Discussion in 'Local Government and Groups' started by dragonflycafe, Jun 18, 2016.
You haven't addressed my question:
What do you mean "another in favor of selling paradise"
Selling beachfront property to include the sand. Most states do not allow this.
SoWal just keeps selling and building. It's going to come to roost at some time.
So? You don't believe in private property ownership? And the right to sell?
Do you realize how much property in South Walton is public owned?
Don't try to twist my words. I fully support private land ownership. But just like rivers and streams are public land, so too should be beaches.
Not wholy correct.
And you are free to your own opinion. But not your own facts.
Fine. Facts are interpreted by many. It's why we have state and federal courts that interpret law.
Go to the beach in Seaside. Have the rent-a-cops come and ask you to leave. Tell them you are within the limits of the MHWL. Then sit back and enjoy while everyone tries to determine the spot.
I'm wise enough not to go to the beach at Seaside during season. We have spent time there during off season with zero issues.
You missed the point. By a mile.
M1, most states do not allow selling beachfront property, property at lest to the MHWL? Is most, 26 of 50 states?
Can you name the American states that "do not allow this"?
For you? Nope. You talk down to people and act as if people must answer to you. Maybe in your world people must answer to you, I don't. Good day sir.
M1, you won't or can't answer the question? I ask the question not to "talk down" to anyone but to know if you have any credibility about what you are talking about. You nor anyone has to answer to me. I know the answer. It's less than five. Not the majority (26?) of states. You'll have to do the homework; like I did to know which ones.
OK, this is the last damn time I respond to you. You told me I was wrong about SC. But you couldn't, or wouldn't, show how I was wrong.
Now you want to talk about MHWL and beachfront. It's a metric you are choosing. I'm talking about sand. SC, for one, uses an erosion formula since 1996 when the state law was changed.
Good bye Lucas.
I could but thought you would know by your statements of fact. I could be wrong about SC laws.
M1 here are the statements you made;
"Of course, all beach in SC, except on private islands, is public."
"In SC, from the sea oats out is public."
"Selling beachfront property to include the sand. Most states do not allow this."
"Now you want to talk about MHWL and beachfront. It's a metric you are choosing."
Just so you and Mike know: Encyclopedia of Coastal Science. In Alabama, Alaska, California, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, Mississippi, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Washington, and parts of Texas transferred under common law land grants, the line between the public trust land and any privately owned littoral land is the mean high tide or mean high water line, typically calculated as the land reached by water at the average of all the twice daily high tides that occur over an 18.6 year lunar cycle.
Lookup South Carolina Code of Laws Coastal Tidelands and Wetlands SECTION 48-39.
The MHWL is not some "metric" I pulled out of the air. It's the law of "most" coastal states that define the boundary between private and public littoral property. The MHWL is an elevation from a standard vertical geodetic datum plane. Not where the the sand and water intersect. So the MHWL property boundary could be underwater if the tides are greater than normal (the mean).
Sowal has become county of complainers.
Even if the vendors setups are unoccupied it sometimes they're only taking up 50% of County Beach. I just don't quite understand everybody period I go to the beach all the time and I never have a problem getting a good spot not even on 4th of July. And yes I am not a beachfront property owner so I have to use a public access.
You know what's funny is they don't show what is said before this video is turned on. And if you watched they cussed at him first. That does not excuse his actions. However I am very familiar with the situation out there from following it on social media.A lot of people are going out there antagonizing the guy at this point. From what I am told this has been going on out there for years and people go out there all the time just to mess with the guy. You know if the guy pays property taxes to the wet sand then it is his property. If everybody wants to claim it customary use then he needs to be paid back property taxes and his proerty taxes need to be lowered. If not stay down close to the wet sand. He does not own that part.
The dispute at Vizcaya can be resolved in one day if someone would just call the man out on his CURRENT TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY and actually SEE where the MHWL actually is THIS year not where it was when he bought it 8 years ago. As for people going out there for years..well that IS customary use whether he or anybody else likes it or not. But he isnt doing himself any favors by making racist comments to the media about beachgoers.
Oyster Lake was a paradise for native Americans. Ancient oyster mounds show an abundance of easy protein. Fish and other wildlife were there for the taking. And we know of of the incredible beauty and spirituality of our coast. Lives were well lived long before fences and ditches.
Anyone not able to connect with this glorious past and pay respect to the land is a lost soul. Expecting to own the beach and exclude others is a path to ruin.
People need to educate themselves about the historical criteria and limits of common-law custom. Failure to meet any of the criteria invalidates the custom claim. Time is but one of the criteria. Historically custom has to be since time immemorial, “so long, that the memory of man runneth not to the contrary.” There are six others plus custom applies to a property not a county or state. Without limits people would claim any and everything as a custom. Common-law custom can apply to more than property. If custom just had a time limit; could a custom accepted by the majority over many years prohibited women to drive or inherit property? An exaggerated example today but why not? Custom is a very narrow legal doctrine and should be very limited or all our personal rights could be in jeopardy. That is also why American property rights are supreme and protected by the Constitution. Government may be able to tell owners how to use their property but not who can use it (except in very narrow cases); big difference. There is no right of custom in the Constitution. Custom is a slippery slope if not narrowly defined and limited.
So should the public be able to use coastal lake owners private property, docks, pools to fish, sunbath, swim, and have fun?
Should property owners have to remove there fixtures and return the land to "... the incredible beauty and spirituality of our coast."?
If I had to live 100 or 1,000 years ago or today with plumbing, electricity, air conditioning, and the rule of law and property rights Americans have today - I'll pick today.
Separate names with a comma.