Jim Brennan in a fight! LOL!

[Roogsy]

http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/467805

[Ladies Love Julius James]

Looooooooooooooooooooool.

[Damien]

Damnnn he aged!!!!
http://multimedia.thestar.com/images/cd/48/e91290984e4c89e267540e874b4f.jpeg

[Cannon]

Nobody has any idea what "Private Property" means anymore.

[Roogsy]

Don't know if I completely agree with that. Beachfront property had always had to deal with this issue and you don't hear of fights every day. Sounds to me like this family is being dicks about it.

I mean, can you imagine if everyone with beachfront property had fences to the waterline?

[Canadian Blue]

Nobody has any idea what "Private Property" means anymore.

You must be joking!! The fence and the owners of the fence are the problem not the beach goers.

[JDG]

You must be joking!! The fence and the owners of the fence are the problem not the beach goers.

Correct - the whole time I was reading the article, I was wondering how they got away with putting the fence up in the first place.
If you own the property right down to the water's edge, and there is a portion of the property that has historicaly been used by the community to access the water, your ownership does not supercede the right to access by the community.
I'm no lawyer, but I had this explained to me when I was involved in the subdividing of some lakefront property several years ago. To my understanding, that fence is illegal, and the community just needs to hire a lawyer to put an end to the situation.

[Roogsy]

^That makes sense. Sounds right to me. Otherwise, everyone in Canada with beachfront property would have a fence like that. Which is why I think this family is being a bunch of douchebags.

[ExiledRed]

^That makes sense. Sounds right to me. Otherwise, everyone in Canada with beachfront property would have a fence like that. Which is why I think this family is being a bunch of douchebags.

hundreds of them on the bruce peninsula, up to Tobermory.

All that land is 'owned' there's no reason to stop between there and here.

[Jack]

If their title to the land states their property goes right to the water's edge, then why are they being dicks about it?

[rocker]

ya I'd hate to buy a property that said it was to the water's edge and then find out people can come right into my yard. i've been up to those beaches and some of the people who hang out on them are really fricken annoying... drunken frat boys trying to show off. I imagine at night you don't exactly have "peace" at the beach.

[Sonny Cheeba]

i do wonder how the liability problem works, can you really be held accountable for someone who hurts themselves on your property? can't you just consider they trespassed and then they have to take care of themselves. furthermore, what kind of asshole wouldn't want to help someone hurt on the beach whether it's your property or not.
and since they own the property to the waters edge, that kid was fine when he was in the water and they should know that. having beach front property is fine, but owning the beach is stupid.
water fluctuations and erosion are two perfect reasons why not to put that kind of fence in.

[Sonny Cheeba]

ya I'd hate to buy a property that said it was to the water's edge and then find out people can come right into my yard. i've been up to those beaches and some of the people who hang out on them are really fricken annoying... drunken frat boys trying to show off. I imagine at night you don't exactly have "peace" at the beach.

yeah it sucks that it can be noisy and whatnot, but what do you expect?

at night, i don't really think it's that bad. but then again, i don't know how far their property stretches from the water. i've been to grand bend on a few nights and the beach was pretty dead. that may be because people only go for the day.

[zeelaw]

lol too funny

[alantang999]

Even if they have a clause extending their property to the waterline, the couple still needs to wise up and realize that when a beachfront has been accessible to the public for so many years, people are going to flare up emotionally in the interests of the greater community.

[Stugatzo]

Correct - the whole time I was reading the article, I was wondering how they got away with putting the fence up in the first place.
If you own the property right down to the water's edge, and there is a portion of the property that has historicaly been used by the community to access the water, your ownership does not supercede the right to access by the community.
I'm no lawyer, but I had this explained to me when I was involved in the subdividing of some lakefront property several years ago. To my understanding, that fence is illegal, and the community just needs to hire a lawyer to put an end to the situation.

Why is my facebook picture your signature??!!!

