Slashdot Mirror
Get Ready For the High-tech Beach
coondoggie writes "Ocean City, New Jersey is a nice, family-oriented beach that will apparently soon be the high-tech model for seashore lovers and now perhaps geeks everywhere. The city has on its plate a $3 million plan for myriad public services and Internet access using radio-frequency identification chips (RFID) and Wi-Fi wireless technology. A wireless network will let Ocean City expand economic development and control the cost of local services. Wireless allows the City to save on cell phone usage, T-1 lines, and it adds efficiency. The city is looking to replace its ubiquitous but mostly annoying beach tags — which indicate you paid to get on the beach $5 per day, $10 for a week, or $20 for the whole summer — with wristbands that contain an RFID chip. Yet another cool feature of the high-tech beach will be the ability to track beachgoers — an application that is being touted by parents."
I live in the land of the free....beaches.*
WTF: you paid to get on the beach $5 per day - Australia may suck big sweaty pendulous donkey balls, but at least we don't have to pay for our beaches.**
* Not so good as the land of the free biatches
** Please return to your scheduled why-noone-needs-wireless-on-the-beach flamefest.
Since there is a big crowd of Slashdotters who are reasonable luddite-like, and who rightfully decry the unnecessary adding of technology to everything, I am guessing that an article suggesting that what the majestic natural experience of ocean and land needs is RFID tags was perhaps posted knowing that it would cause scorn and derision.
Which doesn't mean I am not going to fall for the bait.
Man, is this a stupid idea OR WHAT?
Hopefully I didn't put any [] around my words.
Why on earth would you need wi-fi and rfid at the beach? Maybe its just me but when I go to the beach I don't bring anything that would allow someone to contact me except an old cellphone which is usually OFF. Why an old cellphone? Theft is a huge problem at beaches these days leave your average device that is wi-fi enabled and you'll probably find it gone by the time you are out of the water.
I think the invisible hand of the market has its middle finger extended
--A wise old fart named SC0RN
If we take these rfid tags and throw them in the water, will a lifegaurd come save it? Technology vs. the undertow, and all i want is pam anderson to save me
An I.T. motto in the hands of an idiot is a dangerous thing...
Here in America, our national government is ostensibly seperate from local municipalities. I don't know how it works in your country.
http://xkcd.com/386/
Great idea, but they're not focusing on the good parts of it. This shouldnt be about wireless on the beach but more wireless within the city. This is a great technological advancement and something I hope more cities start to do as well.
As far as wifi on the beach little people will use it, but most people will be using it in the city where the wifi also is.
RFID tags: great for your kids, wonderful idea.. but not everyone will want these, should be optional.
http://interserver.net/
C shells by the sea shore.
I grew up going to the beach. Some of my earliest memories are of fun days at the beach. One thing I've never seen in the last 30 years was public lockers. It just seems like such an obvious thing to me. You go to the beach, you can't swim with your wallet in your pocket. So where do you put it? Under your towel and hope no-one steals it? Pretty much. I asked a friend who is a lifesaver once if he'd ever seen lockers available. He had, but it's pretty rare. Apparently the most common excuse is that the lockers would attract thieves. That's, umm, interesting logic.
How we know is more important than what we know.
The Wi-fi aspect is nothing new. Brighton beach in East Sussex, southern England, has had wi-fi access for years now. I believe it's free too...
ilovegeorgebush
From what I've heard from a friend from NJ, you do have to pay to go to the beach. Space is very limited, too many people, too little parking, and the local government wanted extra income. I've seen other parks you had to pay for, guess this isn't any different. Glad it's not the case in most of the rest of the country.
An I.T. motto in the hands of an idiot is a dangerous thing...
We go down to Ocean City a few times a summer, and at least at one point we're doing there for a week straight. Needless to say, sometimes it rains, sometimes you're bored, but regardless the reason I've had need/desire to get online. I for one welcome the idea that we may be able to get wireless access in OC or on the Boardwalk or wherever.
However I agree with RFID complaints. Right now teenagers stand at the top of the steps leading down to the beach, and 'check' that you have you beach tags. Most people of course buy the tags or don't complain, but it's a big beach and easy to slide in with a group of people or just run out into the water when they start randomly checking for them on the beach.
