Sunset Cliffs Localism
Rory Wicks
Following up on John4Surf's posts, an incident of localism at the Sunset
Cliffs yesterday has received extensive media coverage. The incident
occurred yesterday at Newbreak, a world class righthander located in the
Sunset Cliffs surfing area of Point Loma, San Diego.
In the last few years, the San Diego surfing community has become a credible
local player in promoting environmental and coastal acccess issues. This
incident can only cause severe embarrasment to the nascent environmental
movement at a critical time when the City government is proposing to
restrict surfers' access to the Sunset Cliffs.
In defense of the arrested surfers (if there be one), the Holly family
has been living, surfing, and employed in the surfing industry, in the
Point Loma/Ocean Beach area for three generations; John Holly, Sr. does
shape beautiful longboards; and for years, Newbreak has been privately
declared offlimits to all but the most local (who don't use leashes).
The blow by blow was reported by respected coastal journalist (and surfer/
baja errante) Terry Rodgers in the San Diego Union Tribune:
"Surfer, 22, and father arrested in altercation
By Terry Rodgers
STAFF WRITER
May 15, 1998
A San Diego surfer -- who was prosecuted for assaulting another surfer in
Ocean Beach two years ago -- has been arrested again on felony battery
charges for fighting with two other surfers at a remote surf spot near
Point Loma.
Justin Holly, 22, was arrested and jailed Monday along with his father,
John, 54, in connection with an assault in the water against two other
surfers, one of whom is a San Diego city lifeguard.
Both Hollys were later released on bail.
The younger Holly had pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of disturbing
the peace in connection with a fistfight with another surfer in March 1996
at the Ocean Beach Pier.
In the recent incident, city lifeguard Michael J. Pugh, 31, said he was
surfing with a friend, Thomas Vaughn, 34, at the Sunset Cliffs area of the
Point Loma peninsula when John Holly and his two sons paddled out to the
same spot.
The Hollys began the confrontation by referring to the lifeguard and his
friend as "kooks" who should not be surfing at a spot reserved for locals
who had grown up in the area, Pugh said in an interview.
Pugh said that when he suggested that Holly and his sons might want to
surf somewhere else, the elder Holly became irate and said: "You guys will
just be speed-bumps out here; you're not going to catch any more waves."
Pugh told police that the father and two sons then paddled over to Pugh
and Vaughn and began assaulting the pair.
Vaughn was punched repeately by Holley's two sons, who took away his
surfboard, Pugh said.
The senior Holly tried to spear the off-duty lifeguard by pulling his
surfboard under the water and letting it sling forward, Pugh said.
Eventually, one of the blows from Holly's surfboard landed, creating a
gash below Pugh's left eye, he told police.
The incident was abruptly halted when a large set of waves forced the
group to scatter, Pugh said.
However, as Pugh was trying to paddle ashore to tend to his bloody wound,
Justin Holley, who had caught a wave, tried to run him over with his
surfboard, Pugh reported, adding that he had to dive under the water to
avoid being hit.
Pugh was later treated at an urgent care center for his minor head wound.
In interviews with investigators, the Hollys charged that Pugh initiated
the confrontation by giving them "the stink eye," surf-culture terminology
for a look filled with haughty disdain.
"Stink eye" is a common form of nonverbal communication meant to
intimidate surfers who are not locals or regulars at a particular surfing
spot.
The Hollys also told investigators that Pugh and Vaughn were sitting at
the peak where the waves were breaking, preventing them from easily
catching the better swells, said police Detective Buck Devowe.
Devowe said the second son involved in the altercation, John Holly Jr.,
24, was not arrested but still could face charges in connection with the
incident.
Copyright 1998 Union-Tribune Publishing Co.
Will Borgeson
Rory Wicks (ro...@connectnet.com) wrote:
: In defense of the arrested surfers (if there be one), the Holly family
: has been living, surfing, and employed in the surfing industry, in the
: Point Loma/Ocean Beach area for three generations; John Holly, Sr. does
: shape beautiful longboards; and for years, Newbreak has been privately
: declared offlimits to all but the most local (who don't use leashes).
There no be one...defense, that is. California's navigable waters
cannot be "privately declared offlimits" by or for these candyass homeboys
and their ilk, or by anyone else, unless someone wants to re-write the
state Constitution, which guarantees access to all such waters to any and
all who care to use them. Sounds like assault, and assault with a deadly
weapon in the case of the spear job. I hope the proverbial book gets
thrown at 'em...
Will
CORTICAL
Maybe I can throw some light on this subject.
I know all the characters involved in this altercation. Very ironically
Michael Pugh is a local boy. He grew up in a house overlooking the water in
Sunset Cliffs and has surfed the area quite a lot since he was very young. He's
a perfect gentleman, good surfer, and all around nice guy to everyone.
John Holly is a local has-been legend and shaper who hasn't surfed much at
all in the last twenty-five years, that's why he didn't know who Michael Pugh
was.
Justin Holly is an extremely psychotic disturbed young man who ironically
hasn't been surfing Sunset Cliffs nearly as long as Michael Pugh. In fact
probably only for the last three or four years if that. Since Justin's been
around he's been something of a pain and a terror to the locals. He hassles
locals and non-locals alike and goes in to a psychotic fury when he picks on
people and always refers to his legendary dad when justifying his aggression
"you didn't know my dad!" "My dad doesn't know you"....
If it wasn't for the locals lingering respect for his dad he would have
been run out or hassled out of the place long ago. But he feels he has
literally inherited his dad's old territory although except for fighting, he
doesn't have any of the surfing ability or qualities his dad did thirty years
ago. A very emotionally disturbed young man. No bull. Too bad his dad doesn't
have whatever capacity is needed to set him straight. Obviously there is things
going on in that family that needs serious counseling.
This isn't a case of localism. It's really a case of some extremely violent
abnormal psychotic behavior that would be best dealt with by the authorities
before it escalates or progresses to something else. Justin is a really strange
person. You only have to see him in action to realize that.
99.9% of the locals in Sunset Cliffs are good peole. Yeah they got a crowd
problem there but it's rarely if ever dealt with by all out violence. Not that
I've ever seen. I know these people involved in this story so I thought I'd set
the record straight. The Holly's in no way represent the people who usually
surf the area.
This isn't some kind of trying to disavow the Holly's by another local.
It's the truth. None of the Hollys really surfs out there much. They've got a
very strange chip on their shoulder and really do exhibit some really bizarre
psychotic behavior.
