 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
San Onofre State Beach, as seen from the top of Trail 6. The traditional clothing-optional area starts down the beach to the left (south). It uses
about 1,000 feet of the park’s public beachfront. That’s less than three and a half percent.
CA Parks officials have been talking about how changing times have made the beach less isolated and more crowded.
So, after you you’ve made your way to the very last trail in the park, but before you make your descent down the steep trail to the beach below and your half-mile walk to the clothing-optional area, pause for a
moment to see if you can spot the throngs of people the Parks spokespersons would have you believe are crowding the beach.
|
|
|
|
 1. Californians want to be able to
enjoy clothing-optional beaches.
In a statewide survey conducted in 2009, the independent and prestigious Zogby International polling organization asked:
“Do you agree or disagree that people should be able to enjoy nude sunbathing on a beach or other location that is designated for that purpose?”
The poll shows that 79 percent agree.
2. Californians want the Department of Parks & Rec to designate clothing-optional beaches in State Parks.
In that same poll, which was commissioned by the nonprofit Naturist Education Foundation, 62 percent of Californians said that they
agreed that the California Parks Dept. should exercise the legal authority it has to designate clothing-optional areas in State Parks.
3. The majority of Californians are NOT offended by
non-sexual nudity.
The NEF California Poll asked:
“Do you agree or disagree that you are personally offended by
the non-sexual nudity of others?”
The responses to the poll shows that 60 percent of Californians disagree, that is, 60 percent are NOT offended by non-sexual nudity.
4. Americans want to be able to enjoy clothing-optional beaches.
In a national survey conducted in 2006 by
the independent and prestigious Roper polling organization, 74 percent answered yes to the question:
“Do you believe that people who enjoy nude sunbathing should be able to do so without interference from local officials as long as they do so at a beach that is
accepted for that purpose?”
In the national poll, which was also commissioned by the nonprofit Naturist Education Foundation, a majority of Americans - 54 percent
- said they favored having local and state governments take steps to set aside special and secluded areas for those who enjoy nude sunbathing.
5. San Onofre State Beach is a proper spot for clothing-optional recreation.
In study requested in 1979 by then DPR Director Russell Cahill,
Assistant Director Richard Felty and Ross Henry, Chief of the Planning Division, reviewed existing beaches in the state, with the goal of recommending a couple of beaches, one north and one south, to be
designated for official clothing-optional use.
Quoting from the DPR’s own study:
For more from the DPR’s 1979 study, click here.
Click here for PAGE 2.
IN COURT
DOCUMENTS RELATED TO NAC’s LAWSUIT
DPR’s OPPOSITION TO NAC’s PETTITION FOR WRIT
[Note: these responses contain some breathtaking nonsense!]
COURT OF APPEALS
PUBLIC OPINION
INFORMATION FOR NATURISTS
FROM FRIENDS OF SAN ONOFRE BEACH
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This fight is expensive! The California Dept. of Parks & Rec has already spent more than $40,000 of the taxpayers’ money just to keep clothing-optional users off a traditionally clothing-optional 1,000 foot strip of beach at Trail 6 of San Onofre State Beach.
We need your help now! Please consider making a difference by donating to the Naturist Action Committee. Your contribution of any size will help. Send a check, call toll free or use your credit card online, if you like.
CLICK HERE TO DONATE TO NAC.
_________________________
Brief Summary of Current Status:
JAN 03, 2010 No tickets for mere nudity have been issued at San Onofre State Beach.
However ...
In October of 2009, the California Supreme Court has refused to hear NAC’s appeal of the appellate court’s ruling in the San Onofre lawsuit. That means that Department of Parks and Recreation
(DPR) rangers may choose to issue tickets for nudity at any time.
NAC won at the Superior Court level. The appellate court ruling favored DPR, but was initially unpublished. At the request of DPR, the
appellate ruling was published. NAC asked the California Supreme Court to depublish, but along with its refusal to hear the case, the Supreme Court denied NAC’s request to de-publish.
The result of the
published ruling is that DPR may issue citations for nudity under Title 14, Section 4322 of the California Code of Regulations AT ANY UNIT OF THE STATE PARK SYSTEM.
Watch for NAC Action Alerts, Advisories and Updates on this important topic.
NAC reminds you that
the traditional nude area at San Onofre is south of Trail 6. Marine Base property is off-limits. Speak up for proper clothing-optional beach etiquette. Lewd activity is never appropriate. It reflects badly on the
beach and may result in criminal prosecution.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
SEP 13, 2009 - A portion of the Beach Rally sponsored by Friends of San Onofre Beach. More than a hundred participants showed up. No citations were
issued.
|
|
|
|
California
|
|
|
|
San Onofre State Beach
|
|
|
|
Since the mid 1970s when San Onofre State Beach was first opened to the public, a relatively small portion of the park has been used
clothing-optionally. The far south end of the beach is clothing-optional, just north of the boundary with Camp Pendleton, the U.S. Marine Corps base from which the entire State Beach was originally carved.
Following a series of public hearings in 1979, a memorandum by Russell Cahill established the policy for managing nudity within units of the State Park system. Cahill, who was Director of the
California Parks and Recreation Department, formalized the State Park system’s standard administrative procedure for preserving personal liberties and resolving conflicts that might arise in an area of traditional
clothing-optional use.
The Cahill Policy, as it became known, was cited as Park Department policy in a California Superior Court case (People v. Bost, 1988) and was affirmed in
1988 as the operational administrative procedure for California State Parks in a letter written by then-DPR Deputy Director Jack
Harrison.
In May, 2008, DPR Director Ruth Coleman took it upon herself to abrogate longstanding public policy by suddenly revoking the Cahill Policy as it applied to San Onofre State Beach. In a clear violation of California’s Administrative Procedures Act, Coleman sought no public input whatsoever and held no public hearings at all before declaring the change to an administrative procedure that has been in effect for close to 30 years.
The Naturist Action Committee (NAC) and Friends of San Onofre Beach (FOSOB) have sued the California Department of Parks and Recreation, insisting that the agency be made to follow state law concerning public policy.
|
|
|
|
RESOURCES
|
|
|
|
PREVIOUS NAC COMMUNIQUÉS ON THIS TOPIC
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LAW AND POLICY
|
|
|
|
|
|
