23 February, 2009

Rendezvous


How to destroy the tourism sector and go back to raising goats. Rendezvous Bay has a limited amount of public access to the beach. Most roads go as far as a hotel, and then you must access the beach by foot through the hotel grounds. Not that that little encumbrance will stop the most enterprising of our entrepreneurs from getting their stock and trade onto the public beach when they want to do some hustling.


My attention was caught by a recent post on the Anguilla Guide Forum.



The post suggests that there is a beach bar built on the beach. That is illegal, as every Anguillian school child knows. It is illegal so long as the relevant government officers do their duty. Of course, with sufficient of an incentive they can always wink an eye and look the other way. Just to find out what was going on, I decided to take a drive down to Rendezvous Bay and find out for myself. This is what I found:



It was midday, but the Sunshine Shack was closed up. There was no one I could find to ask the most obvious questions. Who gave you permission to trespass on the public beach? Are you licensed? I could see they were selling drinks. There was a cooler and the post above said so. Their drinks were said to be very good. You are not allowed to sell any drinks at all unless you have a restaurant licence or a liquor licence. I could tell they were serving food. There was a grill securely chained to the beach chairs.




So, I turned around and looked about. Were my eyes deceiving me? Were those tyre tracks in the sand? That is a complete no-no. No one is permitted to drive a vehicle on the beaches of Anguilla. So, I enquired from passers by. Had they seen a vehicle driving by? Yes, they said. There is a white jeep that comes to the Sunshine Shack every day bringing supplies. Unbelievable! Where did it come from? It came onto the beach from the public road to the beach next to the Anguilla Great House, was the reply. So, I went to have a look.



Sure enough, I could see the tracks of a motor vehicle passing and re-passing in front of the hotel. You can see it for yourself. What in the world, I wondered, did Mr Fleming think about that assault on the sensitivities of his guests? I decided to come back to Sunshine Shack when there were people around.



On my way out, I discovered the road that must have originally led to the shack had been cut off by boulders. No wonder the entrepreneurs were using the public beach. But, who had given them the right to do so?



I decided to ask Vincent Proctor of the Physical Planning Department and Karim Hodge of the Environmental Department what they knew about this trespass. They are our guardians of our public beaches. We depend on them not to slack off. So, I wrote:


“A friend of mine sent me this link to the Anguilla Forum . . . It would be useful to know if the Anguilla Forum post is true that a shack has been permitted to be built on the public beach at Rendezvous Bay. It would also be useful to know, if it has planning permission, who gave it to them, if it has a restaurant licence, who gave it to them, if it has a business licence, who gave it to them, if it has public health permission to handle food, and who gave it to them, if they have access to the site along a right of way, and if so what kind of right of way it is.


We all want to encourage local business. But, not if it is illegal. I class operating a beach bar to serve food and liquor to the public without a liquor or restaurant licence in the same category of activity as selling cocaine. No doubt that is just my obsession with things being done legally.


Grateful to know if you knew about this, and what your position is on the question.”


Needless to say, after several days of waiting there has been no response, far less any explanation for this outrageous new development.


On Saturday 21 February, I finally caught up with the proprietors of the beach shack. Three fierce young men approached me. They were not at all happy that I was photographing their establishment.



I could see the liquor bottles on the shelves behind the bar counter. Then, I made out some sort of official-looking government licenses tacked to the wall behind. Somebody had evidently given them some kind of permission. I could not get close enough to the licences to see what they were for.



“You are not allowed to take photographs here!” That was all the encouragement I needed to high-tail it out of there. I guess that must have been one of the friendly proprietors, Garvey, Perry or Leon, speaking.


I do feel bad for the children. They will never be able to enjoy the rights that we once did.


38 comments:

  1. If the people in charge allow one group to set up on a beach, can they prevent any others from doing it? Then what will become of our beautiful beaches that are our main attraction to tourists. Is someone being bribed?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good work Don. Its post like these that keep the public informed of all the injustices that exist in Anguilla.

