Comments
Laeek t1_it8lc11 wrote
Some coastal land trusts are working to change this. Still private land, but open to the public at least.
bubba1819 t1_itafkfu wrote
This is the mission of Maine Coast Heritage Trust. They’ve acquired quite a few properties and have helped some towns buy land to keep access to mudflats for clambers and wormers.
The_Maine_Viking t1_it9bq4p wrote
Uhh... The Maine Island Trail Network?
sooooooooyep t1_itaisdn wrote
Just a heads up: Maine island trail is made up of hand shale deals with private landowners. The land on the trail is not necessarily permanently conserved or open to the public. But some of it is. Like the land trust lands and the state owned lands that the Maine island trail association has deals with to publicize in their book.
acister t1_it9cszx wrote
I will look into it! This is all privately owned land though for the sake of what seems to be mostly boating? The island campgrounds seem cool and I guess they book well in advance but definitely going to check them out. There's a lot of ATV trails that are through networks of privately owned land that are similar but it is much different than public land. I appreciate it all but literally with BLM and National Forest, you're allowed to stay there for up to 30 days in a single location and if you choose to you use a dispersed campsite you can usually find one (this sort of thing is in the White Mountain National Forest in Maine). This is a lot different!
The_Maine_Viking t1_it9hs9f wrote
There are no reservations for the Island Trails. They have a guide book that you can buy (helps fund the maintenance). If you don't have a boat you can always get transportation to places like Jewl Island through Portland Sea Taxi.
sooooooooyep t1_itaizyy wrote
Every island has different guidelines and they change. Be sure to only use the most up to date version of the trail listings as properties may no longer invite the public or have regulations like a reservation system or what not.
acister t1_it9iaar wrote
I only clicked on one of them TBH and to be fair didn't realize it was in Acadia.. I've thought about going to it before offseason without connecting the dots that it's part of the network but Duck Harbor requires advance reservations.. I'll look into the others
The_Maine_Viking t1_it9iro0 wrote
CocoShaynel t1_itcgzto wrote
Yeah grab a fishing pole and a gun then you can explore the coastline all you want.
joeydokes t1_it8i3mg wrote
> The coast is completely privately owned.
Worse, for the public, is that the Maine Supreme Judicial Court previously ruled that private ownership stretches to the low-water mark. So you can't even walk along the beach.
https://www.maine.gov/dacf/parks/docs/public-shoreline-access-in-maine.pdf
Dorrbrook t1_itq3dvh wrote
The recent ruling on rockweed harvesting expanded public access to include walking in the intertidal.
joeydokes t1_itqg2pe wrote
"subject to certain public trust rights, specifically, fishing, fowling, and navigation,,,"
so just bring along a bucket, pole, or other and appear to be "working" the intertidal makes it legit i guess
Yourbubblestink t1_it8wjj5 wrote
Yes there’s a reason Maine can’t do this. The reason is that people with money will never allow it.
This discussion has been had, and ended, many times on Cape Cod. There’s nothing to see here move along
PenguinontheTelly t1_it9uaoz wrote
If it came down to votes there are way more people not living directly on the than the lucky few who do
Yourbubblestink t1_it9zxmj wrote
Their money will keep it from ever coming to a vote. Politics is about money.
EngineersAnon t1_itak7h4 wrote
It comes down to the US Constitution. If that property is to be taken for public use - and let's not fool ourselves, that's what we're talking about here - they have to receive "just compensation". How much are we prepared to spend?
tracyinge t1_itau22e wrote
If it came down to votes in California, gays wouldn't be able to marry. Luckily they've got rights and took it to court. In other words, the majority doesn't just automatically get what they want in this country, that's not how it works.
tracyinge t1_itatvt0 wrote
"People with money"?
Well I ain't got much money but I wouldn't like it if the state suddenly decided that anyone and everyone could sunbathe in my driveway. I mean, I didn't buy a public thoroughfare.
Yourbubblestink t1_itbdnrq wrote
But in this case, people have always camped in your driveway. What’s new is your dislike of it.
tracyinge t1_itcsjw3 wrote
Huh? Nobody has ever camped in my driveway
DrMcMeow t1_it8oswo wrote
it has been tried before in the mid 80s.
in 1984 some people with money and beach front properties in Wells didn't like looking at the peasants frolicking and sun soaking on their sand, so a couple dozen of them brought a case against the town and the state to prevent them from doing so.
in 1986 the supreme court extended private ownership to the low water mark, only granting an easement to the public for fish, fowl, navigation, citing the colonial ordinance as maine common law.
also in 1986, while this case was still in the system, before a decision had been made, the state legislature quickly passed the public trust in intertidal land act, which gave the public recreational rights to beaches.
this went back to the courts, and in 1987 the superior court ruled the public trust in intertidal land act unconstitutional, the public had no easements on beaches except for the original fish, fowl, nav.
appealed, and up to the supreme court in 1989, supreme court upheld previous decision, citing the colonial ordinance once again.
so basically it is defaulted back to the 1647 colonial ordinance, which only effects maine and massachusetts (maine was a district of massachusetts at this time), granting a public easement for fishing, fowling, and navigation only.
fffangold t1_it9464n wrote
So this would require a constitutional amendment then. I can only imagine the attack ads if our state congress actually passed this when it came time for people to vote on it. They'd have to be some out there, wild BS to get people to vote against public access to beaches.
weakenedstrain t1_it8qab2 wrote
Can’t we just… do away with the peasants?
Or at least keep them landlocked like good peons?
They’re so… common…
Runnah5555 t1_it8qj5w wrote
They should try harder to not be so poor.
Alternative_Sort_404 t1_itah4je wrote
Said a recent former governor of ours…
weakenedstrain t1_it8r3le wrote
Seriously! The least they could do is have the decency to be born from a wealthy vagina, but no, they had to go squirming out of some poor, common vagina
Silly peasants
prisonerwithaplan t1_it8u4v8 wrote
We’ll we’re doing our best to make sure they can’t find anyplace to live and will have to leave. Excuse me I have to try and find a <insert name of trade> person. There’s so few here in backwards Maine! Such silly hillbillies. Ta-ta!
weakenedstrain t1_it9ka5q wrote
Thanks for doing your part! If we all band together we can solve poverty by simply getting rid of the poors. It’s a team effort.
sirgoofs t1_itbdqtv wrote
So, if I bring a fishing pole with me to the beach, I’m safe?
Candygramformrmongo t1_itbjvjw wrote
In the Intertidal zone.
jimberley t1_it8un00 wrote
Could we amend the state constitution to include public rights to beaches, or would that be superseded by common law?
EngineersAnon t1_itak198 wrote
It would run into issues with the Federal Constitution's guarantee, in the Fifth Amendment, that "... private property [shall not] be taken for public use, without just compensation." That would get gorram expensive, gorram fast.
sy33d_am33r_ali t1_itbm2j2 wrote
That’s only if you seize the property and make it public land. Granting public access to private land is a different thing, and Maine already has several similar laws on the books. The Great Ponds Act, etc.
EngineersAnon t1_itbn1xi wrote
Outright seizure is not essential for a taking. In the Great Ponds Act, the land to which access is granted must be unimproved, which is very different than letting people cross and occupy your front lawn, or a maintained beach to which you hitherto charged access fees.
Bywater t1_it8v40f wrote
NIMBY crowd would never let that play out here.
Guygan t1_it8lt1e wrote
The reason is that there’s common law and statutes going back to the 1600s that govern coastal rights.
zoolilba t1_itbe0n2 wrote
Why can't we? Because rich out of state people who come for one month a year to their beach house will block it and win.
bubalusarnee t1_it9higd wrote
Yes. There are billions of rea$on$
MomTRex t1_it9xsld wrote
I grew up in California and now have a place in Maine. I cannot fathom how the coastal access is so damn limited in Maine. We used to walk all along the Malibu coast with the rich people's homes there above the tide line but we were at the water line so it was legal. They now try to block the access from the road to the beach but so far the state has won in these cases. People need to have access to the shore!
FragilousSpectunkery t1_ita22dt wrote
Oregon did this by declaring the beaches to be a public highway, and it applied to dry sand only. I’m not seeing much parallel with Maine on this aspect. Fwiw, there is wealth in Oregon too, and a lot of opposition to the Beach Bill.
RitaPoole56 t1_it9pxr4 wrote
The reason Oregon could do it is they basically confiscated the entire land, nearly at once from indigenous peoples who lived there. Then 90%+ of the natives died from disease, poverty etc.
When Maine land was “settled” by westerners (Europeans) it was more piecemeal grabs, and the “state” was across a large distance somewhat indifferent to what happened in the Colonies. By the time it was much of an idea the English Common Law was the norm and the Native peoples were dead from disease, poverty and wars.
Mammoth-Quote-7057 t1_itbimyl wrote
The coast of Maine is public land, private land begins 50 feet past the height tide water line. That's how we're able to clam, worm, welk, etc... Can still be done by walking. You may however have to walk across private land to get to the public coast, in which case you need permission from land owners. Or take a long walk down the shore line from a place you can access publicly.
pseudosophy t1_itgp51u wrote
False. Private ownership extends to low water, subject to certain public trust rights, specifically, fishing, fowling, and navigation in the intertidal zone.
Intru t1_itabyk4 wrote
Puerto Rico has it in their state constitutions where the high water mark plus a pretty sizable buffer are public domain. Which dates back to the Spanish crown wanting to control the coastline as a resource. But yeah Oregon isn't the only US jurisdiction that make the coastline public.
pmiller61 t1_itbnyiw wrote
Too late
MrRemoto t1_itbsdwr wrote
This is the case in Hawaii, too. Beach front property owners don't own the beach.
pseudosophy t1_itgpg3d wrote
Maine did do this by statute in the 1980s. However, the Law Court held that the result was an unconstitutional taking.
[deleted] t1_it8ljwl wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_it9iqb5 wrote
[deleted]
2w3nty8ight t1_ital0a5 wrote
Shameless plug for Surfrider foundation: Granting access and recreational use of all beaches to the public, not just to those who can afford it, is part of their mission. They’ve have had successes nationwide and are active in Maine.
sflfish t1_itb1nvt wrote
Like what Hawaii does with their beaches.
Routine_Ad_5312 t1_itbl51d wrote
Greed and entitlement shall not allow
Catg923 t1_itbr2ii wrote
Grab a Maine gazetteer. It’s an excellent resource for things like camp sites, bodies of water and more
KnownDegree4888 t1_itcccec wrote
So people who don’t live on the coast and don’t have access shouldn’t have to pay for coastal disasters
MonsterByDay t1_itajp2b wrote
I’d be all for more public beaches.
But, the flip side, when I rent a place in the beach it’s nice to know I’m not going to have to fight people to sit out in front of it.
Privacy is part of the appeal of Maine’s beachfront tourism.
The_Maine_Viking t1_it9c131 wrote
Can I come e recreate on YOUR property?
bubalusarnee t1_it9hoy4 wrote
the nice thing about living on a protected reservoir is nobody ever interrupts the view
acister t1_it8fhsq wrote
There is some limited access allowed on all private property (unless otherwise posted I believe) that allows "the rights to fish, fowl, and navigate" on intertidal coast. But yeah I agree I wish Maine had more public land. When my friends from out of state ask where to camp for cheap/free, there is nothing on the coast (except deep downeast - Cutler). Any public land is in western Maine (with some exceptions but dispersed camping and free primitive camping). The coast is completely privately owned. The west has way, way more public land than the east coast.