I suppose it's just extra revenue, but the idea of wanting RFID seems like overkill. All those people coming down are having to: buy gas, pay tolls, buy food, possibly rent places to stay, buy souvenirs, buy random fudge/salt water taffy/sweets, and all the other junk that you feel it's ok to buy because you're on vacation. Do they really need to make sure they are _also_ getting that $5 for me being on the beach? All that money is going to NJ or local businesses, who pay taxes, so does the cost of the RFID system somehow equal out to meaning more dollars, and not a complete money pit. (Oops, I dropped my scanner in the sand again, I suppose I'll have to go report another one needs to be replaced)
I will shred my adversaries. Pull their eyes out just enough to turn them towards their mewing, mutilated faces. Illyria
However, like you said, Australia has bountiful beaches. Tons of them. And not a whole lot of people either. At least no relative to the states. I imagine their ocean side property is at quite a premium. It's completely understandable that beaches would be something you have to pay for. Then again, I'm from a town of 12,000 with 2 beaches, with the town built around a lake. Most of the time we didn't even go to the beach but to some other swimming hole where there wasn't so many people. Anyway, I guess times have changed.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
Linus Torvalds had something to say about the evil beaches:
So, I will ask the obvious question: Why would you bring a wifi enabled device would you bring to an area with a lot of sand and water?
I must have misread this, surely you don't have to pay to go the beach.
In the US, we have a constitutional guarantee of access to the ocean - No one can privately own the strip of land between the low and high tide marks or block your access to the same (though in practice, some entities, in particular shipping ports, can do so in the name of "security").
As for the massive expanses of shining white sand above the high tide mark - No such guarantee exists for that; And the actual rights-of-way to get to the high-tide line also form something of a questionable issue, in that you can have a right to stand somewhere you have no right to get to. On sandy beaches that doesn't so much apply, but on some of our more rugged (and IMO far more beautiful than sand) coastal areas, you can only legally get there by water.
Beach towns in NJ (and other high-density states) thought up tagged beach access to try to keep the beach an enjoyable experience for those living in the town. Or at least to offset the impact of the influx of out-of-town beach-goers has on infrastructure and aesthetic. Keep in mind that the closest of these beaches are less than 20 miles from NYC and you can deduce that something had to be done in order for locals to be able to get a square inch of beach.
I don't know about OC, NJ, but a lot of towns close their beaches at night, mostly because of the town liability insurance impact. Here's a great way to double-whammy beachgoers at night: if you paid for your tag and are wearing it at night, the town knows exactly when and where to send the officer to ticket you. if you either didn't pay or paid and left it behind because you knew they'd track you, then you might get caught by the random sweeps and get two tickets.
"If still these truths be held to be
Self evident."
-Edna St. Vincent Millay
Wireless allows the City to save on ... T-1 lines,
How's that? Do they honestly think they can build a wireless network with sufficient capacity for an entire city? Presumably, they want to replace local T-1 connections (from the telecom exchange to customers) with WLAN. But with the limited number of channels available, they'll run out of bandwidth in no time (esp. near the exchange).
The only beaches I've been to that DIDN'T have a fee were pretty gross and littered.
Those fees go towards cleanup (and other maintenance) and lifeguards.
If you haven't been paying fees to the beach where you are, it's because it's included in the tax you already pay, whether you go to the beach or not. I'd rather pay for my own trips to the beach than pay for everyone's, whether I go or not. (And I don't, generally.)
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
I know, these wacky Americans. Still, I know of beaches in the UK where the enterprising local council has built a car park on the main approach for which they charge an arm and a leg.
