Customary Use Upheld by Federal Court

[jkmason]

Defuniak Herald is reporting

THERE HAS been a recent ruling in federal court in favor of Walton County’s authority to have adopted an ordinance recognizing the public’s right to customary use of county beaches for recreational purposes. The Walton County Customary Use Ordinance went into effect in April 2017

 

[jkmason]

Article

Florida County’s Right to Protect Beach Access Upheld

The Surfrider Foundation’s Emerald Coast Chapter is celebrating a win for public beach access in Walton County, Florida as, last week, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida upheld the County’s “Customary Use” Ordinance.

Surfrider Foundation is pleased with the Court’s decision on the “customary use” issue in the Alford v. Walton County case, whereby Justice Rogers upheld the right of Florida counties to recognize, regulate, and protect public beach access where the public has traditionally recreated. Surfrider previously supported and encouraged the County to recognize and protect the public’s right to continue to utilize its beaches based on a custom of doing so for generations. In 2016, the County did so when it enacted the Customary Use Ordinance, providing that, “The public’s long-standing customary use of the dry sand areas of all of the beaches in the County for recreational purposes is hereby protected.” This case centers around the validity of that ordinance. While acknowledging a “buffer zone,” according to the ordinance, “no individual, group, or entity shall impede or interfere with the right of the public at large, including the residents and visitors of the County, to utilize the dry sand areas of the beach that are owned by private entities for recreational purposes.”

 

[James Bentwood]

I would post a link to the DeFuniak Herald article but although I am a subscriber I don't have a log in and article is behind paywall / login.

 

[formosa64]

Article

Florida County’s Right to Protect Beach Access Upheld

This article is completely MISLEADING. The judge did NOT uphold anything. He refused to rule on the matter in the case - read the case ruling - there is nothing about ruling on customary use, only he was not going to take up the matter as he had already ruled on the first three items. This is FAKE NEWS.

 

[FactorFiction]

This article is completely MISLEADING. The judge did NOT uphold anything. He refused to rule on the matter in the case - read the case ruling - there is nothing about ruling on customary use, only he was not going to take up the matter as he had already ruled on the first three items. This is FAKE NEWS.

My understanding is that in an additional review of her initial ruling related to the signs, Judge Rogers (she) basically upheld Walton County's Home Rule authority to establish the Customary Use Ordinance, while not actually ruling on customary use itself. She also said that property owners have the right to challenge whether customary use actually exists on their property.

 

[formosa64]

My understanding is that in an additional review of her initial ruling related to the signs, Judge Rogers (she) basically upheld Walton County's Home Rule authority to establish the Customary Use Ordinance, while not actually ruling on customary use itself. She also said that property owners have the right to challenge whether customary use actually exists on their property.

Yes thanks, I did not see the "new" replacement order until after I wrote the reply. I agree with your assessment.