beach permits

[ShallowsNole]

Doesn't matter how much property, or where in Walton County it is. My teenage son could legitimately buy a permit (IF he had a 4WD) since his name is on a deed to a small piece of the farm.

 

[wrobert]

Doesn't matter how much property, or where in Walton County it is. My teenage son could legitimately buy a permit (IF he had a 4WD) since his name is on a deed to a small piece of the farm.

That is the way I am figuring it. So I guess I will sell some land for a $100 a sq ft. and let people get them a beach permit so they can go down there and destroy the ecosystem like the rest of us.

 

[30ashopper]

besides having a "real" 4wd vehicle......

what is required to register your vehicle?

1. florida vehicle registration ?
2. proof of insurance ?
3. proof of florida address ?

just wondering......thks

All I needed was my drivers license. She looked up my jeep registration / property ownership on the computer. No inspection was needed.

 

[scooterbug44]

That is the way I am figuring it. So I guess I will sell some land for a $100 a sq ft. and let people get them a beach permit so they can go down there and destroy the ecosystem like the rest of us.

Eat some prunes already!

Nothing wrong with the requirement that you own land to get a beach permit. As you pointed out, someone could own a square foot and get a permit.

And the amount of "destruction to the ecosystem" caused by driving a permitted vehicle in a designated area is so minimal it is ridiculous. :roll:

 

[conched out]

Please don't judge me
Where is the county office.
Won't use (the sticker/beach) much I promise.

 

[wrobert]

Eat some prunes already!

Nothing wrong with the requirement that you own land to get a beach permit. As you pointed out, someone could own a square foot and get a permit.

And the amount of "destruction to the ecosystem" caused by driving a permitted vehicle in a designated area is so minimal it is ridiculous. :roll:

So it is okay with you to destroy the ecosystem as long as it is just a little bit of destruction? Interesting. Instead of the debate being about destruction, it gets to be about the amount of destruction and where that line is crossed. One drop of oil ruins millions of gallons of water.

The owning land requirement is a bit unconstitutional, unless you are one of those that believes the Constitution is a 'living' document, subject to change and interpretation as seen fit for the times.

 

[ShallowsNole]

So it is okay with you to destroy the ecosystem as long as it is just a little bit of destruction? Interesting. Instead of the debate being about destruction, it gets to be about the amount of destruction and where that line is crossed. One drop of oil ruins millions of gallons of water.

The owning land requirement is a bit unconstitutional, unless you are one of those that believes the Constitution is a 'living' document, subject to change and interpretation as seen fit for the times.

So a county commission cannot enact laws to protect the rights of its landowners and residents in the face of challenges brought on by a changing society that threatens a community's way of life?

Dear, you understand the reasons the permits have restrictions. You just like to argue about it. :roll:

 

[Matt J]

The owning land requirement is a bit unconstitutional, unless you are one of those that believes the Constitution is a 'living' document, subject to change and interpretation as seen fit for the times.

A bit unconstitutional? Isn't that like being sorta pregnant?

 

[wrobert]

So a county commission cannot enact laws to protect the rights of its landowners and residents in the face of challenges brought on by a changing society that threatens a community's way of life?

Dear, you understand the reasons the permits have restrictions. You just like to argue about it. :roll:

I understand the reasons. Just like some dislike Walmart and McDonald's others are afraid that those people who can not afford to buy beach land will slip down here and drive on their beaches. But the beaches belong to the people. Not the BCC or Walton County landowners.

The only problem is the BCC does not have the legal authority to require that you own land to enjoy a public beach. Remove the beaches from the argument. What if they required you owned land to use Helen McCall Park or the Bark Park?

 

[scooterbug44]

Study your history - when the Constitution was written only white male property owners were allowed to have certain rights - among them voting. Thus, making landownership one of the prerequisitives to drive a vehicle on the beach does NOT violate the Constitution.

I've never heard anyone complain that they couldn't drive on the beach because they didn't own property - more that they didn't have the appropriate vehicle.

Owning beach land isn't the criteria, owning land anywhere in Walton County (yes, even north of the bay) is the criteria. Since one could argue that a family in Freeport is more likely to own a 4 wheel drive vehicle than a family in Seaside, your attempt to make it a class issue falls flat. A lack of land ownership does not preclude anyone from enjoying the beach, merely driving on it!

And as far as ecological damage, that is why you can only drive your vehicle on one small part of the beach.