Owners Argue "Leave No Trace"

That could get stinky!

I'm aware of this permit stuff but it currently isn't required for private property owners or did I miss something?

Regarding the current authority that the county does have over public beach, do you think the county has same authority over privately owned beach that has a public easement recorded with it (such as Redfish Village)?

SJ, I don't why you're dodging the question. I don't have a clue or an opinion (imagine that).

Isn't this a moot point right now? I was under the impression that until they pass the re-worded ordinance, they were only removing items from public beach accesses. Are they removing items left overnight at Redfish currently?

Quit being a douchebag, pick up your crap instead of whining about property rights, and start being a contributing member of the community.

That is all!

Stop beating around the bush and say how you really feel sbug rofl...

Maybe I missed something here... :scratch:

"Remove it or lose it" is the law, isn't it?

Private property rights encompass a lot of things, but I don't think they allow you to do something illegal on your property, do they?

Current presidency excepted, we Americans tend to believe in the rule of law, which (in theory) includes abiding by laws we find distasteful until we are able to get them changed. Or otherwise deciding to breaking them, then accepting the potential consequences. In this case, that would be losing our beach umbrella.

Maybe I missed something here... :scratch:

"Remove it or lose it" is the law, isn't it?

Private property rights encompass a lot of things, but I don't think they allow you to do something illegal on your property, do they?

Current presidency excepted, we Americans tend to believe in the rule of law, which (in theory) includes abiding by laws we find distasteful until we are able to get them changed. Or otherwise deciding to breaking them, then accepting the potential consequences. In this case, that would be losing our beach umbrella.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Disobedience_(Thoreau)

That could get stinky!

I'm aware of this permit stuff but it currently isn't required for private property owners or did I miss something?

Regarding the current authority that the county does have over public beach, do you think the county has same authority over privately owned beach that has a public easement recorded with it (such as Redfish Village)?

SJ, I don't why you're dodging the question. I don't have a clue or an opinion (imagine that).

I haven't dodged anything. Maybe I didn't see your question.

Whether or not the County chooses to enforce it, the current rule, which also applies to privately deeded beach, does not allow for any objects which may obstruct Sea Turtles or County Vehicles on the beach. The Sea Turtle part is only seasonal, but the County vehicle part applies year round. Leave your crap out and let it be shown that your crap becomes an obstacle for an endangered animal, like the Leatherback Turtle, and you will quickly find out what a felony is all about.

Yes, current authority applies to all beaches, whether privately deeded, public, or privately deeded with recorded easements.

Treefrog had a more lengthy reply for you, with which I fully agree.

Maybe I missed something here... :scratch:

"Remove it or lose it" is the law, isn't it?

Private property rights encompass a lot of things, but I don't think they allow you to do something illegal on your property, do they?

Current presidency excepted, we Americans tend to believe in the rule of law, which (in theory) includes abiding by laws we find distasteful until we are able to get them changed. Or otherwise deciding to breaking them, then accepting the potential consequences. In this case, that would be losing our beach umbrella.

Anybody that feels a need to justify what they do by making comments such as "we are beach property owners" or "we're exempt" in any form is in my opinion and I believe a big pile of others on this forum, just being pure lazy and thoughtless when it comes to others.
Others being emergency vehicles trying to do a public service. Try once being on the other end of that emergency and see if it doesn't change your attitude as to why it took so long for an emergency vehicle to get to you when you needed them.
Others being creatures that were here long before we even knew what a beach was.
Others being tourists (love em or not) that pump much of the life-blood into why these small communities are what they are.
Yep, there are a bunch of you out there that wish it stayed the way it was 20 years ago. There are some of you out there that have already forgotten that the reason you live as well as you now do is precisely because it didn't stay that way.

Guys, don't you realize that private beach owners are above all laws, and that they have elected BMBV to be their mouthpiece? He's making friends and influencing people on this thread as well as he's done on others.

Get it straight: private beach owners can erect a wall wherever they want, out of any material they want, put put signs with whatever editorial they choose, and will leave their stuff wherever they want, because they can. They're entitled. Hazards to animals or humans, unsightly messes, etc. just don't apply to them. Get off their backs and their beaches.

John R, can they also grow marijuana on their beach property?

Get it straight: private beach owners can erect a wall wherever they want, out of any material they want, put put signs with whatever editorial they choose, and will leave their stuff wherever they want, because they can. They're entitled. Hazards to animals or humans, unsightly messes, etc. just don't apply to them. Get off their backs and their beaches.

Oh...I'm sorry. I didn't know that. My bad.