    ReplyDelete
  3. FYI, this "beach bar" was there last year as well - this is not something new.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I find the place intrusive with their generator running, loud music and they keep getting larger. Now they rent chairs and have a large float towed by a power boat. But they are not the only ones that drive on the beach as Cuisenart has a large John Deere vehicle that is driven up and down the beach for no apparent reason. Encroachment on beachs seem to be the the order of the day, look at what is happening at Shoal Bay East and Maundy's Bay where Cap is lining up it boats on public ground

    ReplyDelete
  5. What worries me more than anything else is the fact that they are serving food without having been inspected by health officials. This could become a very dangerous thing.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Please keep us updated on what happens with this!

    ReplyDelete
  7. I know these young men personally and they are hard working individuals who are trying hard to make a niche for themselves. THis is one of the few local run, with local culture bars that we have in Anguilla. On the beach we have Alan Gumbs, Walton Fleming, Banxie Banx, Cuisnart,all with political connections. Im sure that these businesses have their Business licenses automically given to them. No one blinks an eye when we have another foreign owned restuarant on the island. If we are talking about beach access and beach degradation, please take a closer look at Viceroy, which will be off limits to the local population, is building directly on the beach. I also take offence to the line that Selling food and drink without alicense is the same as selling cocaine, please. Locals have for decades been selling food and drinks on the beach, part of our local culture, back in the days when we used to pick coco plums on those beaches. Please take note, our beaches are not just there for the rich and foreign to enjoy. What about Sillerman and the mess he has left in West End and we concentrate on three local decent hardworking young men.

    Leave the boys alone, and concentrate on the real dangers in our society.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I personally know these three hard working very decent young men. I find it very unfair that we concentrate on this small local business, probably not even breaking even. Selling food and drinks on the beach is part of OUR ANGUILLIAN culture and has been for decades. There is absolutely no comparison to selling cocaine as to the sale of food and beverages with out a license.
    Anguilla is full of foreign owned restuarants with expats who are given a chance. Why can't our Anguillian Born locals be given the same opportunity. They can get the appropriate licenses, they can park the jeep and walk to the business. What harm are they doing? Please look at the big developments, building on the beach, ponds drained and that's okay.
    Anguillian culture is already being undermined by expats who continually nit pick over local custom. Big Deal, BBQ chicken on the beach,reggae music, rum punch on the beach, local culture. Do you have a problem with Bankie on the beach?

    Good luck to Garvey, Perry and Leon, we need more hardworking men like you.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I got livid when I saw the tyre tracks! I HATE THAT! Is this Tranquility Wrapped in BLue? Or STupidness wrapped in Blue.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I think the rule is that there can be no "permanent" structure on the beach. It would be nice to have Anguilla's beaches isolated and without anything on them. That's going back to the 60's, isn't it? Do we want to go back to those times when one could not make a living on the island? With progress comes more houses, more businesses, etc. Fact of life. Shoal Bay East is becoming like St. Martin. Can that be stopped? Can you force the removal of Madeariman, Uncle Ernie's, as well as the others? Time to be realistic. Government must enforce the rules fairly. If rule is no vehicle on the beach, then all vehicles must be banned from all beaches. If beaches are to be accessible to all, then there can be no "private" ultra-luxury, high-end tourist hotel hogging their beachfront property. The light needs to be shined on what Viceroy and their ilk are doing as well as what a few locals are doing. All need to toe the same line. No special favors for the "born here" crew and no special favors for the big monied ones, either.

    You think that can happen, really? If not, leave the locals alone.

    ReplyDelete
  11. gov.ai should just sell permits to drive on the beach. They'd make a mint. Just like Nantucket. Or Martha's Vinyard. Or Cape Cod. All those other places where only The Beautiful People can live, and the "locals" have to commute in by ferry every day to their jobs as maids and groundskeepers. Keep the riff-raff down, and all that.

    ;-)

    Seriously folks, if you make it illegal to earn a living on Anquilla, much less start a business, only criminals will earn a living.