That's what my friends down there tell me and I agree with them because
I've known Michael Pugh for a long time and I've also known the Hollys and I
know they really aren't much in to surfing although they claim the area and
surfing in a violent way to make up for whatever else they lack which seems to
be quite a lot, especially in the brains department.
Michael Pugh is the real local in the story but the news media who
obviously must know that Michael comes from a respected family and grew up in a
beautiful home over looking the waves there don't want to mention that because
it ruins the interest value of the story. There's no doubt that the media knows
where Michael is from because they know him personally. He's an all year
full-time lifeguard and deals with the media on a regular basis and even surfs
with one of the newscasters.
The media isn't reporting the whole story. They probably don't care. It's
probably too small of a story for them to concern themselves with.
-Roger Raffee
NO1CATFISH
>In defense of the arrested surfers (if there be one), the Holly family
>has been living, surfing, and employed in the surfing industry, in the
>Point Loma/Ocean Beach area for three generations; John Holly, Sr. does
>shape beautiful longboards; and for years, Newbreak has been privately
>declared offlimits to all but the most local (who don't use leashes).
>
>
In defense????spare me the BS.......there is NO defense for violence in
relation to localism. Local is just a polite name for bigot. Actually, asshole
is probably closer than bigot. A friend of mine was on a recent trip from my
area to SD/Point Loma surfing. I was going to list John Holly as one of the
respected shapers in the area. Maybe he can still shape, but he deserves NO
RESPECT if there is even a small shred of accuracy to the account of what
happened. Nice family ,John........
Fish
mike
CORTICAL wrote in message
<199805161609...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
>Maybe I can throw some light on this subject.
<message snipped here and there>
>Justin is a really strange person.
>You only have to see him in action to realize that.
I think this is evident from his "that guy gave me stink-eye so I had to
pummel him" defense as reported in the SD Union Trib. That should hold up
well in court (on second thought, the "Twinkie defense" worked).
>The media isn't reporting the whole story. They probably don't care. It's
>probably too small of a story for them to concern themselves with.
The media loves to cover stories on goons beating people up. It sells
papers and that's what matters to them.
Thanks for the local perspective Roger. You've described what these kind of
people really are....overly aggressive halfwits that are probably
incorribible.
Peace,
mike
Steve Hershenson
CORTICAL wrote:
Maybe I can throw some light on this subject.
I know all the characters involved in this altercation. Very ironically
Michael Pugh is a local boy. He grew up in a house overlooking the water in
Sunset Cliffs and has surfed the area quite a lot since he was very young. He's
a perfect gentleman, good surfer, and all around nice guy to everyone.
John Holly is a local has-been legend and shaper who hasn't surfed much at
all in the last twenty-five years, that's why he didn't know who Michael Pugh
was.
Justin Holly is an extremely psychotic disturbed young man who ironically
hasn't been surfing Sunset Cliffs nearly as long as Michael Pugh. In fact
probably only for the last three or four years if that. Since Justin's been
around he's been something of a pain and a terror to the locals. He hassles
locals and non-locals alike and goes in to a psychotic fury when he picks on
people and always refers to his legendary dad when justifying his aggression
"you didn't know my dad!" "My dad doesn't know you"....
If it wasn't for the locals lingering respect for his dad he would have
been run out or hassled out of the place long ago. But he feels he has
literally inherited his dad's old territory although except for fighting, he
doesn't have any of the surfing ability or qualities his dad did thirty years
ago. A very emotionally disturbed young man. No bull. Too bad his dad doesn't
have whatever capacity is needed to set him straight. Obviously there is things
going on in that family that needs serious counseling.
This isn't a case of localism. It's really a case of some extremely violent
abnormal psychotic behavior that would be best dealt with by the authorities
before it escalates or progresses to something else. Justin is a really strange
person. You only have to see him in action to realize that.
99.9% of the locals in Sunset Cliffs are good peole. Yeah they got a crowd
problem there but it's rarely if ever dealt with by all out violence. Not that
I've ever seen. I know these people involved in this story so I thought I'd set
the record straight. The Holly's in no way represent the people who usually
surf the area.
This isn't some kind of trying to disavow the Holly's by another local.
It's the truth. None of the Hollys really surfs out there much. They've got a
very strange chip on their shoulder and really do exhibit some really bizarre
psychotic behavior.
That's what my friends down there tell me and I agree with them because
I've known Michael Pugh for a long time and I've also known the Hollys and I
know they really aren't much in to surfing although they claim the area and
surfing in a violent way to make up for whatever else they lack which seems to
be quite a lot, especially in the brains department.
Michael Pugh is the real local in the story but the news media who
obviously must know that Michael comes from a respected family and grew up in a
beautiful home over looking the waves there don't want to mention that because
it ruins the interest value of the story. There's no doubt that the media knows
where Michael is from because they know him personally. He's an all year
full-time lifeguard and deals with the media on a regular basis and even surfs
with one of the newscasters.
The media isn't reporting the whole story. They probably don't care. It's
probably too small of a story for them to concern themselves with.
-Roger Raffee
mike
NO1CATFISH wrote in message
<199805161714...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
>Actually, asshole is probably closer than bigot.
Perhaps "bigoted asshole" is most appropriate.
>Nice family ,John........
The apple doesn't fall far from the tree. Now for some liberal waxing. But
first, let it be known that I am in no way defending the Hollys. There is a
considerable amount of evidence that suggests this sort of violently
aggressive behavior is learned or even genetic. Abusers beget more abusers
and so forth. The young Hollys are probably the latest product of several
generations of abusers. They became who they are not by choice but by
circumstance (consider their father's behavior). This is the real irony of
localism. Most locals just happened to be born to parents who lived near
some particular break. In other words, they are "locals" through no deeds
of their own. Those who pioneered surfing of some particular break may
deserve a different status, but even that is suspect.
Now for my conservative alter ego: Let the public stoning of the Hollys
begin!
Peace?
mike
CORTICAL
You should be careful when you refer to locals. Michael Pugh, the victim, was a
local too. He has a sense of pride in his neighborhood and where he grew up. He
loves the waves in the area. If you met him somewhere else he would proudly
tell you that he's a local at his home breaks but would not lord it over you or
anybody else.
He's a respectful decent person.
Locals and localism are two different things. You shouldn't bash locals
anymore than you like locals bashing inlanders or east coasters, or Hawaiians
bashing haoles, or haoles bashing Hawaiians.
Not all locals are assholes, probably so few to be almost non-existant.
