Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

[Lake View Too]

Really? Your are going to talk about family members too? Sad. Juvenile.

I’m saying nothing but good stuff about you and every member of your family. Bum, I think you are a stable genius, and on this thread you are Right. Just the shear number of posts and the word count makes everything you say Right.

 

[Lake View Too]

"Ah, you cursed brat! Look what you've done! I'm melting! Melting! Ohhhhh... What a world, what a world! Who ever thought a little girl like you could destroy my beautiful wickedness?! Ah, I'm going! Ahhh!"

Bum didn’t want us to get too childish. I’m saying you are Right and now you make fun of me. Sigh...

 

[Bob Wells]

And we are back! It makes no difference who is right or who is wrong. Plenty of innocent folks are behind bars because of a BS case was made to a judge or a jury by a prosecutor. Plenty of Guilty are walking free because of an outstanding defense. That said unless you are a lawyer speaking to the Judge/ Jury who will decide this issue you are at this point creating conflict. I appreciate the forum and I really appreciate the idea of expression, what I hate is the context of how many times and how many ways we can say the same thing. I try not to make enemies on here and I know I have a couple but I wonder if we can ever get past are disagreement on this 1 issue that we would ever talk about something else. I was told a long time a go to never discuss religion or politics at the dinner table. Think I will add Customary Use to the list. You all have a fine day.

 

[Poppaj]

Vizcaya private property Plat and deeds are public record if anyone would bother to make the effort. Been posted before.
The beach is private property to the Vizcaya HOA members to the MHWL. As is the private property to the west in the photo and to the east. The private properties on 30A have NEVER had tax payer dredged sand, that does not meet BCC white sand ordinance, added or an ECL established.
The easements are public pedestrian easements for access (not to occupy if not invited) to the foreshore (Sheriff's wet sand with no wind) only. Ask Walton beach director Brian Kellenberger or County Attorney if you don't believe this information.
View attachment 76724

Never means, well never. Are you claiming this property has always been private? No where in history was this stretch of beach free of recorded ownership?

 

[FactorFiction]

I used to love watching and listening to the debate teams in high school. Funny how they could present opposing facts that supported their position and never once call names or say anything demeaning to each other. There are facts on both sides of this issue that support one position or the other, but not both in most instances. Those of you that aren't interested in an opposing viewpoint, just scroll on by or don't even read this particular thread. Somebody on here made a good point about there being numerous sites that fully and wholeheartedly support the CU position. As far as I can tell the only one that wholeheartedly supports the private property position is the Florida Coastal Property Rights site/FB page. Anyone who has no interest in understanding any other perspective should definitely go to a site where almost everyone agrees with you whether the information is factual or not. If instead, you want to hear both sides and do some research and try to put yourself in the other person's shoes even a little bit, then this thread has been rather interesting. I say interesting for two reasons: 1) Because of the contradictory "facts", which probably means that one of those "facts" is not really a fact (maybe neither is) and 2) Because of the study of human behavior in terms of how people are reacting to opposing viewpoints. I don't know about anyone else, but I have some things to research and I've definitely learned a few things about some member's personalities. Thanks again to SOWAL for allowing a two sided discussion here.

 

[miznotebook]

Yes, thanks, SoWal. We have had good discussions on many topics on this site.

 

[Rachael Ashman McKee]

If the Sheriff legally requires you to follow his Standard Operating Procedure before he will come and handle trespassers, you comply. I understand what you’re saying about trespassing shouldn’t be an issue to begin with, but in the interest of doing what the law has asked . Respectfully, it’s done

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

And we are back! It makes no difference who is right or who is wrong. Plenty of innocent folks are behind bars because of a BS case was made to a judge or a jury by a prosecutor. Plenty of Guilty are walking free because of an outstanding defense. That said unless you are a lawyer speaking to the Judge/ Jury who will decide this issue you are at this point creating conflict. I appreciate the forum and I really appreciate the idea of expression, what I hate is the context of how many times and how many ways we can say the same thing. I try not to make enemies on here and I know I have a couple but I wonder if we can ever get past are disagreement on this 1 issue that we would ever talk about something else. I was told a long time a go to never discuss religion or politics at the dinner table. Think I will add Customary Use to the list. You all have a fine day.

And I’m back....

Bob, respectfully, your attempt to defuse this hot topic is a bit entertaining...like an adult trying to break up a playground fight. NOBODY, I mean NOBODY here on SoWal has addressed ANY of the facts that have been presented here by private property rights advocates. I honestly don’t expect anything different - simply because they can’t. And they especially can’t defend their outright lies.

And of couse we ALL know this will settled in court (at everyone’s expense) so that’s obviously not the point in bringing up the facts. The point is that CU followers are being mislead by their leaders who also continue to paint a negative image of BFOs.

What’s also central to this dialogue (at least some of us are trying to have) is the respect thing. It’s totally lacking.

And yes, against your wishes, I will continue to beat this dead horse until someone supporting CU agrees that Daniel Uhlfelder’s inference that BFOs are behaving like Nazis was absolutely totally inappropriate and disrespectful. I’ll add in disgusting. And they should agree that Daniel Uhlfelder (president of FBFA and key representative of ALL Cu folks) should apologize.

I do this because I heard it with my own two ears.

As you know, I have called out Dave Rauschkolb on this thread regarding this subject...nothing. My guess is he’s hoping it will just fade away.

So much of the noise on the CU side is subjective.

HOWEVER, the above is one ABSOLUTELY CLEAR event in my mind that shows the true colors of many of those supporting CU. And this is from “their leader”.

Emotion.

It’s abundantly clear to me (based on Uhfelder’s statements and others) that the CU proponents are much more emotional and will inflame emotions of their support base, fabricate facts and ignore the truth.

 

[bob bob]

SoWal Rules!

 

[Rachael Ashman McKee]

The Sheriff is not demanding signs. The only reason they would require signage is if you are going to be one of the BFOs who demand that those who transverse their sand or - gasp! sit on it, be arrested for trespassing.

If you are going to be a nice BFO and not harass people who use the beach in front of your house, there is no reason to put up a sign.

I agree with you. But, what was required by the Sheriffs office should be followed.