This morning as my wife and I were returing form a shoreline walk we saw county officials asking a couple of men to move their "set up" from infront of The Retreat at Blue Mountain Beach. About an hour later my wife saw him being led from the beach in handcuffs for tresspassing. One of the men was taking pictures... maybe we'll see them post them here.
I know from reading previous posts that this is a hot button issue but it seems that some want to enforce the "letter of the law". I saw where they were placed and it was close to the water line very near the boundry of the Inn at Blue Mountain. They seemed to minding their own business. As the sherriff left I happened to walk by them and heard "I think it was the right call... where the wet sand meets the dry".
I'm confused, the beachgoers were were set up outside of the posted signs. If the owners really want to keep people out can they fence in their beach? (not that I'd want to see that)
In the many years of coming to SoWal I've always been impressed with the civility of residents and tourists -- although I have heard some horror stories. We abolutely love it here and treat it as though we already live here. But I was very surprised that it seems the owners are calling the country for what seems such a small infraction -- seems like a waste.
This was the second day in a row that I saw county officials inforcing the private beach rule.
Is the pendulum swinging?
Replies
962Beach Fanatic
I believe I understand that which you are saying, but let's say that the ECL is established, the sand is pumped, the beach is extended 50ft. A powerful set of storms blow in, and remove all of the sand back to the ECL, the line where the original private property was deeded to. Now, the original deeded private property no longer has State beaches in front of it, so wouldn't we be back to where we are now with the legal battles of the public not being able to sit on the dry sand beach, which is landward of the ECL?
I have received confirmation. If the beach washes away, then the ECL would be the property line. If the ECL washes away, too, then the wet sand, dry sand rule would apply. Then, if the beach is to be renourished again, a new ECL line would have to be established.
SoWal Expert
1. No, but probably modifications to existing permits since they are valid for 10 years.
2. yes, based on previous hurricane season's it would be 12.5% Walton County
3. Most restored beaches in Florida that were impacted in the 2004 hurricane season were restored by the start of the 2005 season.
Wow! I didn't know that they were replaced so quickly. How do they act so quickly on average? It seems to me that we take half a year to discover white sand deposits at sea.
Beach Fanatic
If FEMA and the State step in to continuing renourishment, are new permits required, will the County have to add funding? That seems like it would be very, very costly. What happens during the time period between when the sand is washed back to sea, and the time when the sand is replaced? Couldn't that take years?
I don't believe FEMA has anything to do with the beach renourishment. I could be wrong, but I don't think they do.
SoWal Expert
I was just using BeachSiO2's quote of departments. I thought the same thing at first, but I could see how FEMA could step in to save the shoreline, which is the lifeblood of Florida's economy.
I don't believe FEMA has anything to do with the beach renourishment. I could be wrong, but I don't think they do.
Beach Fanatic
Wow! I didn't know that they were replaced so quickly. How do they act so quickly on average? It seems to me that we take half a year to discover white sand deposits at sea.
I am told the reason it took so long is our beaches have to be labeled as Critically Eroded. That is the hold up on Holiday Isle now. That was the hold up in Crystal Beach. (for the project to beginm turtles prevented us from finishing until about a month ago)
Beach Fanatic
Wow! I didn't know that they were replaced so quickly. How do they act so quickly on average? It seems to me that we take half a year to discover white sand deposits at sea.
Keep in mind this means that there are already valid permits. Typically, in existing projects some sand has been identified and those areas are usually enlarged if needed through a permit modification, or other sites are located. Based on County reports it appears that in Walton County, they have completed an analysis of all sand available and have found enough sand to restore the beach, which is why they have applied for new permits for 30A.
Beach Fanatic
I don't believe FEMA has anything to do with the beach renourishment. I could be wrong, but I don't think they do.
Fortunately, you are wrong. FEMA will pay 75% of the cost to restore an engineered beach and the state will pick up 1/2 of the remaining cost. A beach restoration project is a restored beach .