In my opinion it's more often visiting beginners and medium ability
intermediates that are the more aggressive type people generally speaking.
Especially when they approach new areas with a prepared mind-set of nervous
anticipation that they're going to be hassled by 'locals'. If their inadequate
abilities cause any friction with other surfers they'll be quick to call it
'localism'. I've seen that happen many times.
Some turd who can't surf drops in on people, creates a lot of danger by his
wankering inabilities. Gets hassled a little, usually in the form of a little
constructive criticism which he immediately resents and semi-threateningly
violently objects to. Then he and his girlfriend, who was watching her hero on
the beach, go home and tell all their friends about how badly they were hassled
by the "locals".
That scenario seems to be the origin of a majority of complaints about
'localism'.
.-Roger Raffee
Subject: Re: Sunset Cliffs Localism
From: "mike" <mlie...@ucla.edu>
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 9:58 AM
Message-id: <6jkj7i$t7s$1...@uni.library.ucla.edu>
wrote:
Will Borgeson
CORTICAL (cort...@aol.com) wrote:
: You should be careful when you refer to locals.
: Not all locals are assholes, probably so few to be almost
: non-existant.
<snip verbiage>
Probably, almost. Those are, like, weasel words. A lot of us
wish asshole surfers were nonexistent, but that's not reality, Roger. And
one asshole "local" can ruin everyone's whole session.
Often times the most obnoxious "locals" (note careful quotation
marks) don't live anywhere near the break at which they're purporting to
be "locals". Cases in point are Malibu and Rincon, where few who ride
these premier pointbreaks actually live nearby. The most strident Malibu
dicks are usually from over the hill, and almost everyone drives 10-15
miles or more to Rincon. Except Kevin Costner. I'd sure love to see his
tired butt out at the Indicator. Just kidding!
Unfortunately, though, wherever they happen to live, many "locals"
are on the continuum from asshole to Holly-style psycho. Cases in point,
in addition to the Sunset Cliffs saga, are, of course, Lunada Bay, the
Oxnard area, and downtown Santa Cruz, to name just a few. Some of the
candyass homeboys who surf these areas think that, because they've never
had the cojones to move away from the ol' home break, they own it.
They're always looking for someone to practice their karate lessons on,
and a "valley kook" is a perfect victim.
People who live near or far from a break and who help protect and
care for it are to be admired and respected. Macho bullies who commit
assault with localism as a rationale belong in the slams or the psycho
ward, no matter where their mailing address happens to be, how well they
surf or how well they have a spot wired.
You are, by the way, correct that the media, particularly
newspapers, often tweak and polarize stories, on purpose or otherwise, to
make them more interesting to the "seventh grade mind" (that's the general
editorial opinion of the daily paper readership). Sells papers.
Will (newsman in a past life)
mike
CORTICAL wrote in message
<199805162001...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
>You should be careful when you refer to locals. Michael Pugh, the victim,
was a
>local too. He has a sense of pride in his neighborhood and where he grew
up. He
>loves the waves in the area. If you met him somewhere else he would proudly
>tell you that he's a local at his home breaks but would not lord it over
you or
>anybody else.
I never inferred that "locals" are assholes. On the contrary, my experience
is that most people living near the ocean are quite satisfied with their
lives and are quite friendly. What I said is that a lot of "locals" are so
due to circumstances they did not create; that is neither a positive nor a
negative statement. I pointed this out to emphasize the absurdity of the
few assholes who repeat the "locals only" mantra. People lucky enough to
live near and surf classic breaks have every right to be protective of that
resource. To me this means reporting destructive and violent behavior and
educating new or visiting surfers about etiquette. This can be done without
physical assault. Roger, you seem like a decent person who honestly
expresses his opinions. However, I'd respect you more if you actually read
my posts before commenting on them.
Peace,
mike
BTW: The real "locals" are the marine critters that evolved in the near
shore zone, everybody else is just a visitor.
Tim
On 16 May 1998 17:54:10 GMT, mv2...@aol.com (MV24fps) wrote:
> cort...@aol.com wrote:
>
> >Maybe I can throw some light on this subject.
>
> <snipped post>
>
> Thanks for the perspective.
>
> I suggest some time in the hole for the Hollys.
Dare I suggest, albeit from 6000 miles away, that given the nature of
the Holly's, in particular Justin, some time in the hole is likely to
make him even worse? If he is exhibiting bizarre psychotic behaviour
now, then it's possible if not likely that he'll come out with that
intact, plus a whole new set of skills. The wrong ones. As Cortical
suggested, he needs some counselling, though this should be enforced?
Plus, community service? And maybe even The Elements of Nature FAQ
<g>
Although locking him up might make people feel good, in a knee-jerk
kind of way, surely in the long run it would help no-one, including
society generally, which would of course have to pick up the tab.
Tim
delete the 'j' in 'clarjach' to reply
mike
Will Borgeson wrote in message <6jktv9$kna$1...@mark.ucdavis.edu>...
>I'd sure love to see his tired butt out at the Indicator.
Watch it Will, the homophobes can twist that statement into meaning
anything.
>Just kidding!
Me too! Sorry, got those "bored with thesis writing" blues.
Peace,
mike
Bonzer
crowd
>problem there but it's rarely if ever dealt with by all out violence. Not
that
>I've ever seen. I know these people involved in this story so I thought I'd
set
>the record straight. The Holly's in no way represent the people who usually
>surf the area.
>
crankin. You don't think you will get the stink eye?
How long you been gone?????
I've seen guys held under by the throat for misunderstandings and almost
drowned. For a MISUNDERSTANDING!!!!!
I started surfing Sunset cliffs with a local because that was the easy way.
Try dropping in without it!
Ever take off right at Abs? And then get shut out of every decent left that
comes through?
Just 'cause you didn't know? I caught a good right and it's etched in the
synapis.
Give me a break. Literally!
I was told you have to make the hike south (read new break) if you want to
surf with the big boys . . . new break is south . . .
I got a boat and now I surf SOUTH!!!!!!
Sunset Cliffs is the Ocean. The Ocean is mine!
Bonzer
-the best surfer is the one having the most fun--
Bonzer
Gleshna wrote in message
<199805162310...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
>My $.02:
>4. I recall looking out at the surf at Ocean Beach on a Sunday in 1959 and
>commenting that it was so crowded that you could walk a hundred yards on
boards
>without getting wet. I can't imagine how crowded the area must be now.
>
1959??????
Come on down and surf a good day . . . you'll get plenty of waves and maybe
a workout too!
