TravelTalkOnline Forums Travel and Vacation Forums St. Maarten - St. Martin END OF AN ERA

When the sign went up about no nudity north of Pedros, we honored that since it represented the "rules". It didn't matter who made the decision it was up to us to abide by it since we are visitors on the island. When we went on the Tiko it was to enjoy the cat ride as well as going to an island that was not inhabited except by wildlife. They discontinued the mud baths and we accepted that as the wishes of the country that was in charge of the island. Now they ban nudity on the island and we will honor that if and when we go back to the flat island. It was nice to have the option of being nude, but it is not the end of the world. Everyone can make their wishes known and it might make a difference and reverse the decision. Until then my wife and I will go by whatever rules or regulations there are on the island we still love (whether we like them or not).

Agreed, not the end of the world - for us. But it could be the end of a good business for Philippe unless they grant an exception for something that has been a good thing for a long time. Sad.

I'm sure Philippe can find another deserted beach somewhere and start a new special tradition

I have a suggestion for Capt. Philippe, having enjoyed TikoTiko cruises many times over the years:

- buy a quantity of inexpensive pareos or sarongs,
- buy a round inflated float with a solid bottom and a waterproof plastic crate
- buy a short length of rope and a heavy anchor

When you arrive at Tintamare anchor the float in knee-deep water, with the Pareo pile in the crate in the float. Your passengers can frolic in the water totally nude, but must grab a Pareo and wrap it around their waists before stepping onto the sand...and leave it on until back in the water...

As they go in and out of the water they just grab a pareo each time they go ashore and then take it off as soon as their ankles are wet and return it to the float.

The Captain and mate would have to grab one as they go ashore as well...

My recomendation would be to buy the thinest pareos you could find!
<img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Doh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Devil.gif" alt="" />

Don't forget to buy a XXL for those offensive 300 pounders

<img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Rofl.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Rofl.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Rofl.gif" alt="" /> Fortunately, pareos are "one size fits all!"

Thank you for your response.

I do NOT believe that people want to disrepect the laws or even the local establishment. But there are more than one local extablishment(s) that do fairly well, as a result. That I know for a FACT that local business have... and... will not go any further at this point as the thread has deterioted!

There is more than one side of this discussion and I am saying discussion!.

As there are and is more than one opinion the they each have their legit commplaints against EACH OTHER!

So let us keep at least a basic civil attitude, there are always those that will not agree with you. Those that think that nobody will disagree --- well that is unrealistic to be polite. No matter the situation.

Compromises are always the best and maybe one end of the beach at Tintamarre can remain unofficially clothing optional so families that dislike nudity can walk 3/4 of the beach and not have to worry about being offended. Tiko passengers can wear a pareo to walk the full beach and everyone can get along.
We were planning to take the Tiko Tiko day cruise to Tintamarre when we visit in April and hope this silliness can be resolved in a way that satisfies everyone (or at least almost everyone).

As PKwx pointed out "I guess what bothers us the most is we find these wonderful and beautiful secluded spots, offending no one and enjoy the naturist experience, than it becomes popular and now the naturists are the offenders." It seems this situation of forced tolerance is everywhere. Cities expand and invade the countryside and the 'invaders' complain about the smells coming from the farms. "Can't they farm somewhere else? I find these smells offensive." It would be nice if some things could just stay the same, because 'progress' doesn't always bring us forward. If we continue down the path of making everything acceptable to everyone, soon it will interest no one. I hope I can keep the right to offend at least someone once in awhile. (And that's not sarcasm.)

We will also comply with the rules as long as they don't dramatically impact how and where we like to spend our winter vacations on the island.
The day the negatives outnumber the positives, it'll be time to reconsider our attachment to St Maarten and go spend our time and money somewhere else.

Maybe a compromise for all is a good thing. I am sure that this thread is being "looked at". Anything beneficail to all parties concerned might be a good thing. <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/duh.gif" alt="" />

That is a completely and reasonable response! This type of situation is an individual situation, so each person has to decide what is the breaking point? Nobody here can decide that for you.