    The "tragedy of the commons" is that nobody *owns* the "commons".

    ReplyDelete
  12. The beach "shack" looks nice, fills a "need" or it wouldn't be there. I'm all for young Anguillians showing some enterprise in the right direction (working for a living).


    "Seriously folks, if you make it illegal to earn a living on Anquilla, much less start a business, only criminals will earn a living."

    I agree. Others got their start this way.

    ReplyDelete
  13. In that case, I will enlist several of my Anguillian friends to build a restaurant on the beach at Cove Bay. I will finance it, with the requisite "AXA owner". I'm sure Smokey's would welcome my new establishment, that will be placed directly, intentionally, and illegally in front of them. I'm very ambitious, well funded, and know the right people to make it happen. I should be applauded, correct? - Scotty

    ReplyDelete
  14. The young men involved in this enterprise are hard-working, and honest. A group of friends and I went visited this beach bar for a day and it was one of the highlights of our trip- we enjoyed drinks, beach games, and boating activities.

    The "tyre tracks" are actually made by employees of Cuisanart hotel up and down Rendez-Vous Bay. I think the idea that Anguilla will stop relying on tourism in favor of herding goats is ridiculous. Don Mitchell needs to develop new hobbies other than playing an amateur Sherlock Holmes

    ReplyDelete
  15. Don, you said, "I do feel bad for the children. They will never be able to enjoy the rights that we once did."

    This is, in fact, the quintessential Anguilla. A beachshack on a beach, a local entrepreneurial venture. Would that there were more of these and that Viceroy and Flag would disappear.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Don Mitchell, you need a life and a way to keep you nose out of peoples business. Keep out of Garvey, Perry, and Leon's business. Garvey said that he would never EVER do something illegal, and he is/was/and never will be so-called "fierce". A scared little 3 year old girl wouldnt be afraid. and by the by, its TIRE tracks. LEARN HOW TO SPELL!!!!!!!!!!!! and smart people get to know someone before saying that they are fierce. Garvey is NOT fierce. I am glad i do not have to know u. If i ever meet you, I will most likely yell at you. who would say that about Garvey?!?!?! I wouldnt blame someone for punching you for that statement. You need a life. maybe you should take up a hobby like fishing. Why dont you raise goats and be happy for the island that is getting money for tourism?!?!?!?!??!?!?! GET A LIFE!

    ReplyDelete
  17. The place looks adorable and cute. nobody would ever even think that it would be illegal. and it isnt so IN YOUR FACE!

    ReplyDelete
  18. It seems friendships and good intentions trump the law any day around here. - Scotty

    ReplyDelete
  19. The point of Mr. Mitchell’s blog was to draw attention to the use of the beach, not to cast aspersions on the operators of any particular beach bar and it is a shame Mr. Mitchell was made to feel uncomfortable and unwelcome.

    Beach access and the protection of beaches is a growing concern. Anguilla has changed rapidly over the last few years and it has become increasingly important to protect our limited natural resources and encourage local entrepreneurs, all while enhancing the visitor’s Anguilla experience. Naturally, this can create some tension and is a bit of a balancing act.

    Preserving beaches for the enjoyment of all today and in the future should be a priority. If the authorities allow the sea, land and sand to be overrun with commercial ventures then Anguilla may lose our biggest asset besides our warm, friendly people, the beaches.

    The Beach Control Act exists to protect the environment and our enjoyment of Anguilla’s natural surroundings today and tomorrow. It should not be construed as a negotiable instrument based on who we are, may know, or the size of our business.

    ReplyDelete
  20. This beach shack does not stop people from going to the beach as by some of the big hotels. Leave the hard working locals alone, go after the big corps.

    ReplyDelete
  21. OH my goodness. This is very upsetting to see how Don posts things on the internet for all to see, when these things are far from the truth. I myself saw Garvey at the court house getting his liquor licence. And i know that he would not sell food without getting permission to do so. I too know Garvey, Leon and Perry very well, and they are anything but fierce. Don, ask all of their teachers and people from anywhere in Anguilla who know them.. they will all attest to the fact that they honest, hard working people.

    ReplyDelete
  22. It is obvious Mr. Mitchell has way too much time on his sorry hands. These boys are warm and wonderful Anguillians who deserve to make a living like everyone else. So should we then get rid of The Dune, Elvis', Reggae Reef, Sammy's, etc - little local joints that add such vibrance to the Anguilla experience?
    What right do you have to make a federal case against them? Go worry about the retarded "concrete jungle" monstrosities around our coast and leave the honest, hardworking locals alone. Get a life, dude!

    ReplyDelete
  23. William Altee, Esq.March 03, 2009 6:58 pm

    As a villa owner in Anguilla and someone who has been coming here for the past 14 years I am as interested and concerned as anyone for the beaches and good governance on the island. As a lawyer I have personally examined the licenses granted for SunShine Shack and everything is in order and totally legal. I have known Garvey Lake personally for at least 8 years and he is a totally honest and outstanding Anguillian as is Perry. The inferences and innuendo in your posting are totally off base and unfortunate as these young men are simply trying very hard to make a good living and to provide a service to the good people of Anguilla who like to come to the beach and enjoy it but who can not find access to beach chairs, umbrellas and fine drinks. The government was totally correct to grant thess licenses and any suggestion of favoritism is completely unwarranted. People should come to Rendevous Bay and enjoy the courteous and excellent service provided at SunShine Shack. If I were your lawyer I would seriously suggest a retraction of the misrepresentations in your posting.

    ReplyDelete
  24. DON, WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM??
    AND WHAT IS YOUR MOTIVE FOR INTENTIONALLY GOING TO THE SUNSHINE SHOP IN PARTICULAR??
    AND TAKING PHOTOS OF THESE HARD WORKING YOUNG MENS' AMBITIOUS EFFORTS.
    JUST SOME PECULIAR QUESTIONS FOR YOU.

    WHO AND WHAT IS YOUR MOTIVE FOR ACCUSING THESE YOUNG MEN OF NOT HAVING A BUSINESS LICENSE, WHEN IT IS CLEARLY SHOWN THAT THEY HAVE LICENSES, AS SEEN IN YOUR PHOTOS???

    WHY ARE THEY SINGLED OUT FOR DRIVING ON THE BEACH WHEN IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE BIGGER ESTABLISHMENTS DO THE SAME EVERYDAY???

    WOULD YOU HAVE POST A BLOG IF THESE YOUNG BLACK MEN WERE SITTING BY THE ROAD SIDE WASTING THEIR LIVES AWAY???????????????????

    WHAT HAVE YOU DONE FOR THE YOUNG PEOPLE OF ANGUILLA LATELY TO HELP AND ENCOURAGE THEM TO OWN A BUSINESS AND NOT WORK FOR MEAGRE WAGES ALL THEIR LIVES??????????

    WHY AS A PROFESSIONAL LAWMAN ARE YOU JUMPING DOWN THESE YOUNG, DECENT HARDWORKING YOUNG MENS, THROAT???

    HOW IN GODS EARTH YOU CAN COMPARE SELLING LIQUOR AND FOOD ILLEGALLY (AS YOU ALLEGEDLY ASSUMED) TO THE SELLING OF COCAINE??? ARE YOU CRAZY???

    DO YOU KNOW THESE YOUNG MEN PERSONALLY AND HOW HARD THEY HAVE STRUGGLED IN THEIR YOUNG LIVES??

    WHAT IS YOUR MOTIVE FOR PORTRAYING THEM AS FIERCE???? IS IT TO SCARE THE TOURISTS AND CRIPPLE THEIR HONEST EFFORTS??? GOOD TRY, BUT YOU OBVIOUSLY FAILED.

    DO YOU KNOW THAT THESE YOUNG MEN HAVE WORKED WITH TOURISTS ALL THEIR LIVES AND THEY LOVE THEM?