Bonzer
Bonzer
>
Bonzer
Bonzer
NO1CATFISH wrote in message
<199805170451...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
>>CORTICAL wrote in message
>>
New Break. Why is it called that?
Bonzer
Agent Utah
CORTICAL wrote:
> Maybe I can throw some light on this subject.
>
> <snipped a whole bunch>
>
> The media isn't reporting the whole story. They probably don't care. It's
> probably too small of a story for them to concern themselves with.
>
> -Roger Raffee
Roger (btw, I'm just kidding about the Media Slut thing.......I don't really
believe that.......just making sure this post grabbed your attention),
Just today I picked up, what I will assume is, the latest issue of Longboarder
Magazine. I was surprised to see an article about you and your surfing
philosophies (that we've all come to either agree with or hate over the years
reading this newgroup). In reference to the part of the post that I've left, do
you feel that writer of the article (and the magazine for that matter), did an
accurate job of representing you and your views.
p.s. hope I didn't get your blood pressure to high with the subject title.
--
fortune cookie message: "That was not chicken."
Mountain Man
CORTICAL wrote:
> Maybe I can throw some light on this subject.
...[snip the keen local knowledge and character perception]...
> The media isn't reporting the whole story. They probably don't care. It's
> probably too small of a story for them to concern themselves with.
From your final statement it would appear that this keeness
extends to the perception of the media. If only you were not
so right, but alas, I think the proverbial hammer just fell
on the proverbial head of the proverbial nail.
Do you see the nature of the media changing, and if so, how?
I ask this çause I gather you are (partly) in the media business.
Pete Brown
New South Wales
NO1CATFISH
>CORTICAL wrote in message
><199805162001...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
>> Not all locals are assholes, probably so few to be almost non-existant.
Almost non-existant?????? Along with the mind of anyone who actually
believes that.
Glad to see so many responses to such a relevant issue.
Surfing Vancouver Island
mv2...@aol.com (MV24fps) wrote:
>Thanks for the perspective.
> I suggest some time in the hole for the Hollys.
>Gamivia Duke, Esq.
5 years probation with a "no go condition" to any surfing break in the
area. The punk is probably past help, but the sentence would be a
clear message to others.
Jail is about revenge, not reform, not societal protection.
Cam
=============================
Surfing Vancouver Island.... and other wet persuits
http://www.island.net/~surfer/
surfing, scuba diving, kayaking, fishing, sailing, windsurfing,
whale watching, snowboard, skateboard, camping, resorts, weather, & more
========================================================================
newave
You Know, this crap has got to stop. If we as surfers don't end Local
violence, the powers that be will crack down and impose god knows what rules on
us.
Too many surfers, too few beaches plus Neanderthal attitudes equal a real
problem for all of us. Maybe the locals should piss in on the beach boundaries
so the other Neanderthals can sniff out where they are not supposed to go.
As I see it It's up to us to stop this attitude. The violence has to stop
somewhere...
Let it be with each of us.
Newave
--
Localism: The cancer of surfing
mike wrote:
> CORTICAL wrote in message
> <199805161609...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
>
> >Maybe I can throw some light on this subject.
>
> <message snipped here and there>
>
> >Justin is a really strange person.
> >You only have to see him in action to realize that.
>
> I think this is evident from his "that guy gave me stink-eye so I had to
> pummel him" defense as reported in the SD Union Trib. That should hold up
> well in court (on second thought, the "Twinkie defense" worked).
>
> >The media isn't reporting the whole story. They probably don't care. It's
> >probably too small of a story for them to concern themselves with.
>
mike
newave wrote in message <355F2CF1...@tmisnet.com>...
.
>Too many surfers, too few beaches plus Neanderthal attitudes equal a real
>problem for all of us.
That's an insult to Neanderthals. Their inclination towards violence is now
believed to have been overstated. I wish I could say the same about the
halfwits we're talking about here.
Peace,
mike
anonymous
mike wrote:
I read this week that Neanderthals had a bigger brain cage and/or bigger brain
than we had.
but they went on to say that they were bigger people and that their brain/weight
ratio was smaller than ours.
Implying that they werent as smart as us.
I've kept up on the latest about Neanderthals, and it was always assumed that
they were closely related to us,
but the latest is that they were there own evolutionary branch and were NOT
related to us. They also
coexisted at one time with homosapiens, but their extinction can not be
determined why.
It was always assumed they were absorbed and the large nose and huge brows or
foreheads
in some Europeans was evidence to that , but I think this is showing not to be
true.
I dont think the Neanderthals wanted anything to do with us. ;-)
Shepard Casey
What is a local? If I surf at D St on Monday, Swami's on Tues.. and then at
Pipes for the rest of the week.....will I ever be a local. Does it take
someone doing the same thing every day, surfing the same spot no matter what
the condition or vibe. Hmmm.... I hope I never get to be a local. It's kind
of nice to get to know people at different spots & make new friends, surf a
different break. I met some guys from PB at Punta Cabras this weekend &
shared some great waves. Surfed Seaside a couple of Fridays ago & made some
new friends there. Unfortunately there are some jerks on every crowd. I'm
just thankful that I haven't run into too may of them. Most of the people I
meet in the water are good people just enjoying the surf....no matter where
they are from.
I think "Local" has been mistakenly interchanged with "Jerk". A jerk is as
much a jerk in Montana (no offense if you're from there!) as in Encinitas or
Baja.
It's almost like dogs pissing on things to mark their territory. It may be
marked, but I wouldn't want to be in the midst of all the "pissing". ...just
a thought.
Shepard
terry-michael tyracy
Steve Hershenson wrote:
May I suggest two remedies? A good ass whipping and some Prozac. Ill have to think about the Dad.CORTICAL wrote:
Maybe I can throw some light on this subject.I know all the characters involved in this altercation. Very ironically
Michael Pugh is a local boy. He grew up in a house overlooking the water in
Sunset Cliffs and has surfed the area quite a lot since he was very young. He's
a perfect gentleman, good surfer, and all around nice guy to everyone.John Holly is a local has-been legend and shaper who hasn't surfed much at
all in the last twenty-five years, that's why he didn't know who Michael Pugh
was.
2 questions:
- where is sunset cliffs&who cares?
