Public vs Private Beach [threads merged]

Yes, this is correct and it is also part of what I'm trying to get folks eyes to see. A survey is Part of the WCSO SOP and must be included in the packet you give to them. That, along with clear, easy to read signs are also part of the requirement for a beach front property owner to receive services as it relates to Trespassing on their property.

I'm sure most owners don't want to jump through all the hoops and spend the $2000+ for the nice little packet.

Before everyone dismisses the sheriff's culpability in why signs are popping up, do a little research.

Let's keep it on the up and up. The TDC benefits many communities and individuals by providing information on a location, Walton in general and Sowal particular. That being said because you as a rental owner benefit already from the service which is to bring folks down rent your property. Which in my opinion is more than enough, but as it is better that the TDC pick up the garbage for the betterment of our community as a whole and is a minimal cost to keep our beach clean. As for thinking the TDC doesn't do much else except promotion and cleaning, I would also dispute that, I believe they have placed sand up and down our beaches.

Why is it the upland property owner has to prove their southern boundary?

Why doesn't the county / state simply prove their northern boundary? After all, if the public is being unfairly discriminated against (wet sand vs. dry sand and all), wouldn't the use of TDC funds be wise for this purpose?

What about the millions that were paid for the beach nourishment engineering and the associated surveys? Who has access to those surveys? Didn't those surveys define the MHWL? The erosion control line (ECL) was supposed to be established from that line.

It truly saddens me when fellow neighbors bring up the burden of proof argument.

I'm not making any argument. I'm pointing you to the source of the argument.

Ask your Elected Sheriff why he requires this "proof".

I've though it to be B.S. from day one and all my posts reflect that.

Renourishment failed! This is the next attempt at taking private property from owners.

Unfortunately, it is an emotional issue and no one sees the simple logic here.

Appreciate your input.

The truth of the matter is that beachfront properties really don't need the promotion afforded by TDC. Since 2002 we've managed to be practically 100% booked for spring, summer and fall long before the more recent tremendous promotional push. VRBO and similar sites do a good-enough job of "promoting" vacation rentals.

Now if one owns a property off the beach, I guess it doesn't hurt that the area gets more exposure and that they somewhat benefit from that incremental increase in interest based on the massive TDC advertising.

But that's where the problem, as I see it....more people...no increase in public beach.

Destin and Panama City promote the hell out their beaches. I personally have had several guests say, "This is the first time we've come to your area because we don't like fighting the crowds at those places."

Why are we trying so hard to become them?

It is really amazing how some people have no respect or regard for owners that actually own their beachfront property, worked hard to get it and purchased it legally.

Sounds like a lot of people are very envious of these owners and are using the "tourists will leave" argument to push their agenda of jealously along.

The tourists won't leave. Hopefully the recent (past few years) of ignorant and inconsiderate ones will, but the real tourists, the one's we want here, will stay.

The County needs to be focusing on buying as much of the vacant lots that they can and improving the beach accesses.

I also think the Beach Vendor issue is embedded in this as well and they are also to blame for this backlash. Many of them think they "own" the beach.

John what about the beach front owner who HIRE kids to be Beach Cops and Protectors inside their Private Beach signs? They also are paying these guys and then the paid vendor is allowed to rent umbrellas right at the wet sand line.

Then He sits there and rents to who ever walks up..

This can be seen 15'+/- west of regional public beach access at BMB end of Hwy83.
Who knows who contacted who first?

But mid summer last year these owners(owner) contracted with the Redfish Village vendor and let him set up umbrellas un-rented and no one else could set up on their property.

Pretty sure vendors on private property can also grill and sale fresh hotdogs and roasted nuts in the fall..

Let the good times roll.....

The chair and umbrella blockades, largely unoccupied, are so ugly. Free the beach from unoccupied beach chairs!!

Does anyone know if the wcso sop addresses the mean high tide water line and the right of the public to transit and set up on the beach below that line?

My wife and I were booted off the beach at Sanctuary by the Sea. We were in our chairs about 10' from wet sand and probably 50-100' seaward from the mean high tide water line.

