Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I live in Florida....in Fort Lauderdale about 7 miles away from the beach, so I'm very familiar with South florida beaches from miami up through west palm beach.
I also work for a university based in San Diego, CA. So, I'm out in SoCal about 4 times a year and make it a point to go to the beaches and vacation there while I have the opportunity.
There is a definitely a clear and apparent difference in the beach cultures, which is why I made this thread.
I think California beach culture is definitely more "laid back"...more granola and naturey feeling, if that even makes sense. I do see more people throwing frisbees, more surfer-types, random yoga classes happening...just more "hey guys, lets go hang at the beach and enjoy nature and surf braah"...;. or somethingl like that. .
Florida beach culture IMO is less granola feeling and less naturey feeling and more resort-like. Massive hotels on the beaches, etc. Granted the water is nicer looking and warmer in Florida...People in FL dont seem to cherish their beaches like people in CA do. There is less of a family element... I feel like when u go to the beaches in Florida.... 85% of the people on the beaches are tourists visiting for the week... and not actual Floridians. I say this because a lot of south FL beaches are flanked with massive hotels and people staying in those hotels are all tourists, so naturally the beaches are filled with the patrons of those hotels...aka just tourists../...so there's not that sense of pride that Californians have for their beaches. ... Like the average person in Florida doesn't even go to the beach....
But ppl in California seem to go to their beaches and take more pride in them. Like, they want to preserve them more, wherte as FL beaches are just transient tourists who dont really care cuz they dont even live in FL
I agree with you in regard to South Florida beaches. People love the beach everywhere for sure, but California has moved to the next level. First you have the California Coastal Commission which which is set in place to protect, preserve the coast line from pollution, over development, public access, even view corridors. This is why you wont see massive projects approved on the beaches. Views are protected and access to an enormous extent. Thats a major difference right there, if you drive A1A in SoFla and PCH in SoCal you will see all the public access points, parking and recreation areas in SoCal that you dont in SoFla. Is there an agency like that in Florida that governs the coastline preservation, development and access?
I think what you are describing is a south florida thing, and not a "florida" thing. I lived about 25 years in Florida and don't relate to what you are saying. You do realize 18+million people live in Florida, right? They are most likely avoiding the tourist beaches like the plague.
As a resident of Florida-- Yes, I do realize 18 million people live in Florida. So what?
Doesn't California have double that?
Even outside of south FL-- I've been to Clearwater, St. pete, Sarasota, Sanibel, Naples, Marco Island, New Smyrna, Daytona, Ponte Vedra, etc..... and they were all quite built up with lots of hotels... right on the beach.
When in CA--I stay in La Jolla--also a very "touristy" town as well, yet their beaches aren't all built up with hotels. Also, Laguna Beach, Redono, Santa monica, etc....All don't have that "hotel" vibe....they are all naturally wonderful and have these nice grassy areas before the actual beach. ..
I feel like in FL....it's pretty much cement and pavement right up til the actual beach....and then BAM...there's a beach. . .. there's no grassy area inbetween.... it's just concrent and beach. . . Like a parking lot or raod...then a sidewalk...then the beach.
Obviously, state parks in FL aside.... it's not like that. But the actual population centers...where people live...those beaches are too built up in FL. . . The population centers in CA seem to keep their beaches less built-up and more natural looking.
I agree with you in regard to South Florida beaches. People love the beach everywhere for sure, but California has moved to the next level. First you have the California Coastal Commission which which is set in place to protect, preserve the coast line from pollution, over development, public access, even view corridors. This is why you wont see massive projects approved on the beaches. Views are protected and access to an enormous extent. Thats a major difference right there, if you drive A1A in SoFla and PCH in SoCal you will see all the public access points, parking and recreation areas in SoCal that you dont in SoFla. Is there an agency like that in Florida that governs the coastline preservation, development and access?
Nope, Florida does not have that.
When u drive along a1a in FL.... most of it is mansions and hotels on the beach. There's no view or "scenic drive"...unless one considers hotels and mansions "scenic"....
I wish FL would go the way of CA in regards to their beaches.
As a resident of Florida-- Yes, I do realize 18 million people live in Florida. So what?
Doesn't California have double that?