Yes you pay to go to the beach in NJ. Even if you own a beach house, your property taxes/association fees are partially used for your family's beach tags for the summer. However, access to the beach is unrestricted during certain hours (such as after 5 PM), and during the off-season. While I believe the state pays for major beach/ocean maintenance (like cleaning up polluted water, or reclaiming lost sand after a major storm), lifeguard salaries and other beach-associated costs are the responsibility of the association that is responsible for their section of the beach (unless you go to a beach that is part of a state or national park). These costs are paid for by proceeds from beach tags. This is done this way mostly to prevent a large hotel or developer from pushing out private ownership of beachfront property to build hotels and condos. Much of the Jersey Shore consists of housing associations. Each block or street forms their own corporation (i.e. ABC Beach Housing Association, Inc), complete with a board of directors. The coproration owns the land while the individual owns the house. Each resident is a shareholder in the coproration, the "share" meaning the parcel of land on which their house is built. So now you have a stretch of beach (for example, on a barrier island - Jersey has a bunch of these) that is owned by about 40-50 separate corporations that each own maybe 1/4 mile long stretch of beachfront property. Now let's say the shareholders of one corporation vote to sell to Mariott, it is still not in Mariott's interest to buy that corporation's property because maybe the corporation on the adjacent street won't sell and therefore there would not be enough room for Mariott to build a resort. They can't be pushed out by eminent domain either, because the property is already be owned by "corporations" and is not considered "blighted". So for once the little people beat the pants off big business. BTW, not every area of the Jersey Shore follows this model, but this is typical in many areas.
hmm.. then thinking about it a little more...
:)
i'm paying $30 a day to get into the national park in order to pay ~$100 for a lift ticket to ski...
supply, demand... i get it!
having to wear a tag too.... at least here its cos some company had to shell out for the lift towers, to fuel the motors, and of course someone has to pay the lifties a minimum drinking wage
( at least this year theres snow is all i can say! )
The register reported on an experiment by Belgian scientists to implant RFID tags in teeth.
Belgian implants RFID chip in tooth
At least you will know where your dentures are, if you lose them.
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
for my family and my dollars to leave this cesspool. Beach tags at the beach for $5/$10 a day? 7-8 dollar cheesburgers on the boardwalk without fries? Ocean city used to be a family friendly destination, but its turning into a playground for the rich. Now a network that monitors all of its visitors? No longer family friendly in my book. Its a shame to see this place degrade in such a short period of time. I've been going down there since I was a kid. Not anymore.
Sig it.
I think that it is time that the USA puts together some Federal investment into national infrastructure. The Internet is a highway, and just as much as the federal highways repay themselves many times over from the increased economic activity they generate, so to will pervasive broadband.
We should have broadband wireless in the entire northeast corridor, and along all the major highways and railways. All the trains, commuter and Amtrak, should also offer free public wireless service. How much could it cost? A few billion dollars? A hundred billion dollars? So what? WE've blown that much on stupider stuff, and wireless would be a national shot in the arm.
This is my sig.
In the US, we have a constitutional guarantee of access to the ocean
Really? I don't remember that part of the Constitution. Where was that, exactly?
"Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
Well, considering taxes are much higher in Europe, I would agree that paying to go to the beach would be a little ridiculous. But...considering it is in the United States, where taxes are much lower, and it is very popular place to the surrounding area (North Jersey, New York City, PA, etc.) $5 doesn't seem very unreasonable.
In North Jersey it costs around $5/game/person to bowl, $7-$9/hr/person to shoot pool, and $10/person to go to the movies. $5 to spend a day at the beach isn't that bad of a deal if you're into that sort of thing.
I've been to beaches in the England, beaches in Australia, beaches in Spain, beaches in France and beaches in Scotland and haven't had to pay for any of them. All of them, the Australian ones in particular have been prisine, despite the large number of people using them, and with good facilities.
I certainly wouldn't want to have to pay to go to the beach, I mean what next, would you have to pay to go the park, or to a national park or walk by a lake or a mountain ? Madness.
Maybe I completely missed the point in capitalism 101, but why do you have to pay to go to the beach?
Good beach in that area is limited. There is a population of tens of millions a few miles up the road. Even with a fee, it is still incredibly crowded.
The vast majority of beaches in the US are entirely free.
Git reddy fo' da hi-tek, Biatch!
at least last summer it didn't, the beaches were free. Wildwood does have a reputation as a vulgar blue collar sort of place, which only adds to the charm for me.
Really? I don't remember that part of the Constitution. Where was that, exactly?
Curiously, it would seem that such a right does not explicitly exist (in the US constitution), instead occuring only as a matter of common law (from Illinois Central Railroad v. Illinois).
Several state constitutions do explicitly spell it out, but not the Big Daddy.
My mistake.