    WHAT DO YOU THINK YOU ARE DOING TO ANGUILLA'S TOURISM, WHEN YOU TRY TO MAKE THE BUSINESSES APPEAR SCARY, FIERCE AND ILLEGAL??? WHERE IS YOUR LOYALTY???

    I HAVE KNOWN THESE YOUNG MEN ALL MY LIFE AND THEY ARE LOVELY, HARDWORKING MEN WHO WERE ALWAYS TRYING TO BETTER THEIR LIVES, LAYOFF THEM AND LIKE THE OTHER COMMENTORS CONCENTRATE ON THE BIGGER BUSINESSES WHO ARE TAKING OVER THE BEACHES AND LOCALS CANT SWIM AND RELAX.
    TALK ABOUT AN OWNER OF AN ESTABLISHMENT WHO WANT TO STOP A POOR LADY FROM SELLING HER JEWELLRY ON THE BEACH TO MAKE A LIVING.
    YOUR CASE CLEARLY SHOWS THAT YOU HAVE AN ULTERIOR MOTIVE FOR PICKING ON THESE YOUNG MEN.
    LAYOFF THEM AND LET THE POOR GET A CHANCE TO SURVIVE, AND HELP CLEAN UP THE PRISON AND THE INCREASING CRIME RATE IN ANGUILLA. YOU HAVE LIVED YOUR LIFE AS A SUCCESSFUL LAWMAN, TEACHER MAGISTRATE ETC. LET YOUR FELLOWMEN EAT TOO AND HAVE A CONSCIENCE. GOD FORBID YOU AND HAVE MERCY ON YOU AND YOUR EVIL INTENTIONS AND ALLEGATIONS.

    FIND A HOBBY IF YOUR ARE BORED AND JEALOUS OF YOUNG, HANDSOME ,AMBITIOUS, BLACK, LOCAL MEN.

    WE ALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO LIVE AND IF YOU TALK ABOUT THESE YOUNG MEN THEN TAKE YOUR CAMERA AND DRIVE THE WHOLE OF ANGUILLA AND TAKE PICTURES OF THE BEACHES, OUR LOCAL CULTURAL TOURIST ATTRACTIONS, I WILL SUPPLY YOU WITH FILM.

    LIVE AND LET LIVE STOP BEING GREEDY WHEN WE DIE WE CANT TAKE THE BEACH OR ANYTHING ELSE WITH US.

    I ENCOURAGE THESE YOUNG MEN TO CONTINUE TO WORK HARD AT OWNING A PIECE OF ALL OF US ROCK, ANGUILLA.

    LOCALS WHO HAVE THE RESOURCES TO DO IT GO AHEAD REACH FOR THE STARS AND FORGET THE FEW IGNORANT KEEP BACKS THAT MIGRATED FROM OTHER LANDS.

    JESUS WAS CRUCIFIED BETWEEN TWO MEN ONE IN THE EAST AND HE IN THE MIDDLE AND THE NEXT IN THE WEST. BUT HE WAS RESURRECTED.

    BOB MARLEY SAID EMANCIPATE YOUR SELF FROM MENTAL SLAVERY ONLY YOU ALONE CAN FREE YOUR MIND.

    AS A HISTORIAN I REALISED THAT BLACKS DID NOT ENSLAVED THEM SELVES BUT THE HIGHER ONES USED THEM TO PULL AND KEEP EACH OTHER DOWN, ULTERIOR MOTIVES DO YOU WANT TO CONTINUE WITH SLAVERY???? NO BROTHERS, SLAVERY HAS BEEN ABOLISHED, DON, YOU HAVE LIVED LET SOME ELSE GET A TURN PLEASE!!!!

    LEAVE THE YOUNG MEN GET A CHANCE TO LIVE ALSO, YOU AND YOUR ULTERIOR MOTIVES, PLEAS HAVE A CONSCIENCE.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Don, get a life. You got too much time on your sorry,uselss, evil and deceitful hands.
    Yes, Imitation, sherlock holmes there maybe tire tracks but i wonder if you used your sense.

