Led away in Handcuffs

[Smiling JOe]

Regarding the above, I am new to this site, but wanted to share:

One weekend, about 4 years ago my fellow and I sat on the beach behind a house just west of the Dune Allen Public Beach Access. This owner too was telling people to get off his "private beach". We had words, didn't leave and he called the Sheriffs office. The officer came down and asked us to leave. We told him that it was public beach and we weren't trespassing. We were at the debris line. Maybe 15 feet upland of the water. He measured our distance from the home and water and I don't know what else. Then he wrote us citations. We didn't leave. He said that on Monday it would go before a judge. If the judge signed, we would be arrested. He did not and we weren't.

So, I do believe this is a change in policy - citation vs arrest.

Who was the Judge, and did the case have an official name?

 

[NotDeadYet]

Thanks JustALocal for posting your story. I remember when that happened, and I've been wondering if the judge signed the warrant this time around. There doesn't seem to be any followup from the media on the arrestee. I believe it was that incident in Dune Allen that motivated the BCC that was in place at the time to write the now-defunct preamble to the beach ordinance. There has been a sea change in county policy since then, as evidenced by the TDC's FAQ's.

 

[NotDeadYet]

The Walton Sun had a story or two about it at the time. They could probably find it in their archives.

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

Bobby J,

I originally posted [ame="http://www.sowal.com/bb/showpost.php?p=262177&postcount=79"]several goals (click here) [/ame]from Surfrider. I could not find a reference where Surfrider (in their "BEACH ACCESS GOALS") promoted the taking of private beach for public use.

Bobby J, I guess what I'm trying to say is that I understand your position with the current situation in Walton County. However, it seems to me that you should not be mixing Surfrider's goals with the general public's perception that ALL of the beach should be public.

We all clearly know tourism is the lifeblood of Florida. But that fact alone, in my opinion, should not give the public carte blanche to anyone's private property without reparation.

Then you said:

Good point. Looking through this thread I was trying to find where I mixed Surfrider's goal? My post is from Bobby J. Local land owner in Walton County who will come sit on any beach.

Then I said:

You're correct. You haven't mixed Surfrider's "Beach Access Goals" with this thread. But as a very vocal proponent of Surfrider, I assumed there was a connection. I guess you're telling me that there is not. I can live with that if that's truly what you mean.

The reality is that you DID MIX Surfrider's goals with this issue on the [ame="http://www.sowal.com/bb/showthread.php?t=13977"]previous thread [/ame]regarding private beaches, right?......

Jay,
This beach access issue is really getting out of hand especially in the last year. Signs are everywhere and the county better get a handle on it. Once again we will be used as an example in Florida of how not to do something (see seawall section). I ask everyone to please get involved. This is just the beginning and we all have to start speaking up and let the county know we will continue to use our beaches! See www.surfrider.org for more info about the "private beaches". Please join and get involved.

I normally let inaccuracies like this slide, but it is painfully obvious to me that you are trying to take this whole issue to a personal level which I am trying to prevent. The reality is that you did use Surfrider's goals (not totally aligned with yours) to confuse issues and to further your personal beliefs about this hot issue even though you allude not to.


If I am wrong, I am totally open to being shown where.

.

 

[scooterbug44]

My impression was that surfrider was mentioned as a source for advice and activism because they were an established group and this was an issue in their general area of expertise.

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

My impression was that surfrider was mentioned as a source for advice and activism because they were an established group and this was an issue in their general area of expertise.

I'm sure that's one of the reasons Bobby J mentioned Surfrider. Regarding their area of expertise, I agree. That's why I quoted their goals.

But re-read Bobby J's sentence in his last post above..."See www.surfrider.org for more info about the "private beaches"."

His main reason for mentioning Surfrider here is crystal clear.

 

[John R]

I'm sure that's one of the reasons Bobby J mentioned Surfrider. Regarding their area of expertise, I agree. That's why I quoted their goals.

But re-read Bobby J's sentence in his last post above..."See www.surfrider.org for more info about the "private beaches"."

His main reason for mentioning Surfrider here is crystal clear.

seemingly, so are you. you're laying some serious groundwork on this issue imo.

 

[scooterbug44]

This is the official statement I got from the link you posted for me:

"Surfrider Foundation's Beach Access initiative promotes the right of low-impact, free and open access to the world's waves and beaches for all people.
Beaches are one of the most popular public resources. Because individuals need access to beaches in order to enjoy them, beach access is probably the most important indicator in determining the number of people who can enjoy beaches.
In nearly every state, some portion of the beach is public land, which means that all members of the public have the right to use that portion of the beach. Because much of the land between where people can park and where they can enjoy the beach is privately owned, their ability to enjoy beaches often depends on the quality and availability of access between roads and parking lots and the beach. It is simply not equitable for only some people to have access to the ocean and beaches, which are public resources.

I don't see anything here contrary to either my personal opinions or the general views most are posting here.

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

This is the official statement I got from the link you posted for me:

"Surfrider Foundation's Beach Access initiative promotes the right of low-impact, free and open access to the world's waves and beaches for all people.
Beaches are one of the most popular public resources. Because individuals need access to beaches in order to enjoy them, beach access is probably the most important indicator in determining the number of people who can enjoy beaches.
In nearly every state, some portion of the beach is public land, which means that all members of the public have the right to use that portion of the beach. Because much of the land between where people can park and where they can enjoy the beach is privately owned, their ability to enjoy beaches often depends on the quality and availability of access between roads and parking lots and the beach. It is simply not equitable for only some people to have access to the ocean and beaches, which are public resources.

I don't see anything here contrary to either my personal opinions or the general views most are posting here.

On an initial cursory read, one would assume you're correct.

But re-read their statement carefully. They are talking about ACCESS to the beach, not the beach itself. Surfrider mentions above that there are existing public beaches in which the public cannot access because there are no public walkways / access points. I believe I pointed out that "access" to the public beach in Walton County is not a problem.

Surfrider was founded by a group of surfing enthusiasts. I understand their concerns about not being able to get to the "world's waves " even where there is no public beach (i.e. they would be happy with the access to "nowhere" next to the Retreat since they could get to the water to enjoy their sport).

Perhaps you might see where I am coming from on all this.

Yes WE have a problem in Florida. To use Surfrider's name is questionable to defend one's belief that they can simply trespass on private property.
.

 

[seacrestkristi]

Did you say you were a beach front home owner