[The Pope]

^^ http://64.13.252.151/forums/showthread.php?t=3868

[13CP]

^ Here we go again.

Anyone who has facebook will see thier own pictue in JDG's sig. No one else can see it but you.

[Stugatzo]

Ahhhhh...ok, thanks.

[olegunnar]

FYI
They own into the water.
it's PIN 584000003 LRO 51

[Derko]

How far into the water, Is Georgian Bay not a navigable waterway and that is public property, they probably have deeded ownership to the High Water Mark, which has greatly decreased in Georgian Bay in the past few years, I'd be sitting out there in my boat all day long, just off shore, just to be a prick.

[RedLion]

Not the first and probably not the last time Jim Brennan got into an argument about de fence.

[Cashcleaner]

I believe ALL natural bodies of water in the province are considered crown land for public use.

And yes, you can have a lake surrounded by private propery (like where my friend's cottage is) and have it all fenced off, but if a person somehow gets into the water without traversing the private lands, that's still perfectly okay.

Also, any body of water that has or had a portage or recognised right-of-way to the water may be travelled upon by anyone at any time, without the permission of the land owner.

[james]

all beach land should be for everyone to use. Exspecially if it blocks the path of people walking by, they shouldnt have to go in the water to get by the property. And if they start fencing off the beach my worry is other people would follow and before you know it the whole beach will be private property. If i lived there or had a cottage there i would probably burn that fence down to.

[james]

and they say they want to take that fence down themselfs and they only put that fence up because they dont want anyone to get hurt on there property and be responsible for it. But then how come they have been so agressive with it. From what ive read before they have been getting in many verbal arguments with locals and in this case a fist fight. It seems like they are pretty much threatenning people to stay off the property. They could also sell the beach property. To me it seems like they just want to keep the beach to themselfs. Selfish basterds.

[Jack]

Well, on one hand, I agree with beaches being public. In Mexico, all beach is considered federal land.

But in this case, the beach is included in their title to the property and probably cost them more as a result. So technically, it's their property and therefore they can fence it if they want.

Obviously, I'm speaking from a point of view with not a lot of knowledge of the actual case.

[Shaughno]

:rofl: That's hilarious. I know exactly where that is. I've stayed at the Sunport on Balm Beach a few times. :lol:

[olegunnar]

The parcel map for this place looks funny.
It's a whole bunch of parcels that end at the "water limits"...then this one...that extends into the water.
Unfortunately Teraview/e-reg etc. isn't set up to save maps/jpegs etc. and I don't know how to post a pdf to show everyone and end this discussion.

I don't know how that got that deal (in terms of limiting public access, and in terms of "owning" beach/water) but they did

[Shaughno]

The parcel map for this place looks funny.
It's a whole bunch of parcels that end at the "water limits"...then this one...that extends into the water.
Unfortunately Teraview/e-reg etc. isn't set up to save maps/jpegs etc. and I don't know how to post a pdf to show everyone and end this discussion.

I don't know how that got that deal (in terms of limiting public access, and in terms of "owning" beach/water) but they did


I was wondering that myself, from the few owners I talked to when I've been up there it seemed nobody owned any actual 'beach' property. :noidea:

[yellowfellow]

Well, looks like the kid punches somebody too hard...broke his arm...seriously, if you get into a fight (doesn't matter whose fault and who is right), why would you go on the media, act all innocent and pose with a sad puppy face?

[olegunnar]

There we go.
See? Into the water.

[Shaughno]

Nope.. don't see . :lol:

[olegunnar]

Nope.. don't see . :lol:

Well the blue line on the map is what's legally defined as the "water limits" and the dark yellow highlighted parcel is that which is owned by the Marion's.
The dark parcel extents past the "water limits" therefore they own past the "water limits". The owner was right, people are trespassing.

I'm assuming your question was an honest question and not a subtle jab at the fact it took me 48 tries and edits to get the pic up :D

[Shaughno]

No honestly, I still can't see it! :lol:

[olegunnar]

No honestly, I still can't see it! :lol:

Well you're a moderator...go look in my album!

