Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Rosalie B." wrote in message ... x-no-archive:yes I think in many cases, beaches are public from the high tide mark seaward. And in some cases, all of the beach part is public. I've lived in Rhode Is (beach property), Calif. and Washington state. The laws of beach rights vary according to state laws.. In RI and Calif. the public has rights to the beach up to the high water line (or something like that) but can't cross private property.. In Washington state, a lot of the beaches property owners own or have lease rights to the beach out to low water (or something like that). It has never been made clear to me how these leases work but I think it has something to do with the the shell fish beds. The property owner will have jurisdiction over the sea bottom but not the water.. I have heard some lease holder complain about boat anchoring near shore because of their oyster beds.. I could understand that, especially if they are paying for the lease rights. I think it is all very complicated and verys from region to region.. Steve s/v Good Intentions |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In South Carolina, the public has rights to the beach 100 ft inland of
the high water mark, letting us use the beach at high tide without stepping on some rich guys domain. To counter this right, the "cities", gated waterfront communities like Kiawah Island, Seabrook Island, Hilton Head Island, bought their way into another state law letting the municipalities have domain over the public's water out ONE MILE from that beach. So, they simply write an ordinance preventing the public from getting to the beach in their boats or some such nonsense. I haven't seen any city gunboats protecting the billionaires from the commoners, yet, but that is just a matter of time. State law says if I want to take the jetboat into the beach at Kiawah, I must do so in a no-wake condition. So, we went. Someone from the beach houses came out screaming and yelling at us, threatening to call the Kiawah Kops. I told him I'd be glad to explain to a cooler head South Carolina law. The cops came, in force! I had violated their "space". The cops threatened to arrest me if I didn't get in my boat and get off "their beach". I pressed for an arrest, but seeing the threat tactic wasn't going anywhere and not wanting to test state law, they got back in their pickup truck and drove away. We stayed on OUR beach for a couple of hours with the jetboat anchored off the sand before going elsewhere. Property owners think just because their property BORDERS on the public's beach, the beach becomes their property. It's not true in SC....(c; I'm still here...... On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 21:57:46 -0800, "Steve" wrote: "Rosalie B." wrote in message .. . x-no-archive:yes I think in many cases, beaches are public from the high tide mark seaward. And in some cases, all of the beach part is public. I've lived in Rhode Is (beach property), Calif. and Washington state. The laws of beach rights vary according to state laws.. In RI and Calif. the public has rights to the beach up to the high water line (or something like that) but can't cross private property.. In Washington state, a lot of the beaches property owners own or have lease rights to the beach out to low water (or something like that). It has never been made clear to me how these leases work but I think it has something to do with the the shell fish beds. The property owner will have jurisdiction over the sea bottom but not the water.. I have heard some lease holder complain about boat anchoring near shore because of their oyster beds.. I could understand that, especially if they are paying for the lease rights. I think it is all very complicated and verys from region to region.. Steve s/v Good Intentions Larry W4CSC No, no, Scotty! I said, "Beam me a wrench.", not a WENCH! Kirk Out..... |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Larry,
Do you remember the case on Bay Point last year where a man was assaulted on the beach? It might have been provoked, but it ended up with the Sheriff, DNR, and the Port Royal cops out there and no one wanted to claim jurisdiction. This happened supposedly below the high water mark which the owner's rep claimed was theirs too. The problem then came up that 'IF' this property was originally a 'KING'S' Grant from the 18th century, and if it was still conveyed to them, then they did have the right to claim all land to the water. One man went to the hospital and then it was all sort of hushed up. I wonder just how many King's Grants that are actually still valid within South Carolina. This new owner developer has ruined a beautiful place to go surf fishing and spend a weekend on the beach. For years people have gone out there which is only reachable by boat. Leanne "Larry W4CSC" wrote in message ... In South Carolina, the public has rights to the beach 100 ft inland of the high water mark, letting us use the beach at high tide without stepping on some rich guys domain. To counter this right, the "cities", gated waterfront communities like Kiawah Island, Seabrook Island, Hilton Head Island, bought their way into another state law letting the municipalities have domain over the public's water out ONE MILE from that beach. So, they simply write an ordinance preventing the public from getting to the beach in their boats or some such nonsense. I haven't seen any city gunboats protecting the billionaires from the commoners, yet, but that is just a matter of time. State law says if I want to take the jetboat into the beach at Kiawah, I must do so in a no-wake condition. So, we went. Someone from the beach houses came out screaming and yelling at us, threatening to call the Kiawah Kops. I told him I'd be glad to explain to a cooler head South Carolina law. The cops came, in force! I had violated their "space". The cops threatened to arrest me if I didn't get in my boat and get off "their beach". I pressed for an arrest, but seeing the threat tactic wasn't going anywhere and not wanting to test state law, they got back in their pickup truck and drove away. We stayed on OUR beach for a couple of hours with the jetboat anchored off the sand before going elsewhere. Property owners think just because their property BORDERS on the public's beach, the beach becomes their property. It's not true in SC....(c; I'm still here...... On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 21:57:46 -0800, "Steve" wrote: "Rosalie B." wrote in message .. . x-no-archive:yes I think in many cases, beaches are public from the high tide mark seaward. And in some cases, all of the beach part is public. I've lived in Rhode Is (beach property), Calif. and Washington state. The laws of beach rights vary according to state laws.. In RI and Calif. the public has rights to the beach up to the high water line (or something like that) but can't cross private property.. In Washington state, a lot of the beaches property owners own or have lease rights to the beach out to low water (or something like that). It has never been made clear to me how these leases work but I think it has something to do with the the shell fish beds. The property owner will have jurisdiction over the sea bottom but not the water.. I have heard some lease holder complain about boat anchoring near shore because of their oyster beds.. I could understand that, especially if they are paying for the lease rights. I think it is all very complicated and verys from region to region.. Steve s/v Good Intentions Larry W4CSC No, no, Scotty! I said, "Beam me a wrench.", not a WENCH! Kirk Out..... |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 4 Feb 2004 11:07:21 -0500, "Leanne" wrote:
