property. Then saying :welcome: as long as you do the following:

-- pick up your trash
-- don't leave stuff overnight
-- if you are too loud you will be asked to leave.

Then enforce those rules!

Is it really that complicated? I agree that once granted, the county or state cannot easily take away the private ownership of the beach. But I also agree that beaches are meant to be enjoyed, and no one should be kicking off little kids for sitting on the dry sand.

In most cases the beach is low enough relative to the house and rest of the lot that it doesn't exactly feel like a "back yard." Common courtesy and common sense, and communication by the rental agencies would do a lot to make this mess go away!
 

wrobert

Beach Fanatic
Nov 21, 2007
4,134
575
61
DeFuniak Springs
www.defuniaksprings.com
It sure is! :wave:
Is it really that complicated? I agree that once granted, the county or state cannot easily take away the private ownership of the beach. But I also agree that beaches are meant to be enjoyed, and no one should be kicking off little kids for sitting on the dry sand.

In most cases the beach is low enough relative to the house and rest of the lot that it doesn't exactly feel like a "back yard." Common courtesy and common sense, and communication by the rental agencies would do a lot to make this mess go away!


The government has allowed people to purchase the beach. The government and private developers have enjoyed significant monetary gain from this purchase over the years. Now that it appears that the people who sacrificed to make these purchases do not want people in their back yard, the government is going to take it away. I know I would not want anyone coming into my backyard and setting up camp to enjoy land that their ancestors had free roam of years ago.

And why that particular spot on the beach? Walton County has more miles of public owned beach than private owned. So why are we not concentrating on making those areas available to the public. Open up areas that are surrounded by nothing so the crowds would not have to go onto private beach. Would that be enough to take the stress out of the situation so we could just get back to neighbors using the beach in these areas?

It seems to me now that the developers and have made their dollars promoting private beaches, they now get the government to take those beaches, make them public, then they can start all over again working on the north side of the street.

It seems real easy to get the government to take things, because the cost is spread out among a much larger group of people costing everyone just a very small amount, even those that do not use or intend to use the property.
 

Bobby J

Beach Fanatic
Apr 18, 2005
4,043
600
Blue Mountain beach
www.lifeonshore.com
My lot line extends out into the road way. The road has always been used and enjoyed by people. I guess it is the same thing. It falls into customary use or should I put up a big sign saying private road? Kind of an odd issue but we all know the beaches have been used and enjoyed for years. I guess we will get to see what the courts decide.
 

Smiling JOe

SoWal Expert
Nov 18, 2004
31,648
1,773
But this is where it gets confusing to me. If the government declares customary use is okay, does that not take the land from the private property owners? How does that affect the value of the land? I am sure private beach is worth quite a bit more than public beach. What about liability for that section of the beach? Do we just apply customary use to the beach itself and not other areas of the county?

Well this is something to discuss.

If the Courts ruled in favor of the beach-going public, and someone holds the deed to the lower elevation of beach, nothing is any different than the last 100 years. The public would continue to use the beach as they had always done. The deed-holder cannot build a house on that beach, cannot erect a fence blocking others, etc. There are limitations that come with all real estate ownership. Easements are a prime example. Restrictions and Covenants are other examples. The deed holder isn't having anything taken from her or him if the Court rules in favor of the public.

Where does Customary Use stop? Good question. In my opinion, it stops where there hasn't been customary use of privately-owned property.

Regarding liability, that is one for a lawyer to give advice, but from my layman's understanding of liability, the deed holder is responsible. With this being the case, in my personal (non-legal), it would be a wise for any Gulf front owner to dedicate that lower elevation to the State to remove personal liability and reduce property taxes, likely by 50%. The property owner would actually gain value by reducing liability, IMO.

I'm still wondering who decided they owned the beach way back when. Did an upland land owner decide to take it from the State? It would be interesting to trace the deeds back to find out who first laid claim to the lower beach elevations.
 

SHELLY

SoWal Insider
Jun 13, 2005
5,770
802
WR,

From reading your comments I've got a pretty good idea as to whose side you're taking...it's a matter of "My mind is made up, don't confuse me with the facts."

There is a very simple solution to this "problem." Get the Coastal Vision 3000 Cabal to change their brand tagline to "THEIR™ Beach"...problem solved. :dunno:


<PS: Developers' or Realtors' puffery doesn't make it so.>

.
 
Last edited:
I know of one development where the parcel maps for some of the beachfront lots go to the mean high-water line, yet the parcel maps for other beachfront lots indicate that these parcels end at the dunes and that the beach in front of their lots are for use by the non-beach-front owners in that development.:dunno:
 

wrobert

Beach Fanatic
Nov 21, 2007
4,134
575
61
DeFuniak Springs
www.defuniaksprings.com
WR,

From reading your comments I've got a pretty good idea as to whose side you're taking...it's a matter of "My mind is made up, don't confuse me with the facts."

There is a very simple solution to this "problem." Get the Coastal Vision 3000 Cabal to change their brand tagline to "THEIR? Beach"...problem solved. :dunno:


<PS: Developers' or Realtors' puffery doesn't make it so.>

.


Shelly,

I am not taking anyone's side on this issue. But I am putting forth the arguments that I hear against customary beach use to try to get a better understanding of the issue. What little bit of time I have spent at the beach lately has been taking pictures of signs telling me to stay off the beach. Which, to be honest, I do find a bit insulting. Especially when I see the TDC patrolling and cleaning something with public dollars that I am not suppose to be able to use.
 

wrobert

Beach Fanatic
Nov 21, 2007
4,134
575
61
DeFuniak Springs
www.defuniaksprings.com
I know of one development where the parcel maps for some of the beachfront lots go to the mean high-water line, yet the parcel maps for other beachfront lots indicate that these parcels end at the dunes and that the beach in front of their lots are for use by the non-beach-front owners in that development.:dunno:

True. From what I hear some developers sold property to the mhw line and the same developers sold adjoining parcels to the dunes reserving the property for use by projects across the street. I think this occurred in Paradise by the Sea. So you take a huge project and give them a little piece of public land, surrounded by private land, and you wonder why they have problems.

Declaring customary use would probably solve a lot of problems. But how are you going to compensate people for the taking of private land. If they have a deed is that not all they need? Or do we just ignore that deed because we do not like what it says? And if you do the taking, where does the money come from to defend that taking? With revenue limits and SOH along with flat growth, what revenue source do you tap?


Shelly-I will say that I am a big proponent of private property rights while I am thinking of it. I certainly would not want someone to come and take my land. And I am sure Native Americans could make an argument for customary use along the creeks that meander through my property.
 

TooFarTampa

SoWal Insider
Shelly,

I am not taking anyone's side on this issue. But I am putting forth the arguments that I hear against customary beach use to try to get a better understanding of the issue. What little bit of time I have spent at the beach lately has been taking pictures of signs telling me to stay off the beach. Which, to be honest, I do find a bit insulting. Especially when I see the TDC patrolling and cleaning something with public dollars that I am not suppose to be able to use.

Or adding to the property via beach restoration using public dollars. Seems like some property owners (but I would guess not a majority) want it both ways. :dunno:
 
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter