Is The Buccaneer trying to keep locals off their beach?

The owners are more local than you are monogram.

Hey, I've been pretty tan as of late. 😉

If someone is buying drinks, etc. I don't think they should be charged to sit in a chair. By purchasing a drink, the customer has purchased the right to reasonably use the bar's amenities (bathroom, chair, etc). Someone who brings their own drinks or is just loitering, then maybe.

On every single beach on STT where there's a chair concession or a resort which provides chairs free of charge to their paying guests, you pay for a chair. And you pay for your drinks at either the resort bar or a concession bar. By purchasing a drink you certainly do not have a "reasonable right" to a chair or to any other resort amenities.

And you are welcome to keep that approach over there in STT.

Any Resort Hotel which is an EDC beneficiary agrees to provide free access to the beach via a designated route across their property. They are not required to provide free parking or free beach chairs. The Buccaneer is an EDC beneficiary. If you take a taxi or park outside of the Buccaneer property they should allow you to walk to the beach across their property at no charge. As for what they charge for parking and chairs, that would be up to them.

"In order to receive benefits from the V.I. Economic Development Commission, an applicant must:

•Provide an easement for free access to the beach or shoreline, if the applicant will be doing business on property that adjoins the shoreline."
http://www.usvieda.org/start-business/edc-tax-incentives/edc-eligibility

(tu)

Need to change the title of this thread from "locals" to "non-guests"

I am unable to find a law which requires that Resort Hotels provide beach access across their private property. All beaches are public, accessible from the water, for 15 feet beyond mean high tide.

Here (not just EDC beneficiaries but all commercial properties):

http://coastal-zone-management.digmeonline.com/userfiles/Beach_Access_Brochure(1).pdf

If someone is buying drinks, etc. I don't think they should be charged to sit in a chair. By purchasing a drink, the customer has purchased the right to reasonably use the bar's amenities (bathroom, chair, etc). Someone who brings their own drinks or is just loitering, then maybe.

On every single beach on STT where there's a chair concession or a resort which provides chairs free of charge to their paying guests, you pay for a chair. And you pay for your drinks at either the resort bar or a concession bar. By purchasing a drink you certainly do not have a "reasonable right" to a chair or to any other resort amenities.

And you are welcome to keep that approach over there in STT.

Only places I've ever paid here are under Magens Bay Authority. We've used chairs at beaches in off season many times. We don't abuse it though. Use them to change baby on and keep our stuff out of sand. Coki charges for parking in lot closest to beach. We park on road or go to Sapphire if no spots.

And you are welcome to keep that approach over there in STT.

That "approach" as you call it is exactly the same wherever I've traveled - and I'm very well traveled.

Your muddled thoughts are as usual hard to follow and as divisive as usual. In one breath you say that a locally-owned business would never do such a thing and then when it's pointed out that this particular resort is locally owned, you do a major tack and come up with, " People just make things up to justify anti-local policies."

The Buccaneer has enacted a policy that is anti-local/non guests. That other hotels in other places treat their locals the same way is of no consequence.

Standing up for locals/residents, etc. isn't "divisive," just as advocating for the business community isn't divisive. Public advocacy is quite the noble calling!

Only places I've ever paid here are under Magens Bay Authority. We've used chairs at beaches in off season many times. We don't abuse it though. Use them to change baby on and keep our stuff out of sand. Coki charges for parking in lot closest to beach. We park on road or go to Sapphire if no spots.

You pay to park at Magens and at Smith Bay Park. Maybe you have used resort chairs and not been charged but every single resort on STT (and at Magens and Smith Bay Park when the chair concessionaire is there) that I know of charges non-guests for the use of chairs - including Sapphire, Secret Harbour (you can rent chairs there from the dive shop), Morningstar, Emerald Beach, etc. Coki isn't fronted by a resort but you pay the concessionaire there too.

Only places I've ever paid here are under Magens Bay Authority. We've used chairs at beaches in off season many times. We don't abuse it though. Use them to change baby on and keep our stuff out of sand. Coki charges for parking in lot closest to beach. We park on road or go to Sapphire if no spots.

You pay to park at Magens and at Smith Bay Park. Maybe you have used resort chairs and not been charged but every single resort on STT (and at Magens and Smith Bay Park when the chair concessionaire is there) that I know of charges non-guests for the use of chairs - including Sapphire, Secret Harbour (you can rent chairs there from the dive shop), Morningstar, Emerald Beach, etc. Coki isn't fronted by a resort but you pay the concessionaire there too.

Yes. That is true. Off season offers more opportunities to use chairs 🙂

The owners are more local than you are monogram.

Hey, I've been pretty tan as of late. 😉

What does skin color have to do with this discussion?
How many generations has your family resided on STX?

The owners are more local than you are monogram.

Hey, I've been pretty tan as of late. 😉

What does skin color have to do with this discussion?
How many generations has your family resided on STX?

I thought you knew--your declaration that the owners are more local than me seemed definitive.

Although, very few can claim to be more "local" than the Armstrong family, an institution on the island since the 1600s. Queen Mary probably thought very highly of the Armstrong ancestors.

I can think of no more typical "Crucian" experience if I ever saw one. Such a family would identify with the interests of the local population. I have heard many stories of Mr. Armstrong's generosity to the Crucian people, particularly during devastating hurricanes (tales of his generosity during Hugo are the stuff of legend). The family has employed hundreds of Crucians throughout the years.

I was thinking of the Renaissance's Carambola when I made my original comment. It's been a long day.

Here (not just EDC beneficiaries but all commercial properties):

http://coastal-zone-management.digmeonline.com/userfiles/Beach_Access_Brochure(1).pdf

The info in that brochure regarding access looks like it applies more to new development. Of course the Buc has been in existence long before that law was passed. And while it says the public has the right to use/access the beach, it doesn't anywhere say for free, is that implied? What does the complete act say? In any case if the Buc is in fact an EDC beneficiary it would appear that free access to the beach is due.

The brochure says "Public access locations and associated parking lots are input into GIS system to create maps for distribution." But of course I can't find any such maps on the CZM web site, that would make too much sense. Anyone seen one?

I propose that the chair fees should be based on the degree of "localness" as follows:

Ancestral native virgin islanders: free
Native virgin islanders: $1
Bahn ya to parents who were not bahn ya: $2
Down islanders: $3
Transplants: $5

Proof of ancestry is required at the gate.

And while it says the public has the right to use/access the beach, it doesn't anywhere say for free, is that implied? What does the complete act say?

I don't have the answer to that and wouldn't assume anything is implied but would check with CZM directly - or ask your local senator to look into it as mentioned earlier.

And while it says the public has the right to use/access the beach, it doesn't anywhere say for free, is that implied?

Yes, "public" access means "free and unrestricted".

I propose that the chair fees should be based on the degree of "localness" as follows:

Ancestral native virgin islanders: free
Native virgin islanders: $1
Bahn ya to parents who were not bahn ya: $2
Down islanders: $3
Transplants: $5

Proof of ancestry is required at the gate.

Bill 15-0243
Sponsored: T. "Positive" Nelson; N. "Ancestral" James

Descendants of slave owners*: $20
Two or more generations: $5
Descendants of slaves: $1
Hon. Adelbert Bryan: Free

*Subject to analysis/determination by Hon. Beeski- Historian, VI Moving Center. Does not apply to such descendants who own hotels.

Yes, "public" access means "free and unrestricted".

It's clear from the CZM mandate (which is essentially the same as in other jurisdictions throughout the US) that any developer of commercial shoreline property must provide public access to the beach through its property. In my opinion this doesn't necessarily imply "free" but "access". There may well be no legal restriction on a commercial enterprise charging an admission fee to use their property to gain that access. Again, whoever has concern should seek clarification from the source and no assumptions should be made nor battle lines drawn in the meantime.

Beeski, I was also wondering what color had to do with local or non local

I got some clarification of the Buccaneer's Beach Policy:

1) There is no charge to use the beach. If you park at the Gate by the golf clubhouse and walk in, or if you get dropped off, there is no fee. You can sit on your towel / the sand, swim etc.....no charge.

2) Parking down by the Mermaid and use of restrooms / showers is $5 per person.

3) if you want to rent a Chaise Lounge, the fee is $10 (which includes a beach chair cover/towel).

Sounds reasonable / similar to what other resorts charge in the VI / around the world.

Thanks for taking the time to find out!

Well, maybe they will cut us a break in low season. Last time I was there in August on one day they charged us the $4pp, on a later day they said it was our lucky day and waved us through.

I am not local, only tourist as of now.
I was at Buc in November. My taxi dropped me off, and I had to pay a fee to go to the beach.
I also paid 10.00 for the chaise lounge and if I wanted a towel, that would be an extra charge.

I also went to Hotel on the Cay and was asked to pay for the chair, even though I and my husband had a Thanksgiving dinner, few drinks.

Spent more time in the restaurant listening to Pressure's VI is so nice and Lock away song.

USVI is nice, but not cheap.

And while it says the public has the right to use/access the beach, it doesn't anywhere say for free, is that implied?

Yes, "public" access means "free and unrestricted".

It does not mean they have to provide a road or parking. Nothing is stopping anyone from walking.

What does the complete act say?

VI legislature, Title 12, Chapter 10: "Open Shorelines"
http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/vicode/

§ 401. Declaration of policy

The sea has long dominated the history of the United States Virgin Islands. It has, until the advent of the air age, been the only route to the outside. The sea has brought to these islands all of the seven flags that have reigned over them. It has also been a constant source of food and recreation. The threshold to the sea that surrounds us is the shoreline. The shorelines of the United States Virgin Islands have in the past been used freely by all residents and visitors alike. The seashore has been a place of recreation, of meditation, of physical therapy and of rest to Virgin Islanders past and present. To fishermen the sea and its shores are a way of life. The second half of the twentieth century has brought adverse changes to the United States Virgin Islands shorelines. There has been uncontrolled and uncoordinated development of this area, together with attempts, sometimes successful, to curtail the use of these areas by the public.

The Legislature recognizes that the public has made frequent, uninterrupted and unobstructed use of the shorelines of the United States Virgin Islands throughout Danish rule and under American rule as recently as the nineteen fifties. It is the intent of the Legislature to preserve what has been a tradition and to protect what has become a right of the public.

§ 402. Open beaches and shorelines; shorelines defined

(a) It is hereby declared and affirmed that the public, individually and collectively, has and shall continue to have the right to use and enjoy the shorelines of the United States Virgin Islands as "United States Virgin Islands" is defined in section 2(a) of the Revised Organic Act of the United States Virgin Islands.

(b) For the purposes of this chapter "shorelines of the United States Virgin Islands" shall mean the area along the coastlines of the United States Virgin Islands from the seaward line of low tide, running inland a distance of fifty (50) feet; or to the extreme seaward boundary of natural vegetation which spreads continuously inland; or to a natural barrier; whichever is the shortest distance. Whenever the shore is extended into the sea by filling or dredging, the boundary of the shorelines shall remain at the line of vegetation as previously established.

§ 403. Obstruction of shorelines prohibited

No person, firm, corporation, association or other legal entity shall create, erect, maintain, or construct any obstruction, barrier, or restraint of any nature whatsoever upon, across or within the shorelines of the United States Virgin Islands as defined in this section, which would interfere with the right of the public individually and collectively, to use and enjoy any shoreline.