But Holte, I think the issue the Hilton is making and Gary is supporting is you should not be able to just come onto the property to use the facilties free of charge. Yes, the lagoon and a certain % of the beach is public land and available to everyone. BUT...access to it though the grounds of the Hilton is NOT! The Hilton has every right to deny or charge for access to their property. You can certainly approach the shore from the lagoon side and they would not be legally able to make you leave. But to access it from their property, they do have the right to deny it.

Would you walk through someones yard, jump over their locked fence to use the beach/lagoon behind their house? Probably not. But you still might swim to it from a public access location on the side of it. This is really no different.

Originally I was on the other side of the issue until I heard some of the facts.

I agree, the case with the elderly woman was rude and extreme and in very poor taste. I think it could have been handled much more delicately. But I do believe the Hilton has very likely had many issues building up over some time to cause them to finally bring the hammer down and limit access and enforce the day pass. We are only looking at this one incident...just how often were people using the facilities set aside for paying guests? My guess it was fairly often. Partly among locals and partly among tourists who keep hearing the Hilton has the best snorkling.

There are different 2 issues going on here. One is being charged a fee to access the Hilton's grounds and facilities...one is free use of the lagoon/beach. They are 2 completely different things. No where have I seen the Hilton saying you can not use the lagoon or a certain % of the shore if you access them from the water. If they do that....then yes, it is illegal. They are simply saying you can not access them for free from their property.

What I understand is that the person did purchase something to drink. Is that incorrect?

I think purchasing a drink entitles you to be in the bar or restaurant. If a person then leaves the bar or restaurant and walks further into the property to get to the beach, they should probably be asked to pay an additional access fee. Otherwise, the access fee would simply be the price of a drink. (and you'd get a complimentary drink with every paid access)

the ocean belongs to all in FP.

I don't know that people can be charged to access the beach.

Interesting idea that the citizens of Tahiti would probably be incensed about

Oh boy, here we go again, like Gary said on the previous page, you get what you pay for.

I'm sure in this case there are 3 sides to this story - what happened according to resort employees, what happened according to trespassing guests and the real story which is probably somewhere in between.

I mean I would love to go up to the Intercontinental or Four Seasons in Sydney, both of which overlook the harbour bridge and opera house, and hang out for the day.

But reality is unless I ""show them the money"" or book a room, its just not gunna happen

I agree. You have to show them the money.

But, the question here is the ocean access which is covered by law in Polynesia. That is the legal question.

I've spent time at the IC Moorea when I wasn't a guest. Bought a few Hinano's from the bar and was even given towels. I guess it just depends on which resort it is.

Holte,

Use of the public beach for everyone is allowed under French law, BUT no one is guaranteed access across private property. If a property owner wants to charge for that access, that is legal. If, for example, some local folks arrived by boat to the Hilton beach, and decided to use the beach without entering Hilton land, they could not be stopped legally by Hilton management or policies.

exactly.

But the question is if they had a drink and then proceeded to the beach. What is the answer to that?

"Get off of our property even though you purchased a drink?"

to me, that is the question.

The Hilton should probably just charge a rate to get onto the property if one is not staying there.

Otherwise, just don't let anyone come who is not staying there. That would solve the question.

If they do not need any business from the outside, that would be the way to go.

In Bali, the owners of the resort own the beach in front of the resort.

I've seen it first hand, and it ain't pretty!

I understand that this is not the case in FP, but if you were paying for the resort and you get a boat pull up and drop people off, then is that fair on the guests that have paid the premium price to stay at that particular resort?

If you pay to stay at a place that has been built in a particular beautiful location, then you deserve privacy - that's what the staff protect.

It's their job to look after guests that have paid the premium price!

If you pay 10% of the price to stay somewhere else, then the guests at the premium resort get the tranquility - the "visitors" get the beach THEY paid for.

Stick to the beach or garden you have paid for and don't try and use the one's that cost you ten times more.

There's a reason they charge so much?

Just my opinion?