Wimpy Carlisle
Alex Rigby
mike wrote:
>
>
> The apple doesn't fall far from the tree. Now for some liberal waxing. But
> first, let it be known that I am in no way defending the Hollys. There is a
> considerable amount of evidence that suggests this sort of violently
> aggressive behavior is learned or even genetic. Abusers beget more abusers
> and so forth. The young Hollys are probably the latest product of several
> generations of abusers. They became who they are not by choice but by
> circumstance (consider their father's behavior). This is the real irony of
> localism. Most locals just happened to be born to parents who lived near
> some particular break. In other words, they are "locals" through no deeds
> of their own. Those who pioneered surfing of some particular break may
> deserve a different status, but even that is suspect.
> Now for my conservative alter ego: Let the public stoning of the Hollys
> begin!
> Peace?
> mike
There are some aspects of this reasoning that removes ones
responsibility for their own actions.
I can't refute the genetic/environmental effects on a persons behavior,
in fact I strongly suspect there is a great deal of truth in it. but it
doesn't make it all right, and as such we should be careful of accepting
it as an excuse. If violent people beget violent people, then the
logical solution is to neuter them, and that is no solution either.
Alex
--
remove the BADSPAM to reply.
CORTICAL
>Just today I picked up, what I will assume is, the latest issue of Longboarder
>Magazine. I was surprised to see an article about you and your surfing
>philosophies (that we've all come to either agree with or hate over the years
>reading this newgroup). In reference to the part of the post that I've left,
do
>you feel that writer of the article (and the magazine for that matter), did an
>accurate job of representing you and your views.
Actually, only partially. They left out much of what I said which would
have been OK but the writer said he was told they wouldn't leave out anything.
When the mag came out I saw that they left out almost all the stuff I said that
could be perceived as harsh against the media.
They probably made me look better to the average Joe than if they printed
what I really said but I didn't care how I looked to the average Joe. That's OK
though, I expected as much. Mace, the editor, and Devon, the writer, are both
good people and I know they meant well and wanted me to look good.
-Roger
CORTICAL
My apologies Mike,
-Roger
Subject: Re: Sunset Cliffs Localism
From: "mike" <mlie...@ucla.edu>
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 1:14 PM
Message-id: <6jkuo6$dqi$1...@uni.library.ucla.edu>
Neal Miyake
CORTICAL wrote:
>>Just today I picked up, what I will assume is, the latest issue of
Longboarder
>>Magazine. I was surprised to see an article about you and your surfing
>>philosophies (that we've all come to either agree with or hate over the
years
>>reading this newgroup).
Also read the article. Honest words. Although I don't completely agree
with everything you said (in the article and on this newsgroup), I know
where you are coming from.
>>In reference to the part of the post that I've left,
>do
>>you feel that writer of the article (and the magazine for that matter),
did an
>>accurate job of representing you and your views.
>
> Actually, only partially. They left out much of what I said which
would
>have been OK but the writer said he was told they wouldn't leave out
anything.
>When the mag came out I saw that they left out almost all the stuff I said
that
>could be perceived as harsh against the media.
>
> They probably made me look better to the average Joe than if they
printed
>what I really said but I didn't care how I looked to the average Joe.
That's OK
>though, I expected as much. Mace, the editor, and Devon, the writer, are
both
>good people and I know they meant well and wanted me to look good.
Don't you hate it when your words get chopped? When I used to write for
H3O, they used to sometimes put stupid things in my writing for a laugh.
Pissed me off.
BTW, how did you get the Cortical moniker? Just curious.
sponge (aka cerebrum, that spongy gray matter)
HI Surf Advisory (http://www.iav.com/~sponge/)
Stephen Hull
I'm as sick of this subject as most of the rest of you, but there is some serious
undeserved trashing going on here.
I'm a local, and I'm proud of it. Ok I was at one time anyway. I still hang at my
home beach from time to time, am very connected to my old crew, and know a lot of
other local crews around that I grew up with. I've gotta stand by Cortical on
this.
CORTICAL wrote:
> <snipped>Locals and localism are two different things. <snipped>
but I would go further.
If you want to bag on violence at the beach and in the water, knock yourself out.
I'll back you 100%. I am not going to defend the examples of violence being
discussed in this newsgroup of late. There is no defense for it. If you want to
bag on prejudice and verbal and other forms of undeserved abuse and discrimination,
be my guest. But, if you are calling these actions "localism" and stigmatizing all
locals based on the actions of a few, you are wrong, and you are doing surfing a
great disservice.
I am personally offended by one of our groups little motto, "Localism: The cancer
of surfing", and I take exception to it.
Several months ago I wrote about some of the value that healthy localism has
contributed to surfing. Locals have saved many peoples lives. Locals have taken
personal responsibility for their local area, and are willing to let visitors who
abuse an area or put others in danger, to know what's up. Locals have done more
to preserve access to surfing areas than any other group around. They are there
for a lifetime, they are there for their kids. They are not there to rip the area
off and bail like many others.
Yeah, during my adolescent local rat pack days I did and said some things I am not
proud of. This is not unique to surfing. I have spent many years taking
opportunities to heal wounds I may have contributed to during those days. Both to
those who I helped victimize, and those like them who have come after. Even after
more than 30 years, I ran into a guy at the hook last summer who my crew and I
used to rag on something fierce. I was almost ashamed to acknowledge him after all
these years, but he definitely remembered me. We eventually struck up a
conversation, I was stoked he was still surfing (I'm not sure I would be if I had
gone through what we put him through), we shared some waves, and both left on a
positive note.
I've been on the other side and share your concerns. I've been hassled,
threatened, and ripped off. Maybe by some of you when I was visiting your
hometown. Surfers don't have a corner on this market either. I have witnessed
some degree of attitude at EVERY established surf area I've visited from Mexico to
Washington to Hawaii. Just as I have also experienced the "aloha spirit" in almost
every area on occasion. Certainly crowding contributes to the likelihood that
hassles will occur. I've been to spots that I will not go back to. I don't
consider these areas to have a "local" problem, they have a delinquency problem.
I've been to inland neighborhoods I won't go back to either, and for the same
reasons.
It's funny. I was talking to an old Westside local the other day and he reminded
me that at one time (the 50's) being local meant you were from Santa Cruz County.
It turns out he was surfing my home beach before I even started. When my crew
claimed our beach, an older guy with his wife and baby used to come down once in a
while and surf. He was pretty good and we started talking. He was a local at our
beach before us. We thought we had the original claim on "our" spot. There are
now others who claim "our beach" and they have never heard of my crew. Sure they
look on me with suspicion. Am I going to disrespect "their" home beach? Am I
going to exhibit the kind of mindless idiocy that forces them into an "enforcer"
role, or put their lives at risk to save me? It doesn't diminish my involvement
and sense of responsibility, nor should it theirs.