See FAQ under Implications
http://protectwaltoncountybeaches.com/phaseII_faq.asp
Beach Fanatic
I am told the reason it took so long is our beaches have to be labeled as Critically Eroded. That is the hold up on Holiday Isle now. That was the hold up in Crystal Beach. (for the project to beginm turtles prevented us from finishing until about a month ago)
I think you are mixing the repair of an exisiting project which is what SJ was talking about, and the starting of a new project. As for the starting of a new project on 30A, check out the FAQ that was produced for the project. They have a lot of good information at:
http://protectwaltoncountybeaches.com/phaseII_faq.asp
Beach Fanatic
...... I also think you have avoided certain issues such as why would one want to say there beach was "private". Are you concerned about your property values? Are you the lone Saviour for property rights? I have openly stated my reason of why I feel the beaches should and are public. I would like to hear the real reason BMBV benefits from a so called "private" beach. I have stated my benefits for the public to have full access. Please address the answer from a personal point of view. I am looking for why "you" want such thing as a "private beach". I am trying to understand the other side of this issue. Thanks in advance.
From the Walton Sun, Bobby J said.....
?Without beach access and open beaches I will not have a real estate business. I have used all these beaches for years and will continue to do so. The state constitution says all beaches below the mean high-water line, or the wet sand, are public.?
? Bobby Johnson,
Santa Rosa Beach
The simple economic law of supply and demand will cause the prices of homes to seek their own level based on circumstances. Simply drop the price, and the house will sell.
Beach Fanatic
Fortunately, you are wrong. FEMA will pay 75% of the cost to restore an engineered beach and the state will pick up 1/2 of the remaining cost. A beach restoration project is a restored beach .
See FAQ under Implications
http://protectwaltoncountybeaches.com/phaseII_faq.asp
This must be a paragraph you are referring to:
Why not wait until after the next storm and let FEMA pay for the recovery?
In a disaster, FEMA will pay for up to 75 percent of recovery efforts for the restoration of an engineered beach. After the completion of the restoration project, it will be an engineered beach. On non-engineered beaches only emergency protection is eligible for FEMA reimbursement. Emergency protection is less than 10 percent of sand placed in a beach restoration project. Emergency protection consisted of beach scraping along the 30-A corridor after Hurricanes Ivan and Dennis as those areas were not engineered beaches.
The beaches of South Walton are not considered an engineered beach, except for the area from Sandestin to the Okaloosa County line. FEMA payed for none of the restoration. The State funded 75% and the TDC 25%. The restored parts can now get help from FEMA.
The ONLY thing FEMA has done is scraped the beach and built a berm on State Property.
SoWal Expert
People buy and build homes here because of the beaches. People vacation here because of the beaches.
No beach access unless you live on a beachfront lot, no market for non-beachfront homes.
Price was not the determining factor in Bobby's statement.
No beach access unless you live on a beachfront lot, no market for non-beachfront homes.
Price was not the determining factor in Bobby's statement.
SoWal Expert
The beaches of South Walton are not considered an engineered beach, except for the area from Sandestin to the Okaloosa County line. FEMA payed for none of the restoration. The State funded 75% and the TDC 25%. The restored parts can now get help from FEMA.
The ONLY thing FEMA has done is scraped the beach and built a berm on State Property.
I think people mis-use the word, "re-nourishment," when they really mean, "nourishment." It sounds like FEMA pays for re-nourishment, but not nourishment.
SoWal Expert
People buy and build homes here because of the beaches. People vacation here because of the beaches.
No beach access unless you live on a beachfront lot, no market for non-beachfront homes.
Even BMBV stated earlier, that most people don't come here to surf. Most come to enjoy the beach. This area is not referred to as the Gulf of South Walton, but rather, the Beaches of South Walton. I know people who will not even step foot in the Gulf when they come to the beach, but everyone tends to at least sit on the dry sandy beach. I think this is a huge issue when talking about public accesses. Accesses to what, the Gulf, in which many people don't spend much time? or the beach, where most everyone tends to spend some time?
Beach Fanatic
I believe I understand that which you are saying, but let's say that the ECL is established, the sand is pumped, the beach is extended 50ft. A powerful set of storms blow in, and remove all of the sand back to the ECL, the line where the original private property was deeded to. Now, the original deeded private property no longer has State beaches in front of it, so wouldn't we be back to where we are now with the legal battles of the public not being able to sit on the dry sand beach, which is landward of the ECL?
