Driving On The Beach

BeachSi02, if the access at the Inn at Blue Mtn Beach was required to be accessible by the public, according to the Judge, why is it not listed on the TDC's list of public accesses?

BeachSi02, if the access at the Inn at Blue Mtn Beach was required to be accessible by the public, according to the Judge, why is it not listed on the TDC's list of public accesses?

It's privately-owned and thus not mainatined by the County.

It's privately-owned and thus not mainatined by the County.

That is interesting, because someone else pointed out that the Judge ordered the access to be available for the public along with having 5 parking spaces available to the public. The Flagpole at that access is also numbered and monitored by the SWFD. Very confusing.

That is interesting, because someone else pointed out that the Judge ordered the access to be available for the public along with having 5 parking spaces available to the public. The Flagpole at that access is also numbered and monitored by the SWFD. Very confusing.

Therein lies the difference, it is a privately-owned access that the judge ruled the owners must allow the public to use. It is not a County-maintained access and thus not in the TDC inventory.

As for the flag pole, there are many flag poles on privately-owned property. Why, because if they weren't then there would be huge gaps of beach where the beach user would not have the ability to see the flag in at least one direction from any where on the beach. They were installed through easement with the property owner for beach safety purposes. Other examples where flag poles are installed on privately-owned prioperties include Seaside, Rosemary Beach, Tops'L, Seascape, etc.

I understand, and see that it is getting off topic. Back to driving on the Beach. Good topic, by the way.

Nothing personal Kristi. Never seen your caboose that I know of. Who knows, maybe it can bring world peace.

I understand, and see that it is getting off topic. Back to driving on the Beach. Good topic, by the way.

Its just another hijacked thread..........

A possible way to cut down on traffic on Grayton Beach is to limit permits to homesteaded property owners.........

Not to hijack this further, but I'd never seen Kristi's quote from Mother Teresa. It is as honest a quote from her that I've seen. Her hunger for personal appreciation was far more than her hunger for bread for those she purported to help.

Sorry guys - I'll let you get back to the sea turtle talk. They are delicious in soup.

A possible way to cut down on traffic on Grayton Beach is to limit permits to homesteaded property owners.........

That is an idea that I, too, have thought about. However, I have a difficult time with the part about having to own. I know that current rules also require ownership of land, but what about the person that rents here and lives here year round? Though, I'm not sure that would help things out as it may increase more vehicles on the beach, too. Maybe the homestead property owners would be the way to go. It would at least be a good start, and I guarantee you that we would have less vehicles on the beach. In the summer, it gets a little overwhelming.

That is an idea that I, too, have thought about. However, I have a difficult time with the part about having to own. I know that current rules also require ownership of land, but what about the person that rents here and lives here year round? Though, I'm not sure that would help things out as it may increase more vehicles on the beach, too. Maybe the homestead property owners would be the way to go. It would at least be a good start, and I guarantee you that we would have less vehicles on the beach. In the summer, it gets a little overwhelming.

Walton County rules requiring property ownership to access a public beach are unconstitutional pure and simple. The same for the rules for dog permits. You can not make residency a requirement in your county to access public facilities. You could justify some sort of cost differential but otherwise you are ignoring the 14th amendment. Now trying to find someone to do something about it is another story in itself.

Interesting point, waltondude. Are you basing that on the 14th Amendment's Section 1, which provides for equal protection of the laws?

Walton County rules requiring property ownership to access a public beach are unconstitutional pure and simple. The same for the rules for dog permits. You can not make residency a requirement in your county to access public facilities. You could justify some sort of cost differential but otherwise you are ignoring the 14th amendment. Now trying to find someone to do something about it is another story in itself.

:rofl:

Who is being denied access?

Everybody has access to the beach at Grayton, but some folks have to walk and leave Fido at home.

:rofl:

Who is being denied access?

Everybody has access to the beach at Grayton, but some folks have to walk and leave Fido at home.

...I you!!!! Leave my dog out of this! Can you even imagine if everyone and his dog could walk on the beach????? Forget the other CRAP...this would be literal!!!!

As a native of Walton County and now an absentee owner at Grayton, I have mixed feelings on this topic. On the one hand, on a beach that is a protected biota habitat, driving seems at cross purposes. Then again, the area where driving can occur is such a confined one (with state parks anchoring either end) that potential damage is contained and fairly obvious to those in the know. The flip side of this issue is consideration of the reasons that driving is still allowed at Grayton. The first is that sunset worshipers are a tradition at Grayton and wouldn't we all miss the tailgate happy hours and beach picnics? Plus, there are a few commercial fishing interests that rely on that beach area for launching of their charter fishing boats. I know they are experiencing economic constraints and increasing competition from other charters. Should we look out for these locals?

As for dogs and as a dog owner, I just make a point to take Butter out during the times dogs are allowed. Dogs are a bad mix with sea birds and turtle eggs. Plus, I remember a time when dogs roamed unleashed on Grayton Beach and still remember watching two German shepherds attack my younger brother on the beach. It is a small price to pay, folks. And I am still distressed at how few people bother to pick up waste after their dogs. Miss Kitty, we should form a poop brigade.

So my take is that the existing and controlled level of driving on Grayton Beach is not harmful enough to justify disrupting a beloved tradition and the livelihoods of local fisherman. And that dogs on the beach have to be minimized/controlled in some manner, so what better way than confining this to certain hours and to homeowners? As you would expect, I don't think this should be homestead owners only, because absentee owners have their dogs down there for such a short time and because we are paying much, much higher taxes than homestead folks. Seems only fair.

These are good subjects for this forum.

You'd be amazed at the number of people who say they bought/live here only because they could take their dogs to the beach. :roll:

I had a beach dog tag once (actually, it was Daisy's) and I had a beach driving permit once. Perhaps if Fuzz had been the one driving and/or walking the lab, things would have turned out better. :funn:

Did you get a ticket, SN ? ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-)

lol..not quite...after the third time I got stuck and had to walk up to my uncle's house to get him to pull me out, he gently suggested that if I want to ride on the sand, to stop at his house first and he would take me. :roll: I no longer have a 4WD, so it's no longer an issue.

And if you can picture a large woman "skiing" down the beach being towed by a large, hyper Labrador Retriever, you can probably figure out the rest of the dog walking episode... :sick:

:funn:

Walton County rules requiring property ownership to access a public beach are unconstitutional pure and simple. The same for the rules for dog permits. You can not make residency a requirement in your county to access public facilities. You could justify some sort of cost differential but otherwise you are ignoring the 14th amendment. Now trying to find someone to do something about it is another story in itself.

I don't understand why it is unconstitutional. You have to live in a school district to use the public schools, why not to use a public beach in a special way?