I've occasionally seen crews that keep a local lunatic. Old loyalties die hard,
and in many cases, the crew is all this warped person has left. I've also seen a
lot of wannabes who are trying to prove they deserve to be known as locals who
cause a lot of grief. Why would responsible locals want to draw negative attention
from authorities on themselves? It's more likely the ones who have nothing to lose
who act out.
RESPONSIBLE localism and locals have an important place in surfing. I refuse to
allow some of you stereotype me, my friends, my predecessors, or my successors as
irresponsible brutes. Who is being irresponsible here? Either become better
informed, or acknowledge your own hostile prejudices and get them off your own
shoulder.
Peacefully
da hulk, Rio Surfing Organization
mike
Stephen Hull wrote in message <3561F492...@cats.ucsc.edu>...
>I'm as sick of this subject as most of the rest of you, but there is some
serious
>undeserved trashing going on here.
<snipped excellent points about use of the term "local">
>RESPONSIBLE localism and locals have an important place in surfing. I
refuse to
>allow some of you stereotype me, my friends, my predecessors, or my
successors as
>irresponsible brutes. Who is being irresponsible here? Either become
better
>informed, or acknowledge your own hostile prejudices and get them off your
own
>shoulder.
Sometimes terms can develop many meanings and their use then becomes
ambiguous. Perhaps the negative connotation to "locals" started with
phrases like "locals only". I confess to not knowing the origin of that
particular phrase but I regard it as a "you don't live here so stay away"
kind of thing. It may not have started like that but that's what it is
perceived to mean now.
You're absolutely right that the "locals" are usually the caretakers of
their particular beach and deserve lots of credit for their efforts in
keeping the place nice. They also stand to lose the most when the "wrong
element" finds its way there. This is true for communities in general, not
just surfbreaks. A strong sense of community is very important for
maintaining the quality of any area.
It is unfortunate that "locals" has become a sometimes negative term in
the world of surfing. In many other recreations it is a term of respect
(e.g. let's ask the locals where is the best hike to take in the area). The
world of surfing is inhabited by as many a-holes as any other slice of
civilization. Whether those people are "local" or not is irrelavent, they
detract from others' ability to peacefully enjoy themselves.
Da hulk has given us a lesson in the positive aspects of localism. The
seed is planted; let's hope it takes root and grows strong and true.
Peace,
mike
SurffOhio
In article <6jsuh3$fsu$1...@uni.library.ucla.edu>, "mike" <mlie...@ucla.edu>
writes:
> Sometimes terms can develop many meanings and their use then becomes
>ambiguous. Perhaps the negative connotation to "locals" started with
>phrases like "locals only". I confess to not knowing the origin of that
>particular phrase but I regard it as a "you don't live here so stay away"
>kind of thing. It may not have started like that but that's what it is
>perceived to mean now.
My take on it.
1. Local One who frequents a surfing spot on a regular basis. He may or may
not live nearby. He either knows or is friends with the other "locals" and is
normally accepted as one of the group.
2. Localism A.) A derogatory term in reference to a group of locals at a surf
spot. It means the exclusion of others by the locals at said surf spot.
Localism can take the form of simple "stink-eye" and wave hogging, or escalate
into violence if a local or group of locals feel that their so called
territiory is being invaded.
Note: This phenomena in the surfing experience is actually very rare and is
somewhat hype. It is usually just one lame or mentally unbalanced character
that gets nasty with someone that is visiting. A good vibe and smile will go a
long way at almost any surf spot. And on the East Coast, I don't know if it
exists anywhere period. :-) ( Just my little plug. )
There is a spot in the PNW that has mines planted around it. But, that's only
because a couple of guys that think they are from the Klingon Empire live
nearby. Namely Agent Utah and the Sandman.
Definition B...As per Da Hulk's post. Localism can be simply the bond of the
surfers at a certain spot. They can be helpful to people in trouble or newbies.
I myself am always happy to see locals at a certain break, I rarely fail to
have a conversation with someone and usually end up with small group around the
tailgate of my Tahoe at NSB rappin about the local shapers or whatever. If I
went to a break and there were no locals I would be dissapointed.
Surff
Neal Miyake
SurffOhio wrote about localism:
<snip>
>Note: This phenomena in the surfing experience is actually very rare and is
>somewhat hype. It is usually just one lame or mentally unbalanced character
>that gets nasty with someone that is visiting. A good vibe and smile will
go a
>long way at almost any surf spot. And on the East Coast, I don't know if it
I guess you never surfed Manasquan Inlet in Jersey. Man, I got some mean
stink eye from the boys. Then again, perhaps it was more my vehicle of
choice (bodyboard) rather than localism that got me the intense stares.
sponge
jb
surf...@aol.com (Surff"Ohio" at AOL dot COM) wrote:
>
> Note: This phenomena in the surfing experience is actually very rare and is
> somewhat hype. It is usually just one lame or mentally unbalanced character
> that gets nasty with someone that is visiting.
>
Obviously SurffOhio has never been feeling his oats at Steamer Lane,
Santa Cruz when Vince Collier was out and about during his menstrual
cycle.
Trust me SurffOhio, there are people who enjoy surfing only for the
sake of making the experience miserable for others.
People like Collier take surfing beyond the realm of the pleasure and
begin begging for an ass whippin'.
On February 18, 1982 I whipped the shit out of Vince Collier in the
parking lot at Steamer Lane. The satisfaction of it all was that he
spent the previous hour in the water begging me to do it.
I came to surf that day, Vince came to fight that day. I gave him an
ass whippin', put my board in the back of my truck and drove away.
Moral of the story: Someone who deserved to kick his ass kick got it
kicked.
- jb
CORTICAL
From: "Neal Miyake" <spo...@iav.com> asked:
>BTW, how did you get the Cortical moniker? Just curious.
Yeah, I took a lot of heat in this newsgroup for that moniker (cortikook
etc..). Actually it's because this email address of mine comes from my partner
in GEMM/Global Electronic Music Marketplace (http://gemm.com).
When we started he gave me use of this email address. It was left over from
a former company of his called Cortical Systems, computer company.
Being a computer illiterate, he suggested I could learn about using email
and netiquette by going in to a newsgroup I might like such as Alt.surfing and
getting involved. A friend of mine suggested that I place a message for him
organizing people against the Obayashi thing on the North Shore. I did that and
also objected to publicizing surf spots that I was surprised seeing being done.
