In ongoing discussions with the California Department of Parks and Recreation, California Parks has advised AANR of its intention to begin citing individuals for being nude at San Onofre based on CCR section 4322 regulating nudity within California State Parks. These citations may be either an infraction or a misdemeanor. It must be noted that the California Appellate Court has ordered the prior order issued by Orange County Superior Court Judge Sheila Fell to enforce Cahill reversed and that a new order be issued.
It is important that individuals be aware that a misdemeanor citation can often have long-term consequences and to make their decisions regarding recreating at San Onofre accordingly.
California Parks is stressing that this change in managing nudity in its parks is being limited to San Onofre. Individuals who are aware of any actions that differ from this should report this information to the AANR office at 800/Try-Nude immediately so we can address this with California Parks.
AANR continues to have ongoing discussions with high-level representatives of California Parks to look for long-term answers to protect our rights to reasonable access to public lands for nude recreation in the California Parks system.
The AANR Government Affairs Team
Tags: AANR, American Association for Nude Recreation, Cahill Policy, California, government affairs, nude, nudity, public lands, San Onofre
My question is: “What are you actually doing about this besides ‘on-going discussions’?” I don’t think just talking will accomplish anything. One would have thought that having a european governor would simplify things for nudists but apparently not
“the California Appellate Court has ordered the prior order issued by Orange County Superior Court Judge Sheila Fell to enforce Cahill reversed and that a new order be issued.”
While the above statement may be true on the face of it there is essential information that is intentionally being left out that might elicit a different interpretation of the risks by your readers. AANR should acknowledge the automatic stay of that appellate court order while the issue is being brought before the CA Supreme Court. Otherwise AANR could rightly be accused of blind-siding the efforts of the Friends of San Onofre and TNS . . . whatever they think of the merits of said efforts.
Why are we getting conflicting information? AANR says Cahill does not apply, and NAC says that it does pending the Supreme Court Decision.
Why can’t these two organizations communicate to get the simple legal facts straight?
Since the CA Supreme Court chose not to reveiw the matter things seem to be going downhill. I’d like to point out though that once the parks dept. decided Cahill didn’t apply to San Onofre they in fact invalidated that policy for the entire state. In the original Cahill Policy there was never any mention about remoteness being a factor however if that were the case San Onofre is a remote isolated section of the beach. The fact is they chose to make an example of one of the most populat nude beaches in that state simply because they could. If we had had the public comment period we would have secured our future in all public beaches in that state. We need to be united in our oppositon to this disgusting abuse of power. An attack on one of us is and attack on all. History shows that putting ones head in the sand is not an effective strategy.