[Shaughno]

Ahh... that's the problem.. Change it from private to public. ;)

[olegunnar]

Ahh... that's the problem.. Change it from private to public. ;)

Does it work now? :o

[Shaughno]

YES!! Whoo hoo :lol:

[Shaughno]

That is weird. The purple is the public land right? I'm pretty sure it's a public beach two lots down from their property anyway.

[olegunnar]

That is weird. The purple is the public land right? I'm pretty sure it's a public beach two lots down from their property anyway.


Purple is roads.
Now that I sort of and finally have the hang of it I'll try and use a different tool to show it. It'll have sat photos and parcels.

[olegunnar]

http://www.redpatchboys.ca/forums/picture.php?albumid=127&pictureid=637

[Shaughno]

Yeah.. but the roads don't go into the water. :lol: I'm pretty sure it's a public beach just north of their lot.

Edit: See! I knew exactly where this place was. I've 'trespassed' on their property apparently. :lol:

[Cantstoptherock]

My family has had a cottage up near there since 1961. The Marion's are being cunts. Balm Beach gets extremely busy because it's public and it's one of the few stretches along that part of Georgian bay where you can park somewhere to access the water. Most other beaches prohibit parking so you essentially need to park at a cottage to walk to the beach. Their cottage is right next to a bar on the water. People will go where they please and some shitty little fence isn't going to stop 'em.

[Cantstoptherock]

Well the blue line on the map is what's legally defined as the "water limits" and the dark yellow highlighted parcel is that which is owned by the Marion's.
The dark parcel extents past the "water limits" therefore they own past the "water limits". The owner was right, people are trespassing.

I'm assuming your question was an honest question and not a subtle jab at the fact it took me 48 tries and edits to get the pic up :D

Why does their lot magically extend to the water and no one else's does? Also, having a kid in front of your house, sign or not, does not give you the right to assault someone. Throw that bastard in jail.

[olegunnar]

Yeah.. but the roads don't go into the water. :lol: I'm pretty sure it's a public beach just north of their lot.

Edit: See! I knew exactly where this place was. I've 'trespassed' on their property apparently. :lol:

It's a weird situation. I have no idea how they got the deal (owning the beach)they got.

It's tricky. People are trespassing on their property. As an owner they have rights.

At the same time though come on...it's a beach, people walk along beaches to get from point a to b...and how are people supposed to know it's private property unless they tack a land title to their fence?

[KdotOdot]

Those fence owners are cunts. My buddy has a cottage there, he told me the Fence owners wife was arrested not to long ago for going out in the middle of the night and breaking her neighbours flower pots..WHAT A NUT!!

Also, if there was ever an emergency on the beach and Ambulance would have to go THROUGH the fence to get to that person. These people are scum. I hope someone burns there fucking cottage down.

[jm5k]

A lot of angry people here over this, and a lot of it isn't fair. I guarantee that the 14 yr old knew what he was doing before the incident and was being a typical 14 yr old (mouthing off, etc). That doesn't give someone a right to attack them, but the truth lies somewhere in the middle, not with puppydog eyes and claims of absolute innocence. It also seems fairly apparent that the land owners are content to horde their property and are of low moral continence. However, if they bought the land, and own it, it's theres to do what they want.

Sure it's frustrating for local tourists who want to walk the beach, but if they do own the land, then really, too bad for you. You can't simply force back land because people want to walk on it, that's ridiculous. People should be mad at whoever zoned and surveyed the land and made such a purchase possible. But again, there is no resolution in doing so, so might as well get used to it.

As well, the second you burn down the fence or cause damage to their property you will only further push the law away from you. I believe the only way you could remove the fence and prevent any further building is creating a protected status for the stretch of beach, much like the Oak Ridges Moraine along the northern edge of the GTA/Durham.

You can't take away land just because people are jerks. That is clownshoes crazytalk.