Thanks for your thoughts. I probably have offended (I know I have) more than you want to know over the years, goes with the territory! <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Grin.gif" alt="" />

Things change, that is a fact of life no matter where you are located. Things change just in routine life for that matter even.... for example I have a "stupid phone" still... the purpose of the phone is to make and recieve phone calls!!! That is it, nothing else, not text, not browsing the web, etc., to make a freaken phone call!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That is the purpose of the cell phone!! <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/duh.gif" alt="" />

I do NOT need or WANT anything else, period. Do you know how hard it is just to replace a "stupid cell phone" today? <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/duh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/duh.gif" alt="" />

But that is a whole different thing! <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Grin.gif" alt="" />

Smart Phones - Dumb Phones

Great question and a few subsequent comments have vaguely tried to respond to this, but bottom line - no one on here seems to know why these actions have been taken. Did "Government officials just took it upon themselves to act." Really? How naïve!

Why do we not see postings from any of the business owners with clear statements from the French authorities as to why they have taken several actions? Have none of them called to get an answer why these anti-nudity actions are being enacted? Between TTOL, Facebook, EverythingSXM, and other sites, do you believe we have no leverage that they'd want to use?

In other words, the government has mysteriously taken action that hurts some businesses and many visitors, and those businesses don't know why, haven't called to find out why, and don't seem to care about getting anyone involved? (Reminds many, I’m sure, of the Caravanserai situation as just another example of how the business owners don't care a lick about tourist concerns, right?)

Facts show SXM tourism is down significantly. Last 5 years - Jamaica tourism is up 14%, DR 18%, Belize 20%, Caymans 14%, Cuba 22%, Puerto Rico 21%, Aruba 18%, St Lucia 8%, Mexico Caribbean Coast 43%. Saint Martin is a decline of 1.7%! (OneCaribbeanWorld.org)

Yes, people are finding other places to go, especially younger people and especially as evidenced by the growth in the Mexico Caribbean basin. Again, we need to ask why. Sure, crime, drugs, traffic, etc impact it, but those are common factors to Mexico and all the other islands that are showing high growth rates.

One thing is, SXM had a special allure for years, one that captivated the hearts of people similar to those of you who are TTOL regulars. For many, the allure of Club O and the French permission for beach toplessness was one of the differentiating factors from those other islands, and it brought MANY visitors. For many nudists, without it, SXM is just another island with its own pros and cons. The crackdowns at Orient and overall French side attitude have caused many friends we’ve made in past years on Orient to say they’re not going back to SXM anymore. Actions like this Tintamere ban are individually insignificant maybe, but cumulatively, they simply accelerate the exodus to other islands. Our next visit in March will determine whether we move on from SXM. Cancelling our Tiko Tiko day of freedom will give us time to reflect on SXM in general. We'll also be trying to figure out what we did out there in years past that was SO offensive to all! Gees! Each year, I pay a few $100 to have a boat carry my wife and me way out in the ocean away from people to a deserted island where no one can see us, but now I'm going to be an arrested sex offender?? Wow, I'm sorry we offended so many!

Its obvious that the SXM tourist industry doesn’t care about us nasty, naked, disgusting tourists that absolutely ruined SXM and, God forbid, Tintamere. At least without us, SXM will be able to revert back to its pure and all-natural state of existence. Gee, it just hit me, THAT's the point!!

Otherwise, Nero fiddled while Rome burned.

Yes, good point. Why?

We had a September vacation in Munich, and they have a big park called the "English Garden" where you can be nude. We were on a tourists tour and nobody complained about the nude Germans.

Just took a look at the Tintamarre reviews on another travel board. I had to go 4 pages into the reviews before I saw one from last June that mentioned the nudists on that island. The poster said that there were nudists there and the people on the tour did not even notice it until the tour guide pointed it out.

