Got my goat
And I am back with another ill-tempered rant. Actually, this one just pisses me off, sort of like Bella Pelosi, on whom I would not urinate should she happen to catch fire.
Due to some greedy idiot (a King) in the 1640's, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts has an odd facet in its real property laws (that is land laws, as opposed to laws concerning other items you may own): a real property owner can own seaside land right down to the low tide mark. Effectively, this makes the beach forever private to the benefit of some lucky blighter who has the will and the dosh to exclude all others. In other words, some type of Nazi.
Many, if not most of the other States, Commonwealths, States with Providence Plantations, have the rule that a real property owner may own land to the high tide line, but no further. This effectively makes the beach state-owned land, with free right of passage to all who would care to walk it. Sensible, giving access to an incredibly valuable resource to the people of the State, for their enjoyment, sustenance and thoroughfare.
But not the oh-so-liberal Commonwealth of Massachusetts. No, Massholes prevent people from free enjoyment of "their" beach. And believe me, they are not Republicans ... there are no Republicans in this State (to use the generic term). Try to walk the shoreline by the Kennedy estate.... Or any other piece held by relatively new money (anything in the last 100 years ... this is Massachusetts, you know). In Massachusetts, residents own the sand on an at least transient basis until the next Nor'Easter. And they will defend it, even as they past their Obama stickers on their Volvos, Saabs and Priuses.
About 8 years ago, I was staying at a friend's house in Hyannis. She lives in a nice little neighborhood that has right to a communal beach. Not the Hyannis Public Beach (which is wonderful, but crowded), but a small, in-the-harbor beach. The strip the community owned was about 100 yards long and on a hot day it was crowded. To relieve the congestion, I decided to take my 6 year old son for a walk and gently toss a frisbee ... to an empty section of beach right next to the crowd. After no more than 90 seconds, a woman dressed in mumu, beads and headband came out to scream -- seriously scream -- at my son and me to get off her land and to stop trespassing and that she would call the police. My son started crying and I stated that we were below the high tide line ... as I learned in law school in New York that I had the right to be there. This provoked an even more shrill tirade about f-ing tourists who don't know Massachusetts law and she knows her rights and to get off right now.
I should have simply sat down and started meditating ... this would have most likely sent her to the ER with stroke, but I told my son that we needed to leave this unstable person. The following day back at work, I strolled down to the library at the firm and did a spot 'o research. She was right. Unbelieveable but right.
A year later I anchored no more than 20 feet from the low tide line on my boat -- outriggers flying, bristling with fishing gear and stereo providing a suitable sound track. Nothing else was within 500 yards of us on the water, maybe more. Within a short period of time the male of the property-defending duo came out to ask me to move citing some crative extension of property rights and other threats of nuisance, public disorder, etc. I told him that I was perfectly aware of the regarding his claim to the low tide line, but in fact I was anchored past the low tide line and therefore outside of his jurisdiction or ownership. He said that he owned the land under the water to the low tide line ... I concurred that this might be the case, but given the temporal proximity of low tide, the accurate fix of my GPS and the approximate depth under my keel, I could not be trespassing and accordingly, he should shove off (or words to that effect). He threats to call the authorities were risible: I offered that should he touch or otherwise damage my boat, I have VHF and I would immediately call the Coast Guard. I hope he liked my offerings of Green Day, AC-DC and other heros of the age of rock and roll. I only wish I might have been able to perhaps fire up the BBQ if the wind had been more favorably oriented.
Why does this bother me so much? It is the hypocrisy inherent in the politics of liberals or democrats and their actions to zealously defend their property/wealth but feel so free to tax me to redistribute my wealth. And in the instance that it is a Republican or Libertarian so insistent on retaining possession of what should inalienably by the public's, it refutes the great conservative notions of efficient use of resources for the greater good. Simply put, no use at all benefits no one and negligible use only provides negligible benefits. Either way, it exposes raw, naked, greed at its basest.