    Yes I give you props for asking the guests if they saw a jeep belonging to the sunshine shack driving on the beach, but i wonder if you were smart enough to ask them if they saw any other vehicles driving on the beaches. *GUESS NOT*
    I have seen other companies' vehicles driving on the beach. Why don't they tell the companies about it?

    Do you realise that yes, it's private property in the back of the shack, that they used to get in and out of the shack, was blocked up so they no longer have access to the shack?
    What other option do they have? Drive on the water?( I would be really afraid if they drove on water)

    They had no other option then to drive on the beaches because of the wicked "people" trying to keep them down.

    You have no business taking photos of peoples efforts and hardwork. These people are hard working and ambitious.


    You have no business taking photos of peoples efforts and hardwork. These people are hard working and ambitious.

    Correct me if I'm wrong but some how you think its a public beach so you can take "public" pictures. But these "public" beaches aren't so "public" when the hotels are stopping people from enjoying the "public" beach.

    These locals are just trying to make a living as the other commentors stated. I believe we are quite clear about the locals being hard working and ambitious.

    I give you respect Mr. Mitchell and you want to know why? Some how, to me, you think you are Jesus, the almighty. It seems you are so powerful, that you have the power of a God, to choose who live and who do not.

    Another thing in this country is "freedom of speech"
    You are a man that knows your law, again tell me if I'm wrong.

    You got the right to say what you want and so do we.
    Another thing is"Deformation of Character"
    You do not have the right to make people and there properties look bad. If you can do those things, we can too.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Mr.Mitchell, in your first statement, you described those three young men as "fierce". By this statement are you implying that they were hostile towards you? Or were they inquiring why you were taking pictures of the property without introducing yourself or your purpose for taking these pictures? Do you think taking someone's pictures up close " just a couple inches away" without greeting or asking permisssion is OK? I know these hard working young men and personally meet them at their establishment regularly. They have licenses, they treat their guest with respect and inturn it seems that these guest always return. Let me ask a question Mitchell, is the problem that these young men are black? I'm asking is it because THEY ARE BLACK?? OR IS IT BECAUSE THEY ARE BLACK????

    Can you Mitchell, show your results from the survey that you told the young men you were doing on beach bars? Come on Don, post these results and why are there any comments on other beachbars example Elvis, Banxies, Sammies, Uncle Ernies etc. Are you lying about your survey or were these guys just your target for whatever reason? Anyway Mitchell thats not the proper way to go about doing things, these guys have every license needed, health inspection etc so dont be wrong. Always try to be right and GET A LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  27. Mr MItchell is that the beach bar you are talking about? IT IS SO BEAUTIFUL. I never been there!! Never knew it was there. IM GOING THERE TOMORROW!! GET A HOBBY DUDE.

    ReplyDelete
  28. The sad thing about all these racist objections to your point is that they all know the truth. Everyone in Anguilla knows the truth. They were refused planning permission to put up their “beach bar” up on the beach. They got some licences that did not need you to prove you had planning permission. You just turn up at the Magistrate’s Court and ask for a liquor licence, and if the police do not object you get one. The magistrate does not ask where it is for. You can put the licence up on your wall. It looks good. The police did not coordinate with the planning department. They did not know that there is no permission to put up a beach bar in that spot. That is why they did not object. So you get your permission. But, you do not have planning permission to be there. You don’t need planning permission, because unprincipled politicians have told you to go ahead, just ignore the laws. That is how it is done in Anguilla. By some people who have the right connections. Let you or me try it.

    I hope planning has the guts to complain them to the Attorney General. It is a disgrace how they can set up in the middle of the beach when the average Anguillian is not allowed. It is disgusting how they can be allowed day after day to drive their jeep back and forwards on the beach in front of the Anguilla great house.