Their signage has become more aggressive over the last couple of years. Here is one of their signs.

I will need to go back and read the entire SOP again but I am not sure WCSO thing reads TOPO survey. A boundary line survey is not sufficient according to Florida statutes. (I am really dreading the hours reading all those chapters again.I posted it several years ago when this whole thing started but that post is long gone. Maybe I should have put something about a blue tick puppy in it....)

Yes, this is correct and it is also part of what I'm trying to get folks eyes to see. A survey is Part of the WCSO SOP and must be included in the packet you give to them. That, along with clear, easy to read signs are also part of the requirement for a beach front property owner to receive services as it relates to Trespassing on their property.

I'm sure most owners don't want to jump through all the hoops and spend the $2000+ for the nice little packet.

Before everyone dismisses the sheriff's culpability in why signs are popping up, do a little research.

I am very interested in the reasons that the public does not seem to utilize the state parks in South Walton, especially given that they have parking and pristine beaches. The parks seem to be sorely underutilized and yet they are clearly open to tourists as well as residents. With an understanding of the reasons that people DON'T use the parks, perhaps Walton County can figure out a way to better utilize the parks to alleviate some of the public beach and parking issues.

John G, it certainly doesn't appear easy (or reasonably priced) to definitively prove one's southern boundary. Yet common sense dictates that it exists "somewhere" near the wet/dry sand boundary during normal tidal conditions (no high winds or storms) based on the definition of MHWL.

Some background and a question for all: Most gulf front lots whose deed runs to the MHWL are typically 4 sided lots with northern, eastern, western and southern property lines. With the southern boundary being in dispute on how it's enforced and based on extrapolation, how does a beach front private property owner prevent the public from trespassing on ANY part of their property?

As an example, would a deputy remove an uninvited person from one's immediate grassy backyard if instructed to do so by the owner?

If the answer is yes, then what is LEGALLY used as the southern boundary if the MHWL is in dispute?

If the answer is no, would the property owner be liable for any harm to the person during removal by the owner if the sheriff refused to do it? Would the sheriff be held liable?

Does the law provide for a "backup" southern boundary if the MHWL is in question?

John G, it certainly doesn't appear easy (or reasonably priced) to definitively prove one's southern boundary. Yet common sense dictates that it exists "somewhere" near the wet/dry sand boundary during normal tidal conditions (no high winds or storms) based on the definition of MHWL.

Some background and a question for all: Most gulf front lots whose deed runs to the MHWL are typically 4 sided lots with northern, eastern, western and southern property lines. With the southern boundary being in dispute on how it's enforced and based on extrapolation, how does a beach front private property owner prevent the public from trespassing on ANY part of their property?

As an example, would a deputy remove an uninvited person from one's immediate grassy backyard if instructed to do so by the owner?

If the answer is yes, then what is LEGALLY used as the southern boundary if the MHWL is in dispute?

If the answer is no, would the property owner be liable for any harm to the person during removal by the owner if the sheriff refused to do it? Would the sheriff be held liable?

Does the law provide for a "backup" southern boundary if the MHWL is in question?

I love your Bolded question. This is my point. Thanks for helping make it.

The SOP is driving this surge of signs.

Does Adkinson require an owner on the Bay to survey their Bay Front property, etc.

Just wait till tourist activity starts to move to Bay waters and "beaches".

All of you complaining about no beaches for tourists, why don't you focus on the beach rules these people break each weekend. Glass bottles! Dogs, off leashes outside the allotted hours, leaving trash, etc.

Perhaps the spoiled and self untitled beach front owners would be appreciative of that and let you on their beach...

Saw it first hand this weekend and I'm sure I'll see it all summer. Never saw a deputy, never saw code enforcement. Was there for six hours!

John G is right about the lack of enforcement. While I was at Grayton beach yesterday afternoon I saw:

1. Glass bottles.
2. Dogs without permits during non-dog hours.
3. Vehicles on the beach without permits.
4. Vendor beach set-ups outside of the vending areas.
5. Folks throwing their trash all over the place.
6. No deputies. No code enforcement.

Unbelievable!