Private Beaches in South Walton - Customary Use Updates & SB1622

[JuridicBeach]

I'm convinced that newly created @JuridicBeach is actually @mputnal .

How do I know?

Painfully long posts with no substance. But the real telltale is the complete absence of paragraphs. And those are free to everyone.

It truly saddens me how the mob mentality thinks they are right solely based on majority opinion. It does smell like a lynch mob with nothing to back up their position other than their "feelings". It's a true sign of desperation with total contempt for private property rights.

Idk who that is, you have paranoia. Might want to check yourself in a psychiatric hospital to get a mental health check.

Goofy answer. Stay miserable in your little scarcity mindset and entitlement. Get help honestly, and don’t skip your meds. Soon enough you’ll probably end up dying in a shooting about sand cause you’ll piss off the wrong kind of crazies like yourself, cause that’s what irrational lunatics like you end up doing. They put themselves in even crazier absurd situations. Natural selection some might say. You won’t be missed with your attitude you definitely don’t have a fan club out there. Who loves you in your life? Does your own mother even does? Is that why you’re so hateful? Is it because your mom never loved you or showed you good manners? Take your miserable argument to Jesus when you die, we’ll see what he has to say about your "private beach" and your mentality. What a waste honestly. Willfully choosing to spend your life hating, and focusing on all the wrong things. You speak of mob mentality, but that’s you. You’re the mob person. You’re the mafia. You’re the crazy insensitive person. The hateful prick masquerading under "private property" BS. It can’t even be your private property. Common law does not admit this theory of yours. Never has and never will. Read a book. I hope someone makes a map indicating all the pricks like yourself who harrass people, and I hope there’s gonna be activist groups who will go there on purpose. We should go specifically there and set up and be like hundreds each week we’ll have a meet in your backyard. I also hope you lose all your wealth. You don’t deserve it. Jesus gave it to you with a choice, hoping you’d do the good you’re able to. And, instead of honoring that stewardship, you chose to showcase your hate, and you use it to follow Satan’s ways. You’re a fool.

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

And that, my friends, is a big reason why BFOs don't want beach nourishment.

 

[JuridicBeach]

And that, my friends, is a big reason why BFOs don't want beach nourishment.

Uneducated goof. Do you want to bring back slavery as well? Is that the next genius idea of yours? You’re an absurd sad and small individual. Stay miserable. One day you’ll die and everyone will be better off and everything you will have done will be meaningless. Imagine that "my life purpose was to defend MY beach so that no one could enjoy it but me". Sick. Mental health issues are real folks hahaha.

 

[mputnal]

And that, my friends, is a big reason why BFOs don't want beach nourishment.

And what reason is that my friend? You are speaking for "thousands" so please explain your reasoning. Is it because a family just wants to go to the beach and not see "keep out" signs and when they do they are upset? Is it because you want control of a natural resource that has been enjoyed by the people forever. You are not a victim. Your one sentence statement regarding why you do not want beach nourishment explains why the people, the county and the State are against you. The people, the county and the State understand you much better now and we are in this fight to save our beaches from you. Your cause is nothing more than fear of something that does not exist. You have lost nothing but somehow will never be satisfied.

And that my friend is the reason why the majority is against you. All you had to do is share something that has been shared since the beginning of time...

 

[MRBS]

What's the story for those of us who don't know the name?

Willie snow ethridge was an author. newsman spouse. I think one of her children owned the “Ethridge Cottage”. my parents noted that in the well stocked library of that charming

cement block cottage on montgomery st had a her books. and a picture of her i believe. so we always called it that. it’s still there w a 2nd story added. from my dads file

 

[JuridicBeach]

And that, my friends, is a big reason why BFOs don't want beach nourishment.

Is that you or one of your friends? Embarrassing to say the least. Mentally ill that’s exactly what I said and I was spot on . Make asylums great again.

 

[Mike Jones]

Is that you or one of your friends? Embarrassing to say the least. Mentally ill that’s exactly what I said and I was spot on . Make asylums great again.

Vending on the beach is a bad idea.

 

[UofL]

Willie snow ethridge was an author. newsman spouse. I think one of her children owned the “Ethridge Cottage”. my parents noted that in the well stocked library of that charming View attachment 109393cement block cottage on montgomery st had a her books. and a picture of her i believe. so we always called it that. it’s still there w a 2nd story added. from my dads file

I wondered why that name was familiar. I live in Louisville. Her husband was with our once great newspapers, the Courier Journal and the Louisville times. She was a writer. The CJ still exists and does a good job today as it can. We are a blue city in a red state. Ellen

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

Here's a link I saw on FB (click here).

