3 ms·
Beaches and coastline are most certainly not like other natural spaces so it's unfair to equate the fight for public beaches to the idea that this means no natu
by gtowey 8y ago
Beaches and coastline are most certainly not like other natural spaces so it's unfair to equate the fight for public beaches to the idea that this means no natural space should be private.
There are 3.7 million square miles of land in the US, but only 88k miles of coastline. It's a vastly more rare resource. There are lots of places across the US which are still untouched wilderness, both private and public. I would argue that there are no unexplored beaches on the California coast. It's a very finite resource and there not that much to go around, especially in the most desireable areas.
But the article is actually addressing ocean access. You clearly can't own the ocean, the property owners already acknowledge that. They know thier property ends at the mean high tide line. The real fight is that if you can own and control the land that let's you access the ocean, in practice you effectively have your own private area of ocean. That's not fair. We wouldn't stand for it in other circumstances. You couldn't buy up all the land around Disneyland and then charge people for access to cross your land. It's the same for natural spaces and public resources. You can't keep everyone out just by buying up all the reasonable access points.
- the_absurdist 8y agoBut the article is actually addressing ocean access. No. Actually the article is talking about beach access via traversing private property. There are 3.7 million square miles of land in the US, but only 88k miles of coastline. It's a vastly more rare resource. There are lots of places across the US which are still untouched wilderness, both private and public. I would argue that there are no unexplored beaches on the California coast. It's a very finite resource and there not that much to go around, especially in the most desireable areas. So simply because there is no "unexplored" coastline, and because there is only 88k miles of it...it should all necessarily be open to the public? Your argument then is that relatively scarce lands should be necessarily open to the public. Where does that end? Beaches? Waterfalls? Rock formations? Absurd.
- the_absurdist 8y agoAnd the downvote is just so petty. You guys need to downvote someone that you disagree with to exercise your little power play. Pathetic.
- UweSchmidt 8y agoIt's simply too arduous to adress arguments like "should no natural spaces be private"? No, nobody said that. Let me reply to your complaint about your comment's vote with "Shouldn't people be allowed to vote however they like?"
- A2017U1 8y agoHN guidelines: > Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading
- killjoywashere 8y agoAt what resolution did they measure 88,000 miles of coastline? The "general coastline" is only 12,383 miles.
- em-bee 8y agoin germany if the only way to access your property is through someone elses private property, then you have a right to cross that private property. if the beach is public property, then the public should have a right to get there. any arguments by the private property owners that they are protecting the beach is irrelevant, because the beach is not theirs to protect.