Here in Michigan we have 60 times the coastline that NJ has and we dont gouge our residents by charging for beach access.
Because you have 60 times the coastline, and 1/10th the population, is the reason you don't have to charge for beach access.
I've been to Ocean City, NJ every summer for 10+ years.
e m.asp?idProduct=1
Ocean City has a large life guard staff. A lot of people (esp. from Philly) visit this beach. The guards aren't just guys sitting around getting a tan-- they actively monitor the beach. There's a stand every hundred yards or so, with 2-3 guards to a stand. I estimate at least 200 lifeguards are on the beach on a normal day. In a given week, I've seen 3-4 saves done.
By using the beach during lifeguard hours, you automatically give them consent to perform first aid, saves, CPR, etc. in the event of an emergency. Being that many beach-goers are not locals (shoobies), it would not be fair to charge a tax to citizens for a service used in a large portion by outsiders. By paying for a beach tag, you are supporting this public service that is not supported by taxes alone. The tags are only $20 for the season. I think that's a small price to pay for safety and compared to what they could charge.
http://www.ocnj.us/comersus/store/comersus_viewIt
For the record, you may use the beach for free after life guards have left (5PM I believe).
Seriously, though-- if every beach in the world is going to be overrun by loud-mouthed douches talking to Bob about the documents for my entire vacation, I'm hiring that guy from the old comic book ads to come around and deliver some sand-kicking!
UTF-8: There and Back Again
20$ is the price for the entire summer
10$ is the price for a week
5$ is the price for a day.
(btw, if you snap them up early, it's 15$% for the season)
This pays for the
1- DAILY sweeping of the beach with a big ol' sand rake machine along the heaviest portion of the beach (directly in front of the 20 block boardwalk) which sifts through the sand
and the intermittent raking of other beaches
2- the lifeguards
3- the trash removal off the beach/emptying the trash cans...
strangely, (and I originally found it shocking too) it works.. much like the toll roads, it's a pay to play system.. the nicer motels in town (see my homepage) include them with your stay.... so do most of the condo rentals.. so for those folks, it's free/subsidised by direct spending at area businesses (in my case, a motel) and day trippers also pay in proportion to the # of dollars they leave in the town (i.e. little) someone enriching my business at a few hundred a night doesn't pay the 'tax' directly, but indirectly... someone who comes into town for 8 hours pays more... beacause their direct benefit to the towns economy is a whole lot less....
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
there are many cities up & down the shore without tag fees, and some don't require them on certain days of the week, and some communities honor each other's tags as they are so darn close.....
Wildwood NJ is free, if you have a half hour to trudge from boardwalk to waters edge each time.....
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
with wifi.. the RFID tags are a new aspect..
I've been following this story closely.. and the RFID stuff just came out in the last few days..
My hotel, stopped plans to expand it's wifi access point to cover the entire building because the city announced blanket coverage over the entire island...
Now it turns out the city plans to charge a fee of 6-9$ a day, and upto $30something a week..
(my hotel btw only charges $1.00 a day and $5.00 a week- and that only because it solves more problems than offering it for free--when it was free and didn't work on a customers POS laptop- they would ask for a disocunt... now instead they get their dollar or 5 back no questions asked...)
so- until the city DOES this, or does it and sucks at it... local expansion plans are frozen....
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
I think they should just tag your ear like Marlin Perkins did on Wild Kingdom. According to the show, you wouldn't notice it at all. And some guy can just track you down using a radio with a funky antenna.
Your logic is strange, I cant wrap my head around it. To manage 60X coastline it takes 60X the resources(ok let's say it takes 20X resources and we simply let the other 40X ferment untouched). having 1/10'th the population means the tax base is far less therefore we have less money to spend on it. You are telling me that when you have less expenses because of less resources and a far higher tax income to support the smaller resource you have to charge MORE for managing it?
HUH? I really do not understand how that works.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
As a Texan I must say I would NEVER pay for my RIGHT to be on PUBLIC PROPERTY.
Ever pay a fee to go camping in a National Park?
Oh, great.
One of the big issues they're going to "solve" is that people on the beach don't like being asked to show their beach tags. But the shiny new RFID tags, they can check at the beach entrance, meaning that they won't get hassled on the beach. Hey, here's a question: couldn't that particular problem be solved more cheaply by checking non-RFID badges at the entrance?