    ReplyDelete
  29. VERY GOOD POINTS BUT HOW COME YOU KNOW ALL THIS INFO ABOUT THIS BUSINESS, THE ABOVE COMMENT ONLY PROVES THAT SOME ONE IS HURT AND ENVIOUS OF THESE YOUNG GUYS, YOU SOUND SO DESPERATE AND ANGRY ALMOST PERSONAL, WHY???
    DO YOU THINK THAT THESE GUYS ARE CRAZY FOR OPERATING A BUSINESS WITHOUT PERMISSION. YOU TALK ABOUT THE POLITICIANS BUT YOU WOULD NOT HAVE GOTTEN AWAY WITH THESE TYPE OF ALLEGATIONS AND DISRESPECTFUL ACTS ANY WHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD. LEAVE THE KIDS ALONE AND RELAX, OR YOU CAN EXPLOIT ALL THE OTHER BARS , ON THE ISLAND THE SAME WAY TO SEE IF THEY HAVE PERMISSION ALSO. LETS NOT JUST SINGLE OUT AND BE PREJUDICE TO THE SUNSHINE BAR ALONE. WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS TO THESE HARDWORKING GUYS, HAVE YOU CHECKED ON ELVIS', MADEARIMAN, SAMMYS,SMOOTHIES UNCLE ERNIES AND THE MANY MANY OTHERS. WHAT HAVE THESE GUYS DONE TO YOU??? AND AGAIN WHY ARE THEY SO VICIOUSLY ATTACKED, THAT YOU WANT TO REPORT THEM TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, (SOMETHING IS DEFINATELY WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE)????

    WHO AVERAGE ANGUILLIAN IS NOT ALLOWED TO SET UP ON THE BEACH AND WHY??
    AND IF IT IS SO DISGUSTING TO DRIVE THEIR JEEP EVERY DAY IN FRONT OF ANGUILLA GREAT HOUSE, THEN WHY THE OWNERS OF THIS ESTABLISHMENT HAVENT COMPLAINED AS YET???
    THE BIG PICTURE IS COMING TOGETHER NOW!!!

    GOD BLESS YOU ALL!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  30. the day the shack was placed on the beach
    it was said to the young owner that he should move it untill he had all the permission need to put it there that was said by MR WALTON FLEMING two days later the road used had a trench dug in it big enough and deep enough to hide a truck to you morons out there is the picture any clearer the land behind the shack is cleared off apparently for developement the heat is back on again "the picture should be clear by now" mr michel and mr flemming was seen having drinks at great house right after the picture taking "CLEAR AS CRYSTAL TO ME"

    ReplyDelete
  31. With reference to comment posted on 28th Feb at 2:58. How could someone else clarify Don Mitchell's point, unless it is his conscience working overtime. I was told that you bit off one foot already, be careful you might be putting the other foot in your mouth.

    ReplyDelete
  32. The above flood of invective, Mr. Mitchell, all has a strange similarity. It appears that most or all of it are written by the same person.

    If he or she is correct and Garvey dem have permission to be where they are, then we must wonder why Planning and PS Foster Rogers and Minister of Lands Bunton are giving out permits to operate private businesses on Crown land. What are we trying to compete with here are on our upmarket destination - Cancun? The Jersey Shore?

    ReplyDelete
  33. lol Anguillians always talking and posting everything on the internet including ANGUILLA TALK is the only thing that is corrupting and ruining Anguilla and scaring away tourists. You all need to get a life and stop entertaining Mr. Mitchell.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Just a note of caution.

    I am getting too many anonymous comments that are either overtly defamatory, or so by innuendo. I had about 30 yesterday, and about 50 today. They appear to be deliberate and malicious. I have had to spend a lot of time reading, and editing or deleting them.

    It is difficult to find the time to do this. If it continues, I may have to limit commenting rights to only a selected few of my correspondents. I would not want to have to do that.

    But, it is a viable alternative to spending hours reading lengthy scripts of illiterate, hate filled, or simply malicious tripe. I am seriously considering doing it.