Damn, I sure was a 'net neophyte back then as many of you who remember
will attest to. I started wars everytime I expressed my honest opinions and got
very welcome lessons in netiquette while at it.
Thank you Alt.surfing.
Thanks for asking Neal.
-Roger Raffee
(GEMM)
Foondoggy
CORTICAL wrote:
>
> From: "Neal Miyake" <spo...@iav.com> asked:
>
> >BTW, how did you get the Cortical moniker? Just curious.
>
>
> a former company of his called Cortical Systems, computer company.
>
> >
> will attest to. I started wars everytime I expressed my honest opinions and got
> very welcome lessons in netiquette while at it.
>
> Thank you Alt.surfing.
>
> Thanks for asking Neal.
>
> -Roger Raffee
>
My heart soars like.......a seagull (ok, shithawk then) at this
unsolicited testimonial to the healing and restorative powers of
alt.surfing. Even in my short time here I've seen the miracle of this
group performed on the likes of Sandman, and now Roger. This gives me
much hope for the others who have strayed (Foon turns his head to sob
and wipe a tear). Now if the karma of alt.surfing can only reach the
likes of VMXLD and that blackest of all souls, Peter Amschel, the world
would be safe for all alt.surfers and those who march to a different
drummer (you know, the guys who wear speedos to surf :) Welcome back
Roger. We may not always agree with what you say, but in a certain sense
that's a lot of the attraction of this group.
I've thoroughly enjoyed this thread on Sunset Cliffs Localism since it
is one of the breaks I virtually lived at one year. Roger's take was
very informative, if somewhat "psychotic" (Oh I'm such a kidder.
MrsFoon would dope slap me silly for a cheap shot like that)
-Foon (preferring not to prefix the word "slut" with any adjectives,
I'm a purist)
SurffOhio
In article <199805200606...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, cort...@aol.com
(CORTICAL) writes:
> Yeah, I took a lot of heat in this newsgroup for that moniker (cortikook
>etc..).
There was also Roger Rabitt. However, the heat you took was not due to your
moniker.
I'll let you explain why you actually took so much heat.
Surff
SurffOhio
In article <199805201345...@ladder03.news.aol.com>, surf...@aol.com
(SurffOhio) writes:
Cortical wrote:
>> Yeah, I took a lot of heat in this newsgroup for that moniker (cortikook
>>etc..).
I kooked out and wrote this without seeing Cortical's whole post:
>There was also Roger Rabitt. However, the heat you took was not due to your
>moniker.
>
>I'll let you explain why you actually took so much heat.
>
>
Cortical also included in his post:
>> Damn, I sure was a 'net neophyte back then as many of you who remember
>>will attest to. I started wars everytime I expressed my honest opinions and
got
>>very welcome lessons in netiquette while at it.
>> Thank you Alt.surfing.
Keep firing your honest opinions, Cortical. They add flavor to the group.
Surff
newave
hulk:
There is nothing wrong with hanging out at your local beach in fact it is one of
my favorite things to do. If you define LOCAL that way then cool. But as with any
semantical nit picking, definitions become clouded. The term Localism, as I and others
define it,
refers to the idea of ownership of the ocean/beach. To the point where when other folks
want to surf they are given the "stink Eye" (old pidgin term). Or worse yet cars are
damaged,
butts get kicked. Mike is correct about the ambiguity of the term localism. However
when I
say it is the cancer of surfing, I am (I thought) obviously, referring to the violent/
negative aspect.
I agree then Locals and localism are two different things.
Unfortunately the attitude perceived is, negative localism, most of the time. Hell
man, we are all locals somewhere, even if you live inland, I understand that. When we
can turn that connotation around by deeds then I'll change my signature. You are
correct in saying that, "Surfers don't have a corner on this market," I think this is
the thing that bums me out the most. It is too much like gang turf wars to suit me. We
are better than that (or should be).
I am sorry you take umbrage to my statement. I simply intend to provoke thought and
discussion on what,
I feel, could do serious harm to the lifestyle I have loved and lived for the past
thirty two years. I fear
that if we don't do something about it the authorities will. I don't need some, non
surfing, surf cop directing
traffic at our breaks, or worse loose the few breaks we have because of a few idiot
Neanderthals. Unfortunately
these jerks are the ones that get the press.
Given the definition, if you are not one of these jerks then it shouldn't upset
you. We as humans are
all subject to, as you say, hostile prejudices. It is how we channel and deal with them
that counts. As to being
better informed I think I've been at this, long enough to be informed.
I think it's up to us who have been at this so long to teach by example. It sounds
like you are already
doing that, bravo. I try every day. I know it isn't easy sitting at your favorite break
in a huge crowd to
be benevolent, but we gotta try.
Keep surfing
Newave
Stephen Hull wrote:
> I'm as sick of this subject as most of the rest of you, but there is some serious
> undeserved trashing going on here.
>
> RESPONSIBLE localism and locals have an important place in surfing. I refuse to
> allow some of you stereotype me, my friends, my predecessors, or my successors as
> irresponsible brutes. Who is being irresponsible here? Either become better
> informed, or acknowledge your own hostile prejudices and get them off your own
> shoulder.
>
> Peacefully
>
> da hulk, Rio Surfing Organization
--
SurffOhio
>Obviously SurffOhio has never been feeling his oats at Steamer Lane,
>Santa Cruz when Vince Collier was out and about during his menstrual
>cycle.
No, I haven't had that pleasure. Isn't he, or was he, a pro surfer?
>Trust me SurffOhio, there are people who enjoy surfing only for the
>sake of making the experience miserable for others.
I find that very strange. Just the nature of surfing seems to lead toward a
peaceful and aesthetic experience. How can someone be a whacko meany riding
waves on a sunny beautiful day? I don't get it.
>People like Collier take surfing beyond the realm of the pleasure and
>begin begging for an ass whippin'.
>
>On February 18, 1982 I whipped the shit out of Vince Collier in the
>parking lot at Steamer Lane. The satisfaction of it all was that he
>spent the previous hour in the water begging me to do it.
Ah yes, but why bother? I abhor the thought of creating violence on someone,
and if someone is begging for it I will just leave.
Protect yourself and others of course, but if someone is asking to be pounded I
will certainly not oblige them.
>I came to surf that day, Vince came to fight that day. I gave him an
>ass whippin', put my board in the back of my truck and drove away.
>
>Moral of the story: Someone who deserved to kick his ass kick got it
>kicked.
Moral of the story: A mean person got beat up, and is now probably even meaner.
>- jb
I know, what do you do if someone like this is at your local break everyday
causing trouble?