Below is an excerpt that sticks out in my mind:

The Corps, the government agency in charge of playing in such big sandboxes, always claims they’re “saving” the beach from disappearing. They aren’t, says Orrin Pilkey, a Duke University geology professor who’s an expert on beaches and barrier islands.

“We’re just saving a lot of people’s investments,” he told me.


A big issue is that between the county with about 60 million dollars and the state/federal willing to match that, the government has a pile of money burning holes in their pockets that, supposedly, can't be used for anything else. And, of course, you have the "majority mentality" as well as developers, who want to develop tons of off beach property with beach access guarantees, exerting influence on the commissioners. Heck, if I was a commissioner, I'd probably push for nourishment as well, only to make my core constituency happy. But trying to make the majority happy doesn't necessarily translate to the best decision - remember CU litigation?

In my previous posts I have made at least two absolute claims regarding Blue Mountain Beach and Walton County beaches in general:
1. The beach has naturally accreted, not eroded, since the back to back hurricanes of 2004 and 2005;
2. Most beach front owners, the ones nourishment is supposed to benefit, do not want beach nourishment, i.e. they do not feel "their investments need saving" at the moment via nourishment.

So the reality comes down to this: beach nourishment is only a guise to create more public beach (only the added part). And based on the article, and as I have mentioned in a previous post, if the added beach eroded away by a hurricane, the public would then be legally LOCKED OUT from going to the beach (where ECLs were established) until another beach nourishment is performed. That scenario would be a disaster, especially from a public relations / law enforcement points of view. "What do you mean we can't go to the beach?? The nourishment project made all the beach public!!" Again, if the nourished beach south of the ECL washes away, it's all private again. And then the county would have to come up with "60" MORE MILLION DOLLARS for a follow up nourishment project. How long do you think that would take?

Nobody touting nourishment wants to admit to the above, but the situation could very realistically happen. That's why I mentioned in a previous post that the county should acquire beach property next and near to public accesses via eminent domain. There would still be public access in that scenario.

I know the county will push for beach nourishment. So we'll just have to wait to see how it all plays out, especially after a major hurricane hits, post nourishment.

 

[mputnal]

Here's a link I saw on FB (click here).

Below is an excerpt that sticks out in my mind:

The Corps, the government agency in charge of playing in such big sandboxes, always claims they’re “saving” the beach from disappearing. They aren’t, says Orrin Pilkey, a Duke University geology professor who’s an expert on beaches and barrier islands.

“We’re just saving a lot of people’s investments,” he told me.


A big issue is that between the county with about 60 million dollars and the state/federal willing to match that, the government has a pile of money burning holes in their pockets that, supposedly, can't be used for anything else. And, of course, you have the "majority mentality" as well as developers, who want to develop tons of off beach property with beach access guarantees, exerting influence on the commissioners. Heck, if I was a commissioner, I'd probably push for nourishment as well, only to make my core constituency happy. But trying to make the majority happy doesn't necessarily translate to the best decision - remember CU litigation?

In my previous posts I have made at least two absolute claims regarding Blue Mountain Beach and Walton County beaches in general:
1. The beach has naturally accreted, not eroded, since the back to back hurricanes of 2004 and 2005;
2. Most beach front owners, the ones nourishment is supposed to benefit, do not want beach nourishment, i.e. they do not feel "their investments need saving" at the moment via nourishment.

So the reality comes down to this: beach nourishment is only a guise to create more public beach (only the added part). And based on the article, and as I have mentioned in a previous post, if the added beach eroded away by a hurricane, the public would then be legally LOCKED OUT from going to the beach (where ECLs were established) until another beach nourishment is performed. That scenario would be a disaster, especially from a public relations / law enforcement points of view. "What do you mean we can't go to the beach?? The nourishment project made all the beach public!!" Again, if the nourished beach south of the ECL washes away, it's all private again. And then the county would have to come up with "60" MORE MILLION DOLLARS for a follow up nourishment project. How long do you think that would take?

Nobody touting nourishment wants to admit to the above, but the situation could very realistically happen. That's why I mentioned in a previous post that the county should acquire beach property next and near to public accesses via eminent domain. There would still be public access in that scenario.

I know the county will push for beach nourishment. So we'll just have to wait to see how it all plays out, especially after a major hurricane hits, post nourishment.

I think you know that you do not speak for all BFO's. Your post are not serving the BFO well. Why do you fear a family going to the beach so much? It makes no sense. You do not lose anything with beach nourishment or a family enjoying the beach for a few hours on this beautiful resource. BTW our leaders are not happy with anything Duke University. Interesting quote on your part It seems you are acknowleding climate change which includes storm intensity, storm frequency and higher sea levels. Do you realize that our leaders have completely abandoned efforts to lower our risk of climate change? I am not sure what your true purpose is on this subject. I really do not believe you can be this upset over beach nourishment or a family enjoying the beach.