To the Editor:
I will support any legislation that starts to open up beach access for the public. I have watched, over the past 50-plus years, beachfront property owners become more proprietary about letting anyone from the public enjoy what should be everyone’s God-given right. Unlike 48 other states, Massachusetts extends private property ownership to the low-tide watermark. This archaic ordinance was not enacted for the public benefit, but to encourage private pier construction in the early colonial era. Today, those pushing back against public beach access do so to protect their own private interests.
Specious arguments are made about how this is going to create financial and other burdens on the public. I don’t see those problems in the 48 other states and the commonwealth of Puerto Rico, which do allow public access to the beaches. If one is fortunate enough to own beachfront property to the high-water mark, that is still a coveted asset in my mind. That some will not allow folks to enjoy what nature has bestowed and should be a gift for all of us is just plain wrong.
Section 33 of Senate Bill No. 2542, filed as part of an environmental bond bill by Gov. Healey, is a step in the right direction. Instead of others explaining the aforementioned section in self-serving editorials, here is the pertinent language as proposed: “Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, the commonwealth shall retain title to any waters or land below the low water line of a great pond in perpetuity. Persons passing by foot over areas between high-water and low-water lines of a great pond shall not be in violation of section 120 of chapter 266 nor subject to arrest for trespass, provided they remain within an area that a reasonable person would believe to be below the high-water line, which shall include areas of wet sand and areas below the seaweed line. In areas where natural processes, with or without human intervention, have caused the landward or lateral movement of a barrier beach into an area below the historic low water line of any great pond, the portion of the barrier beach relocated into the former bottom of the great pond shall be and remain in commonwealth ownership in perpetuity.”
This bill’s passage will not affect the vast amount of private beach ownership in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. It pertains only to coastal land that protects inland waters and marshes, and the natural changes that may or may not occur to those lands. It is a small step in what I hope will be a more concerted effort to open up the shoreline to the public. I want to thank our governor, who has put this issue on the table, for standing up to pressure from others who are only concerned about keeping the status quo in place and keeping the public away from “their” beaches! I am fortunate enough to live in Dukes County near the ocean, but like the majority of folks in my community, we are shut out of much of our coastline and treated like lesser citizens. The issue seems to me to be class-oriented, and it is telling that the Boston Globe and the local newspapers here take the side of privilege and not of the common good. Vast stretches of the commonwealth’s shoreline are off-limits to most of its inhabitants. It is time to start to change this dynamic and give access back to the people.
Tristan Israel
Tisbury