Everyone needs to pay close attention to the BCC candidates' positions on this issue, which will probably be one of the biggest, if not THE biggest, issue of the next 4 years.

Everyone needs to pay close attention to the BCC candidates' positions on this issue, which will probably be one of the biggest, if not THE biggest, issue of the next 4 years.

With reference to the other thread(s) regarding lack of publicized positions and folks being intimidated into not running for BCC seats (lengthy intro, eh?)...

Have any of the candidates taken a position on the "private beach" issue? If so, how about some links to where we can read what they said?

[ame="http://sowal.com/bb/showthread.php?t=23167"]Robert 'Bob' Hudson Introduction - SoWal Beaches Forum[/ame]
Bob Hudson addressed private beaches in Post #30. There are several questions and answers, this is toward the end of the post.
"Is the beach public or are some areas private and the public shouldn't use them?"

http://sowal.com/bb/showthread.php?t=23167
Bob Hudson addressed private beaches in Post #30. There are several questions and answers, this is toward the end of the post.
"Is the beach public or are some areas private and the public shouldn't use them?"

Thanks.

Looks like he personally wants to be able to continue to walk and use the beach, but doesn't want the county to go toe-to-toe with the owners. "Let the Supreme Court do it" seems to be the position I get. Cake and eat it too?

I take it none of the rest have gone on record?

Slightly drifting, I think what they let Redfish Village do in BMBV's neighborhood is wrong. I'd probably take some of the positions he does if that had happened to me.

Slightly drifting, I think what they let Redfish Village do in BMBV's neighborhood is wrong.

I agree. The County had no business approving what is in essence, a commercial property, in a residential neighborhood. I will say that, for Blue Mtn Beach, they screwed it up long before Redfish Village, by allowing the multitude of condos to be built in a low density residential neighborhood.

Regardless, the crap doesn't need to be left on the beach, and if I was a beach front property owner, I'd want the County to enforce the rules about people who leave their crap in my back yard, especially if I lived next door to something like the access for 70+ units.

Here is the newly amended proposed draft, being discussed tomorrow 4pm at the South Walton County Courthouse annex.

http://www.co.walton.fl.us/administration/julyeight/Tab-G.pdf

Just read it.

I was pleased to see there doesn't seem to be any making of exceptions for those claiming property rights for their "private beach".

And I would guess that the prerequisite of the state approval before the county grants a permit for an exemption will keep the number of permit applications quite small.

The "abandonment" clause appears to make "remove it or lose it" an apt description, if....

(is this a big deal or do I not understand the process?) There seems to be no mention of who will handle the actual removal, how often, how it will be funded, etc. Without that, it's just a hollow law.

Here is the newly amended proposed draft, being discussed tomorrow 4pm at the South Walton County Courthouse annex.

http://www.co.walton.fl.us/administration/julyeight/Tab-G.pdf

SJ - Sorry to say, my DSL line has been intermittent for the last 3 days and I just read your message. I would have attended if I'd seen it yesterday.

Did you go? How about a summary of what went down.

SJ - Sorry to say, my DSL line has been intermittent for the last 3 days and I just read your message. I would have attended if I'd seen it yesterday.

Did you go? How about a summary of what went down.

It's still going on right now, but SJ is here so I will let him fill everyone in later. My head hurts.

It's still going on right now, but SJ is here so I will let him fill everyone in later. My head hurts.

I feel for you. The first agenda item about did me in. It was lovely to see you, though.

Actually, steeleing1, the first agenda item took up two hours, and was ending when you arrived. Just be glad you didn't also have to sit through it. I've been thinking about setting up an illegal Grilled Cheese table in the parking lot for these all-dayers.

TreeFrog, enforcement is covered in existing Code. The language in the link above was slightly tweeked, but mostly remains the same. They removed the part about bringing permits from the FLDEP, et al, noting that the County doesn't want to be enforcing State stuff. They used the example of driving on the beach. Getting a driving permit, the County expects that the State will enforce the basics such as driver's license, insurance, etc. Other than that change, it mostly remains the same.

Many people in attendance were in favor of the ordinance and there were about three who spoke against it.

It's still going on right now, but SJ is here so I will let him fill everyone in later. My head hurts.

Yours wasn't the only one! (good to see you, btw )

I feel for you. The first agenda item about did me in. It was lovely to see you, though.

Good to see you too. Sorry I didn't get a chance to come get a hug but if I would have gotten up I would have likely ended up on the floor.

Yours wasn't the only one! (good to see you, btw )

It was good to see you too.