Led away in Handcuffs

[Smiling JOe]

At the risk of sounding like a psychiatrist, how do you feel about it?

Were any of these requests for property with beach accesses to "nowhere"?

It isn't so much a feeling which I have regarding it as it is a thought. I think that the County should not be approving things which squeeze more people into the existing infrastructure. Until the County is willing to address the lack of parking and restrooms at beach accesses, they should not be adding more units by increasing density. The one exception I could think of would be affordable housing of some sort. I think the Commissioners forget that a substantial number of the lots in SoWal are not built out, and when they are built out in the future, we will have a bigger strain on everything around here.

As for your last question, the County's accesses go to the beaches of South Walton, and it is debatable whether or not they go to nowhere.

 

[Smiling JOe]

So here's a question. Flag Post #16 is located at the entrance beside the Inn at Blue Mtn. I am fairly certain that the Flag at that location is maintained by the SWFD. I've read on here that the particular access is for only the guests and owners of people who are members of good standing with the Blue Mtn Beach Club. If that is so, why is the County (SWFD) maintaining the flag? To my knowledge, they don't manage any other flag poles/flags on private property in Walton County. Do you know different?

 

[Bob]

First, beach service can be requested by private property owners. I don't see any relevance here with all the talk regarding beach service. Perhaps you could explain why this subject continues to pop up.

Second, as I've already said, someone else posted "...someone sitting on one patch of sand does not prevent someone else from using another nearby patch."

I just thought I would show that the beach can get a little crowded and that finding a "nearby patch" of sand could be difficult at times. What better than a photograph?

Does this clear things up?

You deliberately used a telephoto shot that compresses depth of field to illustrate a holiday crowd directly in front of several condo complexes on a beachfront sorely in need of renourishment. That's highly manipulative, and does not characterize most of Blue Mountain Beach on any given day. Of course, as a local owner, you know better!?

 

[Smiling JOe]

You deliberately used a telephoto shot that compresses depth of field to illustrate a holiday crowd directly in front of several condo complexes on a beachfront sorely in need of renourishment. That's highly manipulative, and does not characterize most of Blue Mountain Beach on any given day. Of course, as a local owner, you know better!?

Bob, while it appears that the photo was zoomed in a bit, it is fairly accurate in appearance of that stretch of beach to the west of the CR83 access. I think, for that particular stretch, this week is just as busy as last week. See attachment for different view of the same stretch, of a photo take this week. (No zoom lense used.)

Let's keep in mind that these are the same folks who share common walls in many cases, so being in the shade of someone else's umbrella, doesn't seem to bother them. Thanks, but no thanks.

 

[Bob]

Bob, while it appears that the photo was zoomed in a bit, it is fairly accurate in appearance of that stretch of beach to the west of the CR83 access. I think, for that particular stretch, this week is just as busy as last week. See attachment for different view of the same stretch, of a photo take this week. (No zoom lense used.)

Let's keep in mind that these are the same folks who share common walls in many cases, so being in the shade of someone else's umbrella, doesn't seem to bother them. Thanks, but no thanks.

Agreed, but look at the depth of the beach in the photos. It's pitiful!

 

[Smiling JOe]

Regardless of how it may appear in the photos, that stretch of beach is shoulder to shoulder under those tents and umbrellas (when people are actually in the chairs), and it isn't only during Holiday weeks.

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

It isn't so much a feeling which I have regarding it as it is a thought. I think that the County should not be approving things which squeeze more people into the existing infrastructure. Until the County is willing to address the lack of parking and restrooms at beach accesses, they should not be adding more units by increasing density. The one exception I could think of would be affordable housing of some sort. I think the Commissioners forget that a substantial number of the lots in SoWal are not built out, and when they are built out in the future, we will have a bigger strain on everything around here.

Yep. Public or private the beach itself is also a finite resource.

As for your last question, the County's accesses go to the beaches of South Walton, and it is debatable whether or not they go to nowhere.

The people that were arrested...they also debated this issue with the deputies but lost out. Don't get mad, that was just a jab. It's late at night.