But hey, way to spend some bucks there.
The mob probably gets a cut or something. Ocean City MD doesn't charge any fees for beach access. It also has free (though somewhat limited) parking on the beaches.
Best Slashdot Co
Maintenance on a lighty used beach is pretty inexpensive. Now...a beach that gets used so heavily that you literally have a hard time finding a spot for your blanket costs a lot to maintain. More per acre than the lightly used one. Maybe not more total, but more per acre.
Trash pickup, lifeguards, etc.
Now imagine your local taxpaying population is outnumbered 100 to 1 in use of this beach. Who should foot the bill for the maintenance? Locals via taxes, or all users via this fee?
Who do you think pays for the life guards, beach patrol, cleaning, shore maintenance? The tax payers, so in Maryland, all the people who don't use the beach are paying for your fun. In NJ the people who use it are charged.
Just like gas prices. In america we think we only pay 3-4$ per gallon, while in Europe, they pay $7. However, most Americans forget that we just spent a TRILLION dollars make sure the oil keeps coming.
..........FULL STOP.
The fees, in many cases, are used to pay for things like cleanup, because a lot of people just don't know how to pick up their own trash. The fees also pay for lifeguards and beach patrol (if there are any), maintenance of structures (boardwalks, access bridges), and for replacing sand lost to erosion. It would be unreasonable to expect the residents to bear the entire cost, when the vast majority of it is incurred by visitors. The money has to come from somewhere, and it's only fair to charge the people who are using the beaches.
$20 does sound kinda steep, particularly if that's per person. Down here, Tybee and Hilton Head don't charge access to the beach itself, but they charge reasonable amounts for parking (about $1/hour at Tybee and $4/day at HH). I'd assume the revenues go to the things listed above.
The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
No alcohol on the beach, you're kidding ?
Some of the best things about Spanish beaches are the beach parties, plenty of booze, music, drunk people. Excellent.
Most beaches are free you do some places like this that are run by a city or county where they charge a fee.
When I lived in Florida it was mainly to charge some money from out of towners, if you had a local address you could get a free pass, if you left the area of the town(a few miles) you could find beaches that had free access. The benifit from the standpoint of visitors was the paid area had life guards, they were cleaned in the mornings(raking of sand), toilets, changing rooms w/showers and such.
You guys all miss the point that these could save lives.
If they can pick up your signal they can track you and find you when you get dragged out to see. This could save hundreds of lives just by giving them a rough area to look in even if they can't pin point the person directly.
How did you guys miss such an obvious thing?
I like muppets.
Let's see...
Beach tag: $5-$7.
Parking at beach: $10-$25, depending on the demand.
So now, for a family of 4, you've spent a max of $53, and you haven't even put one foot in the sand yet.
And the food prices are no better than a theme park or a ballpark.
Only beach that is free is down in Wildwood, at the southern tip of the state.
There are public beaches in the US that are open to anyone for free; those that charge a fee, like state and federal parks; there are others where preference is given to local taxpayers and usually owned by the local municipality or county. Then, there are others that are privately owned (not unusual in a resort area), and are often owned by the hotel closest to the water. In beachfront NJ, there is even a town owned by a church and restricts it's beach to residents and by day of week (no swimming on Sunday )[Ocean Grove, north of Bradley Beach and south of Asbury Park]! When was the last time you DIDN'T PAY on a 'public property' toll road or 'public property' parking (even in TEXAS)? How about for fresh water or sewer lines? What about 'public property' sports stadiums? How about museums? (OOPS, sorry I forgot you were in TEXAS.) Do shipping companies pay to use the Ship Channel? And trucks to use the 'public property' highways, even those without tolls? Unfortunately, the beaches don't get groomed or cleaned for free. Someone has to pay for it if it is going to be done. Whether you call them 'taxes' or 'usage fees', somebody pays.
If I am not for myself, then who will be for me? If I am only for myself, what am I? If not now, when?
I live in Wildwood Crest and the beaches are free. Why bother taking a laptop and getting sand in it while enjoying the rays and the surf. I think beach tags are the worst idea for using public land and since it is free where I'm at they get the beaches clean without the tag money.