Larry, Do you remember the case on Bay Point last year where a man was assaulted on the beach? It might have been provoked, but it ended up with the Sheriff, DNR, and the Port Royal cops out there and no one wanted to claim jurisdiction. This happened supposedly below the high water mark which the owner's rep claimed was theirs too. The problem then came up that 'IF' this property was originally a 'KING'S' Grant from the 18th century, and if it was still conveyed to them, then they did have the right to claim all land to the water. One man went to the hospital and then it was all sort of hushed up. I wonder just how many King's Grants that are actually still valid within South Carolina. This new owner developer has ruined a beautiful place to go surf fishing and spend a weekend on the beach. For years people have gone out there which is only reachable by boat. Leanne Don't remember it. Interesting, though. What's REALLY scary is this nonsense where each little waterfront fiefdom has domain over the water 1 mile from shore. Larry W4CSC No, no, Scotty! I said, "Beam me a wrench.", not a WENCH! Kirk Out..... |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I just remembered what one lady down in Beaufort, SC, said to the
newspaper when they were discussing a new marina going into a creek near her home. She was opposed to them installing "a floating trailer park" in the creek to spoil her view. That's what property owners think of your boats......"floating trailer parks". Larry W4CSC No, no, Scotty! I said, "Beam me a wrench.", not a WENCH! Kirk Out..... |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Larry W4CSC" wrote in message ... I just remembered what one lady down in Beaufort, SC, said to the newspaper when they were discussing a new marina going into a creek near her home. She was opposed to them installing "a floating trailer park" in the creek to spoil her view. That's what property owners think of your boats......"floating trailer parks". There was also a case on Hilton Head where someone was fishing in a creek off someone's land and the lady disliked them spoiling the view that her state rep. daughter tried to get a law passed about restricting the waters to a distance (I can't remember the exact amount, something like 300 yards)of private property. Then we have the problem that there are very few creeks that are wider than that. It didn't pass because it ended up being a federal jurisdiction. Btw, the daughter is no longer in public office. Leanne s/v Fundy |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In order to try to spoil boating around HHI, the entire area was
declaired a no-wake zone. No wake zones are being used to spoil boating across the country in the same manner. There is also a law against anchoring out off of the billionaires at HHI and shrimp trawlers are forbidden from even being in the waterways around it. Money talks in Columbia. FBI proved you can buy a SC politician for around $2200. Remember "Operation Lost Trust"? On Wed, 4 Feb 2004 11:14:20 -0500, "Leanne" wrote: "Larry W4CSC" wrote in message ... I just remembered what one lady down in Beaufort, SC, said to the newspaper when they were discussing a new marina going into a creek near her home. She was opposed to them installing "a floating trailer park" in the creek to spoil her view. That's what property owners think of your boats......"floating trailer parks". There was also a case on Hilton Head where someone was fishing in a creek off someone's land and the lady disliked them spoiling the view that her state rep. daughter tried to get a law passed about restricting the waters to a distance (I can't remember the exact amount, something like 300 yards)of private property. Then we have the problem that there are very few creeks that are wider than that. It didn't pass because it ended up being a federal jurisdiction. Btw, the daughter is no longer in public office. Leanne s/v Fundy Larry W4CSC No, no, Scotty! I said, "Beam me a wrench.", not a WENCH! Kirk Out..... |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Larry W4CSC wrote:
In order to try to spoil boating around HHI, the entire area was declaired a no-wake zone. No wake zones are being used to spoil boating across the country in the same manner. I dunno, Larry. You're an unusual sight. Perhaps the folks on Hilton Head enjoy looking at you as you creep by in your jetski boat. Cheers. ------------ Was this a great country or what? Bush-The Great Divider. -- Email sent to is never read. |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I have been trying to watch a similar issue in PA. Apparently someone waded
downstream fishing and was chased off. Kayakers and canoe owners have been trying to fight it. Link at: http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/Go...ccghissue.html Apparently it is a state law issue. I also recall Michael Moore and his group protesting this issue out in Malibu or somewhere in CA where all beaches were represented as Private. Kathy M "Larry W4CSC" wrote in message ... In order to try to spoil boating around HHI, the entire area was declaired a no-wake zone. No wake zones are being used to spoil boating across the country in the same manner. There is also a law against anchoring out off of the billionaires at HHI and shrimp trawlers are forbidden from even being in the waterways around it. Money talks in Columbia. FBI proved you can buy a SC politician for around $2200. Remember "Operation Lost Trust"? On Wed, 4 Feb 2004 11:14:20 -0500, "Leanne" wrote: "Larry W4CSC" wrote in message ... I just remembered what one lady down in Beaufort, SC, said to the newspaper when they were discussing a new marina going into a creek near her home. She was opposed to them installing "a floating trailer park" in the creek to spoil her view. That's what property owners think of your boats......"floating trailer parks". There was also a case on Hilton Head where someone was fishing in a creek off someone's land and the lady disliked them spoiling the view that her state rep. daughter tried to get a law passed about restricting the waters to a distance (I can't remember the exact amount, something like 300 yards)of private property. Then we have the problem that there are very few creeks that are wider than that. It didn't pass because it ended up being a federal jurisdiction. Btw, the daughter is no longer in public office. Leanne s/v Fundy Larry W4CSC No, no, Scotty! I said, "Beam me a wrench.", not a WENCH! Kirk Out..... |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Anyone familiar with Sears Sea-Vee 15' fibreglass? | General |