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

I finally found a list of states and their public/private policies in one document. From what I can see, only Hawaii, Oregon and Texas have what could be considered public beaches. Delaware did the same thing that Walton County and Destin did (still in court) with beach renourishment thus far. So Florida is definitely in the majority. Keep in mind that the document is dated in 2000.


The States Can Be Generally Classified as High and Low Water Boundary States

?Where is the dividing line between the property of the State and that of the littoral property owner? The States are divided on that question, and the groups may be conveniently labeled ?high-tide? or ?low-tide? states.? The two extreme ends of this spectrum are Hawai'i at the high end and Massachusetts at the low end, both, interestingly, based on old traditions.

The high water mark states are Alaska, Washington, Oregon, California, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin. The low water mark states include Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, Massachusetts, Maine, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota.​

Hawai'i is the only state to use the vegetation line as the boundary between public and private property.For public access purposes, Texas and Oregon attain the same result as Hawai'i, but both use an easement to create public access, one statutory and one based in case law. This removes from the littoral owner only the right to exclude, not the whole fee. Other states grant an easement in public access in limited situations. Delaware, for example, provides public access to newly formed beach wherever publicly funded beach nourishment is done.​

 

[yippie]

I finally found a list of states and their public/private policies in one document. From what I can see, only Hawaii, Oregon and Texas have what could be considered public beaches. Delaware did the same thing that Walton County and Destin did (still in court) with beach renourishment thus far. So Florida is definitely in the majority. Keep in mind that the document is dated in 2000.


The States Can Be Generally Classified as High and Low Water Boundary States

?Where is the dividing line between the property of the State and that of the littoral property owner? The States are divided on that question, and the groups may be conveniently labeled ?high-tide? or ?low-tide? states.? The two extreme ends of this spectrum are Hawai'i at the high end and Massachusetts at the low end, both, interestingly, based on old traditions.

The high water mark states are Alaska, Washington, Oregon, California, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin. The low water mark states include Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, Massachusetts, Maine, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota.​

Hawai'i is the only state to use the vegetation line as the boundary between public and private property.For public access purposes, Texas and Oregon attain the same result as Hawai'i, but both use an easement to create public access, one statutory and one based in case law. This removes from the littoral owner only the right to exclude, not the whole fee. Other states grant an easement in public access in limited situations. Delaware, for example, provides public access to newly formed beach wherever publicly funded beach nourishment is done.​

Well, from my understanding, you should be more concerned about the ECL than other states practices. And if you do know much about the current lawsuit that the SOB's vs Destin is involved in, you should know what a ECL is. Better get out your wallet, Walton county is facing the same thing and litigation can be quite expensive.

 

[BeachSiO2]

another local case of a brilliant use of "marketing" for the purposes of looking pretty instead of building business. the tdc went to GREAT LENGTHS to change the branding of the region to "the beaches of south walton" with an image of "the small, low-key southern beach" because they understood that was the side of bread the butter was on and that was their target niche. obviously they can't compete with orlando or miami, so value what you have going and work it. great. if that was in deed instead of word.

when it came time to produce "the beaches" concept sold, all that was left is a silly slogan.

it's like the developers who mow down rosemary to create "rosemary beach" or cypresses to build "cypress dunes" or are now blocking the view to the sea in "seaside".

profit oriented marketing means that you work hard to get them here once so they come back again and again. the opposite is happening here. it looks like a good idea to newcomers until one visit. even some oldtimers i know here stay based on the nostialgia of what once was, but when they look around they're hardpressed to feel good about very much of what it's become. well, tourists don't have that kind of personal attachment to a place. piss em off once and you'll never see them again. and they will NOT bother wasting their breathe telling you why.

so if that's the case why bother allotting a marketing budget to the TDC when it's a one-shot wonder?

the powers that be really believe the world is full of yankee suckers and maybe they can fool people once, but they will not be fooled twice.

Actually, the opposite is happening here. In information I read from last year, it was reported that there is a 78% return visitation rate to BSW, which is much greater then most areas.