    IDM

    ReplyDelete
  35. The Royal Gazette
    Hamilton, Bermuda
    March 7. 2009 08:24AM
    Premier heckled as BEST hands over 5,000 name petition
    By Sam Strangeways

    A petition containing the signatures of more than 5,000 people who oppose the building of a beach bar on Warwick Long Bay was
    delivered to Premier Dr. Ewart Brown outside Parliament yesterday.

    Protesters waving placards asked Dr. Brown and Environment Minister Glenn Blakeney to withdraw permission for a plan by
    entrepreneur Belcario Thomas to develop a 2,500 sq ft restaurant and cocktail bar on what they describe as a "pristine beach and
    national park".

    But Tourism Minister Dr. Brown told the crowd of demonstrators that he backed Mr. Thomas' scheme as it could help give visitors
    a more exciting experience.

    "I have supported this initiative at Warwick Long Bay because it's in line, in my opinion, with the principle of sustainable
    development," he said. "The structure is non-permanent. It's a temporary wooden deck that will be removed at the end of the
    beach season."

    Mr. Thomas' application for his SandBar was rejected by the Development Applications Board (DAB) but approved on appeal by Mr.
    Blakeney. Bermuda Environmental Sustainability Taskforce (BEST) is to contest the decision at the Supreme Court.

    Dr. Brown and other MPs took time out of a House of Assembly session to speak with demonstrators for about half an hour
    yesterday, with the Premier telling them: "I'm here to have a free and open discussion with you."

    At that point a woman in the crowd called out: "Rubbish!"

    There was more heckling when the Premier asked the campaigners why they hadn't opposed private developments such as the "Mid-Ocean beach house" or the Reefs.

    "I would hope that your concern and your commitment is not limited to public property,"he said, to a clearly irritated crowd.

    BEST Chairman Stuart Hayward told him: "You are judging us."

    Dr. Brown replied: "That's your track record." Further niggling between the pair occurred when the Premier disagreed with a woman who said putting any kind of structure on previously untouched land meant it could never go back to being undeveloped.

    Dr. Brown said: "Consistent with that then, is that there is no such thing as sustainable development."

    Mr. Hayward called out: "Spin!" and Dr. Brown told him: "Ihave respect for you. Hard for me as it is to maintain that, I do."

    Mr. Blakeney told campaigners that a liquor licence had not yet been given for the bar and was not a fait accompli. "It may just be a concession that consists of foodstuffs,"he said.

    The Minister explained that he overturned the DABdecision because he saw the success of a previous tourism initiative on some of the Island's beaches. He said talking about the court case would be sub judice.

    The demonstration began with objector Toni Daniels formally presenting the Premier with the petition and explaining that it had been signed by 5,133 people 4,567 residents and 566 visitors since January.

    She said: "We do not want to see this pristine beach and national park put on the path to becoming commercialised like so many others in Bermuda."We believe that there must be something for everyone and that there must remain for our extraordinary country and her people, open and pristine parklands. Warwick Long Bay is one of those parklands."

    After Dr. Brown returned to the House, Shadow Environment Minister Cole Simons urged the protesters to keep up their fight. He said Bermuda's past tourism success in tourism was a result of its outstanding beauty and maintaining it was the best way to attract visitors.

    Warwick West MP and Shadow Justice Minister Mark Pettingill said he was appalled by Mr. Thomas' plan, which he described as "tacky at best".

    ReplyDelete
  36. In Bermuda they sign petitions - and their proposed shack is to be on private property. Here, someone builds, allegedly illegally, on Crown land, and we attack Don Mitchell.

    ReplyDelete
  37. had a walk on rendesvous bay the shack looks fine an its not in the way of persons using the beach went on in a westerly direction saw bankies realised his beach bar is permanently built about 10ft from the waters edge.mr mitchell way dont you write about this because we dont want to be unfair and only judge a selected few also temenos looks the worst out of all

    ReplyDelete
  38. The issue is not whether the shack blocks anyone from using the beach.

    The issue is not how far from the water a structure is.

    The issue is not which structure "looks the worst".

    The issue is the alleged illegal takeover of public property for private use. Bankie and Flag have built on private property.

    ReplyDelete

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.