There are two exceptions to this ancient legislative folly: you can trespass for purposes of harvest the bounty of the sea (fishing) or land (fowling). In other words, carry a fishing pole and stick a line in the water and you can tell the shrieking harridan to sod off. Or carry a gun, a ruddy great shotgun along the shore during hunting season -- pending local regulations. Imagine what the average property-owning Cambridge armchair liberal weenie would say to Joe Six Pack strolling along the beach with a pump action Remington ... "ah, Ma'am ... I am fowling today, so I claim the exemption provided to me the Courts of the Massachusetts Bay Colony."
This ruling stems from the 1640's when the King of England was considered to own the tidal flats -- particularly important in places such as Chatham and Wellfleet. The King charged colonists to construct piers and wharves out beyond the low tide line. The local courts overturned this through upholding Colonial Ordinances (1641-7) by granting ownership to the low tide line, as even then people understood you could not own the sea.
Today, this has led to the absurd result that businesses such as the Ocean Edge Resort is trying to enforce their property rights at low tide ... more than 2000 feet out from the high tide mark. Get this, they have weenie running out with no trespassing signs as the tide retreats!! Why? They are defending an initiation fee of $10,000 plus monthly $200 to be part of this prestigious (or at least exclusive) club. But the law reads ... "100 rods" or 1650 feet. Beyond that, the ancient Roman rule of "in the public trust" still holds sway. So they can run out to the 100 rod mark and no further. Beyond that, you can have a circus!
But it is a judicially confected farce ... all the legislature would have to do is simply make the laws of the Commonwealth conform with those of the rest of the Union. Interestingly, Billy Bulger, democrat, crook, politico extraordinaire and general wheeler-dealer was unable to do it. No matter how much strong-arming he engaged in, he was unable to convince a DEMOCRAT controlled house or senate to pass what should unquestionably be a law for the people. How much money do you think has been flowing to keep this state of affairs? This is a uniquely crooked and anti-democratic problem. And it is time to point fingers and call a spade a spade.
Due to some greedy idiot (a King) in the 1640's, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts has an odd facet in its real property laws (that is land laws, as opposed to laws concerning other items you may own): a real property owner can own seaside land right down to the low tide mark. Effectively, this makes the beach forever private to the benefit of some lucky blighter who has the will and the dosh to exclude all others. In other words, some type of Nazi.
Many, if not most of the other States, Commonwealths, States with Providence Plantations, have the rule that a real property owner may own land to the high tide line, but no further. This effectively makes the beach state-owned land, with free right of passage to all who would care to walk it. Sensible, giving access to an incredibly valuable resource to the people of the State, for their enjoyment, sustenance and thoroughfare.
But not the oh-so-liberal Commonwealth of Massachusetts. No, Massholes prevent people from free enjoyment of "their" beach. And believe me, they are not Republicans ... there are no Republicans in this State (to use the generic term). Try to walk the shoreline by the Kennedy estate.... Or any other piece held by relatively new money (anything in the last 100 years ... this is Massachusetts, you know). In Massachusetts, residents own the sand on an at least transient basis until the next Nor'Easter. And they will defend it, even as they past their Obama stickers on their Volvos, Saabs and Priuses.
About 8 years ago, I was staying at a friend's house in Hyannis. She lives in a nice little neighborhood that has right to a communal beach. Not the Hyannis Public Beach (which is wonderful, but crowded), but a small, in-the-harbor beach. The strip the community owned was about 100 yards long and on a hot day it was crowded. To relieve the congestion, I decided to take my 6 year old son for a walk and gently toss a frisbee ... to an empty section of beach right next to the crowd. After no more than 90 seconds, a woman dressed in mumu, beads and headband came out to scream -- seriously scream -- at my son and me to get off her land and to stop trespassing and that she would call the police. My son started crying and I stated that we were below the high tide line ... as I learned in law school in New York that I had the right to be there. This provoked an even more shrill tirade about f-ing tourists who don't know Massachusetts law and she knows her rights and to get off right now.
