Lakeshore Property with illegal fences & walls on beach

[Graham Adder]

If we don't protect the General Public's right to access the lakeshore, one day the only folks able to enjoy it will be the very rich.

exactly
I'd like to add that in some stretched of our lake shore, this is already the case.
That is really what this issue is about.
The exclusive use of our beach by the rich.
It's time we put an end to it before it gets worse, and that's the only way it will go without intervention of some sort.

[GordonH]

impo on this subject the stretch of property between low water line & high water line (normal spring run off/high water line.... to maximum of "X" metres, not the complete flood plain).
Should be considered public access along all water ways i.e creeks, rivers & lakes in the Province.

no ifs..... maybes or buts about it

[Graham Adder]

no ifs..... maybes or buts about it

Well...butts maybe. It is after all beach that we are talking about.

Just no cigarette butts/loser tracks.

[WalterWhite]

Your previous posts, though laced with snips of sarcasm, condescension, wit and the occasional back-handed compliment were usually on point to some degree. These latest musings leave me to think you've fallen off a wagon or something. Vigilantism has never produced a desired outcome.

No wagon to fall off. Can't afford a wagon.
Who's talking about vigilantism here?
I stated there should be no legal reason why we can't...
That's about doing things within the confines of our own laws, should they allow. It's an opinion regarding whether or not there should be legal excuse NOT to take action.
It's food for thought, that you ate and are now whining to me about your belly ache.

Tell me (us) what your idea would be around finding a solution to this obvious legal infraction and loss of beach access to all.

I'm all ears. Damn, I am all ears. Tucking them as a kid only does so much.

You're up at bat, Slugger. Show us that batting arm.

I hardly think I need to point out the aspects of your post advocating vigilante actions.
I have no suggestions to offer, as the current state of affairs doesn't bother me in the least. There are plenty of public beaches and parks for me to fill my boots if I want to stroll the lakeshore. I also happen to have respect for those that own lakefront property and whatever improvements they have legally made to said property. If in fact, it is deemed that improvements have been made that are not permitted, then yes, they should be removed, or have the proper permits approved. That in no way means Joe Public should - as you advocated - launch an assault with "wrecking bars and sledgehammers" to remove what Joe Public feels is an obstruction.

[Graham Adder]

I'm going to suggest that my arthritis is worse than yours.
I don't find it so easy to bend over at the waist.

Some laws need to be broken to be changed.
Many laws need to be changed.
Ownership of lands out into the water was NEVER a legally viable option for land ownership, as not all OWNERS of our natural resources gave permission.

You don't like when someone challenges your laws/beliefs?
Deal with it.
GOT MILK?

[WalterWhite]

I'm going to suggest that my arthritis is worse than yours.
I don't find it so easy to bend over at the waist.

Some laws need to be broken to be changed.
Many laws need to be changed.
Ownership of lands out into the water was NEVER a legally viable option for land ownership, as not all OWNERS of our natural resources gave permission.

You don't like when someone challenges your laws/beliefs?
Deal with it.
GOT MILK?

Ah yes - the classic retort of "if you're not with us, then you're not only against us, but a bootlicker too". I'm ok carrying on with my law-abiding ways and having respect for others and their property - just as I would like others to do unto me.

- and I deal with it just fine.
Thanks - but I'm lactose intolerant.

[Graham Adder]

Ah yes - the classic retort of "if you're not with us, then you're not only against us, but a bootlicker too". I'm ok carrying on with my law-abiding ways and having respect for others and their property - just as I would like others to do unto me.

- and I deal with it just fine.
Thanks - but I'm lactose intolerant.

Ah the classic ... BS.
Nobody has said anything of the sort you are trying to insinuate has been said.
Your law abiding ways are spoken loud and clear.
You keep on letting other do unto you.
I don't swing that way.
Us humans can adjust to some incredible environments. I have no doubt you deal with "it" just fine.

I respect others, but that doesn't mean I have to respect their choices and actions.
It also doesn't mean I have to accept what is clearly a violation to me, in order to "get along just fine".
You just keep on keeping on.
Try Silk.
It washes down anything hard to swallow.

[WalterWhite]

Such witty retorts. However, I'm not the one needing to swallow anything.

[Graham Adder]

[marooned]

I would love to help protect these homeowners' foreshores from damage due to flooding, but I can't seem to get by the fences that are waist deep in the lake to help.

[Black Daisies]

I wonder how many people will be allowed to rebuild their docks damaged from the floods and the storm?

[Fancy]

I would love to help protect these homeowners' foreshores from damage due to flooding, but I can't seem to get by the fences that are waist deep in the lake to help.

Put on a swimsuit. Other people were in waist deep water protecting property.

[westbankkid]

But the property they were protecting didn't have fences. You got a fence blocking access. Suffer the consequences.

[Fancy]

Then don't offer to help with a "but".

[ferri]

Let's not worry about each others "but" and stay on topic please. :) Thanks!