Most slashdotters wouldn't be caught dead outside of the basement!
Inane Comments are Generously Disregarded
all local traffic will stay local.
the plans include all city workers who travel around town using wifi/ip phones...
(no cells) and all incity network traffic to stay on this network...
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
It wasn't originally like this. However people decided to organize like this so they would have more power against "real" corporations. Your hardly even think about it until your street has a board meeting. It's not like some suit is coming in telling you what you can and can't do...all bylaws, and any association regulations (very few, if any) are decided by the people who live on the street as shareholders. Most of the people who own homes in this situation have been there since NJ shore communities were nothing more than a bunch of tents. Some people paid as little as $5,000 for their houses back in the 50s and 60s....and now could sell their houses for at last half a mil, and that's just the going rate for a permanent trailer.
Oh, and BTW, some parts of NJ are below the Mason-Dixon.
It's different than a tax in that:
A. People in the municipality who don't use the beach don't have to pay for it.
B. People outside of the municipality who use the beach pay for it.
Stupidity is like nuclear power, it can be used for good or evil. And you don't want to get any on you.
I went there a few years ago and I wasn't impressed. It's basically a skinny island a few miles long, but only wide enough for 2 streets N/S. It was extremely crowded and the beaches were full of garbage. Jazzing it up with high-tech frills that you go on vacation to get away from won't make it a good place to vacation. I recommend Rehoboth Beach, Delaware instead. 1/10th the people, but it's clean and still has a nice boardwalk as well.
Ocean city, NJ? Cue the Chris Hanson jokes...
as some have pointed out the existence of beach fees in NJ is to defer the cost of maintenance and safety with the tourists. many nj beach towns have populations in the hundreds but are visited by tens of thousands of out-of-towners who need saving and cleaning up after. most towns have a resident, and non-resident rate. it seems alien, i suppose, to many people, but as a jersey shore native it makes perfect sense to me. that said, it is pretty well excepted that some of the beach towns have certainly used fees as a means of exclusion. sometimes racially motivated, others motivated by class distinction. it continues in some localities despite varying levels of protest. little known, however, is the fact that the beaches "are" public property (with a few small exceptions) and the towns can not actually charge you to use the beach. what they legally charge you for is "access" to the beach. the fee is to actually walk through those controlled access points. if you enter a beach from an adjacent beach, or from the ocean, you have every right to be there. you are essentially paying for the convenience of proximity to adjacent services (rest rooms, lockers, food stands, etc.) via the controlled access point. spot badge checks on the beach are carried out, but they really have no right to do so. though i wouldn't recommend arguing , as shore town seasonal police generally have a better familiarity with the use of their nightsticks then they do with public beach access laws. you can find it all here: http://www.state.nj.us/publicadvocate/news/2007/ap proved/070628_beachguide.html
Yeah but you also need the overhead for enforcement. If you're not constantly sending people around to check that people have tags, and arrest/fine/beat-senseless those who don't, then there's no point in doing it in the first place.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
I've been going to Ocean City, NJ since I was a babe. Paying to get on the beach gets under my skin.
I'm not too concerned about Big Brother. I don't think Ocean City is big enough or desires to go down that route.
But they control access to who goes on the beach. And that, while probably constitutional, stinks.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
replacing sand lost to erosion
That is a big waste of money. Big storms often wash out tons of sand. Some more crappy sand gets trucked in, and washed out....and trucked in....and washed out. It is ridiculous. Then the locals complain about how the jetty that Springfieldport built, two towns over, effected the currents, and the "natural" deposit of sand during huge storms, and they are to blame! It's actually kinda humorous...
If there's one state that would do this it would be New Jersey. If they had everything they wanted they would prefer the RFID chip be implanted under the skin. They love restricting access to their beaches.
Out of all the places I've lived the one with the most anti-privacy attitude and laws is without a doubt New Jersey.
Not only this, but afaik (I've been gone from OC for about a year now, so it may of changed)
The beaches are "free" after the lifeguards are gone
Some beaches don't actually cost money (on the far North and South ends).