I should have simply sat down and started meditating ... this would have most likely sent her to the ER with stroke, but I told my son that we needed to leave this unstable person. The following day back at work, I strolled down to the library at the firm and did a spot 'o research. She was right. Unbelieveable but right.
A year later I anchored no more than 20 feet from the low tide line on my boat -- outriggers flying, bristling with fishing gear and stereo providing a suitable sound track. Nothing else was within 500 yards of us on the water, maybe more. Within a short period of time the male of the property-defending duo came out to ask me to move citing some crative extension of property rights and other threats of nuisance, public disorder, etc. I told him that I was perfectly aware of the regarding his claim to the low tide line, but in fact I was anchored past the low tide line and therefore outside of his jurisdiction or ownership. He said that he owned the land under the water to the low tide line ... I concurred that this might be the case, but given the temporal proximity of low tide, the accurate fix of my GPS and the approximate depth under my keel, I could not be trespassing and accordingly, he should shove off (or words to that effect). He threats to call the authorities were risible: I offered that should he touch or otherwise damage my boat, I have VHF and I would immediately call the Coast Guard. I hope he liked my offerings of Green Day, AC-DC and other heros of the age of rock and roll. I only wish I might have been able to perhaps fire up the BBQ if the wind had been more favorably oriented.
Why does this bother me so much? It is the hypocrisy inherent in the politics of liberals or democrats and their actions to zealously defend their property/wealth but feel so free to tax me to redistribute my wealth. And in the instance that it is a Republican or Libertarian so insistent on retaining possession of what should inalienably by the public's, it refutes the great conservative notions of efficient use of resources for the greater good. Simply put, no use at all benefits no one and negligible use only provides negligible benefits. Either way, it exposes raw, naked, greed at its basest.
There are two exceptions to this ancient legislative folly: you can trespass for purposes of harvest the bounty of the sea (fishing) or land (fowling). In other words, carry a fishing pole and stick a line in the water and you can tell the shrieking harridan to sod off. Or carry a gun, a ruddy great shotgun along the shore during hunting season -- pending local regulations. Imagine what the average property-owning Cambridge armchair liberal weenie would say to Joe Six Pack strolling along the beach with a pump action Remington ... "ah, Ma'am ... I am fowling today, so I claim the exemption provided to me the Courts of the Massachusetts Bay Colony."
This ruling stems from the 1640's when the King of England was considered to own the tidal flats -- particularly important in places such as Chatham and Wellfleet. The King charged colonists to construct piers and wharves out beyond the low tide line. The local courts overturned this through upholding Colonial Ordinances (1641-7) by granting ownership to the low tide line, as even then people understood you could not own the sea.
Today, this has led to the absurd result that businesses such as the Ocean Edge Resort is trying to enforce their property rights at low tide ... more than 2000 feet out from the high tide mark. Get this, they have weenie running out with no trespassing signs as the tide retreats!! Why? They are defending an initiation fee of $10,000 plus monthly $200 to be part of this prestigious (or at least exclusive) club. But the law reads ... "100 rods" or 1650 feet. Beyond that, the ancient Roman rule of "in the public trust" still holds sway. So they can run out to the 100 rod mark and no further. Beyond that, you can have a circus!
But it is a judicially confected farce ... all the legislature would have to do is simply make the laws of the Commonwealth conform with those of the rest of the Union. Interestingly, Billy Bulger, democrat, crook, politico extraordinaire and general wheeler-dealer was unable to do it. No matter how much strong-arming he engaged in, he was unable to convince a DEMOCRAT controlled house or senate to pass what should unquestionably be a law for the people. How much money do you think has been flowing to keep this state of affairs? This is a uniquely crooked and anti-democratic problem. And it is time to point fingers and call a spade a spade.
posted by Zaphod at Wednesday, August 06, 2008
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home