Never underestimate the power of effective communication.
The ability to have compassion for someone in the face of hatred is one of the
greatest abilities of all.
BTW, are you or are you not the one and only T-Bone?
Surff
Agent Utah
SurffOhio wrote:
> I kooked out and wrote this without seeing Cortical's whole post:
>
> >There was also Roger Rabitt. However, the heat you took was not due to your
> >moniker.
> >
> >I'll let you explain why you actually took so much heat.
> >
> >
>
> Keep firing your honest opinions, Cortical. They add flavor to the group.
>
> Surff
Keep grovelling Ohio, it adds flavor to the group.
--
Fortune Cookie message: "That was not chicken."
Neal Miyake
>From: "Neal Miyake" <spo...@iav.com> asked:
>>BTW, how did you get the Cortical moniker? Just curious.
<snip>
I didn't think there would be that much of a story behind the name. Thank
YOU for sharing it with us.
> Damn, I sure was a 'net neophyte back then as many of you who remember
>will attest to. I started wars everytime I expressed my honest opinions and
got
>very welcome lessons in netiquette while at it.
When I first started lurking, I thought that some people were so "wrong" in
their mindset (yourself included, Roger). However, over the years, I've
come to realize that the passionate people are the very ones that should be
lauded for saying how they feel. After all, it's not a popularity contest;
it's a forum for people around the world to express their opinions. And
honesty should be commended.
We don't have to see eye to eye, but at least we can--for just a moment at
least--see through someone else's eyes. In that way, we can better
understand how others feel.
I for one am glad you are back, Roger.
sponge (neal)
Foondoggy
Agent Utah wrote:
>
> SurffOhio wrote:
> > Keep firing your honest opinions, Cortical. They add flavor to the group.
> >
> > Surff
>
> Keep grovelling Ohio, it adds flavor to the group.
I for one Surff, would like to apologize for the rudeness of John
Lake.....????
Hey wait, that's your job. So now you gotta apologize to yourself.....
-Foon (Sometimes I get so confused as to who does what around here).
Agent Utah
SurffOhio wrote:
> In article <3562ED...@nist.gov>, Foondoggy <wfo...@nist.gov> writes:
>
> >I for one Surff, would like to apologize for the rudeness of John
> >Lake.....????
> >Hey wait, that's your job. So now you gotta apologize to yourself.....
> >
> >
>
> Mr Johnny Utah Lake might find himself shackled to my business while I make my
> surf trips.
>
> Surff
Sure thing............Dad.
Agent Utah
SurffOhio wrote:
>
>
> There is a spot in the PNW that has mines planted around it. But, that's only
> because a couple of guys that think they are from the Klingon Empire live
> nearby. Namely Agent Utah and the Sandman.
>
>
> Surff
Off-Topic: Surff...lay down your beloved crack pipe................and take a
step back.
On-Topic: Localism in general is a good thing, it just depends on how it's used.
Don't let a few bad apples spoil the pie for everybody else <ouch, that was really
ugly>. Some people just live to be dickheads........whether it's in the water, on
the beach or on a mountain bike trail (I got vibed once by
some......uh,er.......lady rider while riding on trails that I had ridden since I
was in grade school........I just laughed out loud in here face) and every place in
between. Surfing has it's fair share, but there's that same type of people
everywhere you go. I just smile and laugh a little bit.
--
fortune cookie message: "That was not chicken."
Surfer Bob
CORTICAL wrote in message
> Yeah they got a crowd problem there (at Sunset Cliffs surf spots)
> but it's rarely if ever dealt with by all out violence.
Then Bonzer wrote:
> Give me a break. Take a longboard out to Luskims some time when it's
> crankin. You don't think you will get the stink eye?
So I wrote:
Luscombs was far and away my favorite surf spot while I lived in SD. I
surfed it a lot from 1990-1993 and sporatically through 1995. I surfed
most of the other Sunset Cliffs and Pt. Loma spots throughout that
period too, but mostly Luscombs and Rockpiles.
There is definitely a crew of older guys on longboards who have been out
there for a lot of years and who don't give much quarter. After 3 years
out there paying my dues a few showed no sign of letting me in, so I
started introducing myself to them. Didn't help much, but to their 15-20
years there, I guess my 3-5 years wasn't much.
I never experienced much stink eye and certainly never experienced any
violence. There was some grumpy, self-righteous complaining about wave
priority on a few occasions when I'd sit outside of them and paddle hard
and early through the pack to get an occasional set wave, but that's as
bad as it ever got.
There's a crew of young, hungry shortboard guys too. They're no more or
less polite than young, hungry, self-absorbed teens anywhere I've been
(well, no- they're more polite than some I've met).
Maybe things have changed radically in the last three years, but I'd be
amazed. Those same old guys are still out there, I'm quite sure. They're
nice enough, just kind of cliquish and not very interested in yielding
to anyone who takes off deeper than they do. I found some of them to be
pretty inspiring surfers. And seems to me the crew at Luscombs is much
better about sharing than the older guys down at North Garbage. A surfer
could get totally skunked down there for days at a time for all the
waves they'll give away. I'm sure they'd tell you that 25 years in the
water earns one certain rights. I'm willing to cede them that for the
most part.
One thing about Sunset Cliffs is that the proliferation of longboards as
a response to crowding is pretty out of control there. The place does
get pretty crowded when it's on, but where in southern CA doesn't these
days? (Actually, I know where, but you need a boat...:-)
Aloha,
Surfer Bob
robert beedie
save the locals ; especially the ones that can really surf = but
destroy the attitudes with better surfing yourself. GREAT SURFING has
always dominated our sport and hopefully it always will. Simple answer;
simple problem-JUST GO SURFING.
John Ferguson
Stephen Hull wrote in message <3561F492...@cats.ucsc.edu>...
>Locals have saved many peoples lives. Locals have taken
>personal responsibility for their local area, and are willing to let
visitors who
>abuse an area or put others in danger, to know what's up. Locals have
done more
>to preserve access to surfing areas than any other group around.
Very Good Point!
I'm sure most of us that have surfed the same spot have at one time or
another rescued some poor swimmer.
Also, on many popular reef breaks, local knowlege is invaluable to visitors.
If I visit some hard-breaking hot spot, I'd like a local person to tell me
where the best location to paddle out is, how the channel behaves, and if
there's any freaky currents or rocks to watch out for.
Linking "Local" and "Localism" is like calling any gang of city kids that
get in a rumble "Gang Violence". We should know better.
John.