So you're paying to have a "safe" beach experience during the day, when there isn't even enough room to breath on the beach due to the crowds. And this helps bring money into the city and keep the beaches clean (in addition to combing, cleaning, and lifeguarding, the beaches have to be pumped every year or so. As in sand is taken from somewhere else and dumped on the beach to make it bigger and protect the big expensive beachfront property)
Oh, and I'll address this here, afaik beach tags are for older kids/adults only (forget the cutoff age, but I think it's like 16), so why would having rfid's on beach tags (wrist bands) effect kidnappers?
This signature is pure win!
I thought going "down the shore" was more like going to a shore town. Going to the beach, is ... well ... going to the actual beach from wherever you're staying.
-b.
There are some even odder setups down the shore. My family used to own a house in a town called Ocean Grove, which was a small town originally created as a Methodist resort in the 1890s, near Asbury Park. It was eventually incorporated into a town called Neptune, but was basically a single private property owned by the church, and people had to pay a nominal lease of something like $10/yr to continue to use their land.
-b.
Americans tend to be rather puritanical about alcohol and in general -- remember that we were founded by the people that England kicked out for being too conservative :P. NJ and NYC actually are less strict than many other parts of the country -- there are whole counties in the South where alcohol is entirely illegal (enforced to differing degrees depending on where you are).
-b.
AFAIK, none of this is true anymore. My family had a house there until ca. 2000. The beach opens later on Sundays -- 12:30 or so, but is still open, and swimming is perfectly legal. And no one would boot you off the beach if you went there earlier -- it was technically illegal, and there were no lifeguards, but no one cared much.
As far as the residents-only thing, you can just buy beach badges -- I don't think they ever carded anyone to buy a badge. Restricting the beach to residents would mean losing tourist money, and it's a very tourist-y sort of place.
-b.
?????
I might pay for parking, but I definitely don't pay to go on to the beach - Thats the bigger shame
I thought this site was news for nerds. It shouldn't be news that the beach is high-tech. Hell, the whole thing is just blanketed in silicon!
This is the USA. We don't have nude beaches because of all the stupid Christian fundamentalists.
From there we can watch the progress of the Outsource Ship, and have a going-away hula party for our jobs ;-)
Table-ized A.I.
RFID in addition to no beer on the beach?
And no thongs, or the VERY large list of things verboten on the beach in OC. There's a beach curfew after 10pm as well. OCPD is very good at generating revenue in alot of ways, they're gonna have a field day with this. Overcrowded and over priced, you'll get a week's "all inclusive" vacation in Mexico or somewhere actually tropical for what you spend on just your week's rental in NJ. Add gas and "other" costs...EEK!
Or if you want further fun, go a bit South to Cape May beaches...Thou Shalt Not Share Beach Tags...Under penalty of law.
BTW, Strathmere's beaches are still free, tho I (as do most of us locals) avoid the beach in the summer. Spring and fall...Amazing what fun a near empty beach is.
Nice troll. For the edification of anyone who isn't you, because I've found that most trolls don't want to be edified:
First: municipalities cannot impose income taxes. So, they use things like sales taxes (which hurt the poor more than the rich) and user fees, which only apply to people wanting to use the service for which they are charged. Of the two, I vastly prefer user fees. This is because if I don't like the beach, I don't have to pay taxes to support keeping it free. Lots of people go camping. When they do so, they can choose to find a free campsite, which will have no amenities whatsoever and which may be difficult to find, or they can go to a campsite for which they must pay. This will usually include things like toilets and showers on property, and some sort of minimal security. It is the same thing with beaches. If you want the easy, safe route, you go to a municipal beach (and pay for the privilege), if you want to get risky, you go outside town and find some (probably private) beach and swim for free.
If you have a lovely beach, that attracts people, they are going to make a mess, require lifeguarding, and parking, and security. Are those things free? Of course not. So why burden taxpayers, many of whom may never even see that beach, to pay for it?
http://xkcd.com/386/
no one day trips to california beaches... utahians and arizonians would have to spend the night..
we have millions of people a day trip distance away.. philly is an hour-15 minutes it doesn't make the seashore tourist trap rich, it generates (currently) just under 300k a year- to keep the 8 miles of beaches clean and safe....
I grew up in Santa Cruz CA-- and NO ONE on the beach got there that morning, that was going home that night, from a state that wasn't california...
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random