Yes, that is true but typically FEMA and the State step in to help restore the beach to the pre-storm condition.
This must be a paragraph you are referring to:
Why not wait until after the next storm and let FEMA pay for the recovery?
In a disaster, FEMA will pay for up to 75 percent of recovery efforts for the restoration of an engineered beach. After the completion of the restoration project, it will be an engineered beach. On non-engineered beaches only emergency protection is eligible for FEMA reimbursement. Emergency protection is less than 10 percent of sand placed in a beach restoration project. Emergency protection consisted of beach scraping along the 30-A corridor after Hurricanes Ivan and Dennis as those areas were not engineered beaches.
The beaches of South Walton are not considered an engineered beach, except for the area from Sandestin to the Okaloosa County line. FEMA payed for none of the restoration. The State funded 75% and the TDC 25%. The restored parts can now get help from FEMA.
The ONLY thing FEMA has done is scraped the beach and built a berm on State Property.
You are correct but look above at the posts that spurred my comments. We are only talking about beaches that have an ECL, NOT 30A. That means they have already been RESTORED. If a beach has been restored then it is eligible for FEMA and state funds as an engineered beach. The beach was built after the hurricanes of 2005 so they haven't needed to restore it. By the way, the County paid about 73% and the state paid about 27%, not the other way around.
Beach Fanatic
.....while using other tourist tax dollars to maintain "public" beach accesses that lead to private beaches, and telling those same tourists that they may be asked to leave.......It's more than a little strange. Something just ain't right!
....Even when they happen to be located within walking distance of one of the public accesses their taxes fund, now they have to fire up a car and add to the traffic to get to one of the regional beaches. Does anyone else think this is a little strange?
However, let's temper things here just a little. I know nobody is being run off, as an example in the Blue Mountain Beach public access area if they are on private property. This may change and change soon, but for now its business and pleasure as usual for the most part.
So for any prospective tourist trying to get a handle on what's going on, just stay away from the Retreat and the Inn at Blue Mountain Beach and maybe another one or two and you'll be OK. Don't push the issue, as some here would encourage....example: don't debate the MHWL if asked to leave. You will be arrested as already evidenced. Use good sense and have fun.
The wheels that are in motion are much much much bigger than any of us are able to stop with our opinions here on this thread. Things will pan out where they will.
needs to get out more
something to chew on. In Cape May, NJ the entire beach is public, and everyone who sets foot on the sand is required to have a 'beach tag' on their person, plainly visible. a lot of money is generated this way for daily cleaning, lifeguards, and renourishment(i believe). this system has worked for years.
http://www.capemaycity.com/announcements.htm#tags
http://www.capemaycity.com/announcements.htm#tags
Beach Fanatic
I think people mis-use the word, "re-nourishment," when they really mean, "nourishment." It sounds like FEMA pays for re-nourishment, but not nourishment.
Actually, there really isn't any such thing as renourishment if you think about it. You restore a beach, and then nourish it, and then nourish it again (if neccesary). It's like eating dinner. Do you eat dinner to renourish your body, or to nourish your body. Just because you do it every day doesn't change it's meaning.
First time= restoration
Second time= nourishment
Third time= nourishment, etc...
Edited
SoWal Expert
something to chew on. In Cape May, NJ the entire beach is public, and everyone who sets foot on the sand is required to have a 'beach tag' on their person, plainly visible. a lot of money is generated this way for daily cleaning, lifeguards, and renourishment(i believe). this system has worked for years.To heck with permits to enter the beach! That is just silly. I am for free and open access of, and too, the beach.
http://www.capemaycity.com/announcements.htm#tags
Beach Fanatic
It's more than a little strange. Something just ain't right!
However, let's temper things here just a little. I know nobody is being run off, as an example in the Blue Mountain Beach public access area if they are on private property. This may change and change soon, but for now its business and pleasure as usual for the most part.