Even outside of south FL-- I've been to Clearwater, St. pete, Sarasota, Sanibel, Naples, Marco Island, New Smyrna, Daytona, Ponte Vedra, etc..... and they were all quite built up with lots of hotels... right on the beach.
When in CA--I stay in La Jolla--also a very "touristy" town as well, yet their beaches aren't all built up with hotels. Also, Laguna Beach, Redono, Santa monica, etc....All don't have that "hotel" vibe....they are all naturally wonderful and have these nice grassy areas before the actual beach. ..
I feel like in FL....it's pretty much cement and pavement right up til the actual beach....and then BAM...there's a beach. . .. there's no grassy area inbetween.... it's just concrent and beach. . . Like a parking lot or raod...then a sidewalk...then the beach.
Obviously, state parks in FL aside.... it's not like that. But the actual population centers...where people live...those beaches are too built up in FL. . . The population centers in CA seem to keep their beaches less built-up and more natural looking.
You are going to cities though, why?... Population centers in CA are totally built up. They are only slightly farther away from the beach b/c there are usually cliffs in CA or not a beach at all. Many of those with cliffs can't build houses b/c the tide would come in sometimes over the entire beach. Some of course have massive areas of sand dunes, which again you can't build upon. Many older houses that were built out there have to get reconstructed, condemned or some have fallen down the unstable areas. The beaches in CA, at least in SoCal are also significantly wider.
Nope, Florida does not have that.
When u drive along a1a in FL.... most of it is mansions and hotels on the beach. There's no view or "scenic drive"...unless one considers hotels and mansions "scenic"....
I wish FL would go the way of CA in regards to their beaches.
People would be shocked to know how much power the California Coastal Commission has. No development takes place in the coastal zone (not just beach front) without their approval. Ive seen large developments where the houses had to be built to a total specific height so you didnt block views of the water from Highway 1. Limited approvals and lack of highrise development keeps prices ultra high too. They try to mitigate that by insuring access to the beaches.
People would be shocked to know how much power the California Coastal Commission has. No development takes place in the coastal zone (not just beach front) without their approval. Ive seen large developments where the houses had to be built to a total specific height so you didnt block views of the water from Highway 1. Limited approvals and lack of highrise development keeps prices ultra high too. They try to mitigate that by insuring access to the beaches.
Conservation is definitely better in CA, but, they had to also do a lot of damage first over the last 100 years like building dams, clearing out redwood forests, etc. to push that stuff through.
Conservation is definitely better in CA, but, they had to also do a lot of damage first over the last 100 years like building dams, clearing out redwood forests, etc. to push that stuff through.
What do you mean? Are you saying they were reacting to early development?
What do you mean? Are you saying they were reacting to early development?
Uhh, yes. That is how the conservation groups initially sprung up. The history of California is a huge land grab for logging, agriculture, views, mining, etc.
around 95% of the redwoods in CA are gone from a century ago. So as beautiful as CA is... humans effed a lotttttt of it up. You are only seeing like 5% of the redwood forests that used to be there.
Uhh, yes. That is how the conservation groups initially sprung up. The history of California is a huge land grab for logging, agriculture, views, mining, etc.
around 95% of the redwoods in CA are gone from a century ago. So as beautiful as CA is... humans effed a lotttttt of it up. You are only seeing like 5% of the redwood forests that used to be there.
It was for sure, but its all protected now and being re-planted, cultivated. Your 95% number doesnt smell right though and the article doesnt say that. Anyway, not sure what that has to do with the CCC only that the state of California is more advanced in preservation/consrevation? Its definitely the most advanced state in that regard.
It was for sure, but its all protected now and being re-planted, cultivated. Your 95% number doesnt smell right though and the article doesnt say that. Anyway, not sure what that has to do with the CCC only that the state of California is more advanced in preservation/consrevation? Its definitely the most advanced state in that regard.
Well they are all related. The # is from another article direct from the National Park Service, it's actually 96%, see below. Just that park alone used to be 2 million acres, it's now 138,000, that is just one park of many. America in general has been bad about conservation, but I think what made conservation currently so strong in California is that we were destroying really beautiful landscapes instead of a flat forest of pine trees. California is certainly now a leader on this front. Florida is way behind.
How many redwoods have been logged? 96 percent of the original old-growth coast redwoods have been logged.
Last edited by grapico; 06-21-2013 at 01:20 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