So for any prospective tourist trying to get a handle on what's going on, just stay away from the Retreat and the Inn at Blue Mountain Beach and maybe another one or two and you'll be OK. Don't push the issue, as some here would encourage....example: don't debate the MHWL if asked to leave. You will be arrested as already evidenced. Use good sense and have fun.
The wheels that are in motion are much much much bigger than any of us are able to stop with our opinions here on this thread. Things will pan out where they will.
It will be very interesting to see who kicks people off the beach at the access because there is platted "beach" on both sides, and the upland property lines stop at the top of the dune. I personally look forward to meeting the "owner" of the "beach."
Edited
needs to get out more
To heck with permits to enter the beach! That is just silly. I am for free and open access of, and too, the beach.
i agree, i'm not using it as an example of 'who' can get on the beach, i'm using it as an example to raise funds for cleaning, maintenance, and possibly purchasing rights...
should have been a little more clear. it's just a different way another community does it.
SoWal Expert
Actually, there really isn't any such thing as renourishment if you think about it. You restore a beach, and then nourish it, and then nourish it again (if neccesary). It's like eating dinner. Do you eat dinner to renourish you body, or to nourish your body. Just because you do it every day doesn't change it's meaning.Makes since to me, but will you please explain that to all the people in the higher-ups, that we don't renourish something that hasn't been nourished in the first place?
First time= restoration
Second time= nourishment
Third time= nourishment, etc...
Maybe we should be re-eating instead of eating.
Anywho, it does make a difference when talking about FEMA funding a beach which has been restored then destroyed, rather than one which has not been restored.
SoWal Expert
something to chew on. In Cape May, NJ the entire beach is public, and everyone who sets foot on the sand is required to have a 'beach tag' on their person, plainly visible. a lot of money is generated this way for daily cleaning, lifeguards, and renourishment(i believe). this system has worked for years.
http://www.capemaycity.com/announcements.htm#tags
I think they did the tags because they don't have the bed taxes etc. to fall back on. IMO we have plenty of money to maintain the beaches, the big issue is being able to USE them!
We used to have patches you sewed on your swimsuit for the city pool - my mother hated them as they were constantly getting lost and you had to pay full replacement fee.
It was a concern that enforcement would be too difficult to keep tents etc. off the beach, so I don't know how they could easily enforce this tag system here.
Good idea in that those using the beach directly pay for its upkeep, but I keep picturing a prize bull w/ a yellow plastic tag in its ear.
SoWal Expert
i agree, i'm not using it as an example of 'who' can get on the beach, i'm using it as an example to raise funds for cleaning, maintenance, and possibly purchasing rights...
should have been a little more clear. it's just a different way another community does it.
Gotcha. We have the TDC, and tourists and short-term rentors, plus many respectful frequenters who clean the beaches here.
BeachSiO2, maybe DOG owns the beach.
Dog is my co-pilot... :funn:Beach Fanatic
Makes since to me, but will you please explain that to all the people in the higher-ups, that we don't renourish something that hasn't been nourished in the first place?
Maybe we should be re-eating instead of eating.
Anywho, it does make a difference when talking about FEMA funding a beach which has been restored then destroyed, rather than one which has not been restored.
And this is what I thought you were asking about- a restored beach, which is why I said that FEMA would probably participate. Thanks for jumping on the grammar bandwagon with me, but I didn't see the word "renourish" in anything I linked to, did you? If I ever get a chance to talk to higher ups, I will let them know. But then again, I heard you were running for County Commissioner.
Edited
SoWal Expert
And this is what I thought you were asking about- a restored beach, which is why I said that FEMA would probably participate. Thanks for jumping on the grammar bandwagon with me, but I didn't see the word "renourish" in anything I linked to, did you? If I ever get a chance to talk to higher ups, I will let them know. But then again, I heard you were running for County Commissioner.I don't recall you using the term, renourish, but I have, just following most people who discuss the issues. I don't like confusing the matter more, but we need to be speaking intelligently on the matter, because it does make a distinct difference when talking about restoration vs nourishment.
Checking your forum account
Please wait while we verify your forum account.