Have my "stupid phone", but now I have to call to get it activated, done but just to let people know that a STUPID phone is not as essy as it used to be.

Cannot do it online, as............. will no go there. So it is a call to .... stupid phones are not what they want to sell!! <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Grin.gif" alt="" />

Interesting thread. Might look at this instead of the Super Bowl. Not a naturalist, but I found from experience that the less I wore on the beach, the more relaxed I was, so I definitely understand why those who choose nudity like it.

However, 100% of the French beaches in the world are topless, so that is always an option.

I just find it really interesting that everyone jumps on the "someone had to complain" band wagon when that is not the case at all. The people that make the rules decide for the overall enjoyment of the majority and no one needs to complain for things to change. Everyone still says that nudity on Orient Bay has been curtailed because of complaints from cruise ship passengers, This is totally false but there is no stoping beach tourist rumors.

OK, so if that's false, please enlighten us "beach tourists"! Why exactly was THAT curtailed. What was the specific motivation behind Orient and Tintamere curtailments? Government officials just decided to do something on their own? LOL!

It was not complaints from cruise ship passengers it was complaints from French residents and taxpayers and the responsibility of the government to enforce and pass laws that protect the people. Do they have laws against nudity in public places in your home town? Why shouldn't the French people be protected by the same system? Doesn't your government have a responsibility to enact laws that are in line with civilized behavior?

For example, Just because you used to hunt and take timber from the forest and then it became a National Park , should you still have the rights you had before the land was set aside for the protection of all including future generations.

Before the Natural Reserve was established, there was no rules at Tintemarre and it was little used. As use increased the Natural Reserve was put in charge of protecting the island and make sure it stayed pristine and useful to the majority people visiting. Before there were no turtles to be seen at Tintemarre. The grass beds were destroyed by anchors from yachts and the area where the mud was made was being exploited to unbelievable proportions.( the mud baths were stopped because people were getting sick from the mud!) The Nature Reserve has turned things around and now there are 100's of turtles to see and more every year. The grass beds are coming back well and the area where the mud was is healing and boats with more than 28 passengers are banned. These are good things and I commend them for doing what they do. All the boat operators pay a fee of 1.52 Euros per passenger to be able to use the Natural Reserve and this is money well spent to keep the place pristine. I understand that nudity does not affect the natural stability of the island but it does affect the general free use and enjoyment by the majority of visitors. Unfortunately things change and you have to too.

The majority of laws of this nature that are passed in the US are typically the result lobbying sponsored by someone to gain from the change such as a charter boat captain that caters to a group that typically are not on the island because of traditional things to do, just where the boat happened to dock for a few hours...

Same as for the enforcement of existing laws...

and the supporters of the changes always have a long list of talking points to back the actions that have nothing to do with what actually influenced the change...

I have no horse in this race but well put, Bob, and I'm sure you're right as to who did the complaining and why.

I haven't spoken to a lot of French families regarding their viewpoints on this but I have spoken to many West Indian Dutch and Ive been told time and again many of them take great exception to the practice of public nudity and particularly the attitude that it can be done anywhere if it can be gotten away with. We have an island acquaintance who felt forced to stop going to Happy Bay with his family, a place they'd enjoyed for generations, because he didn't feel comfortable bringing his family there and putting up with the antics they'd witnessed too many times over the recent years since it's more widespread discovery.

We don't always like the rules but we still have to respect and play by them. As visitors, it's not up to us to decide what is and what isn't acceptable or tolerated but to appreciate what we have and enjoy it as we can.

As one who knew Orient 'back in the day........' that would be the day when there was no development at all, few people to be seen and difficult roads to navigate to find and get to the area in the first place, sometimes you just have to accept that time brings change, and sometimes lots of it, so appreciate and enjoy what you have while you have it. And if the changes make the island intolerable or unenjoyable for your personal comfort zone, only you can make the choice to move on, but I feel pretty comfortable in saying for each and every one of us who decides to move on down the road, there will be five more coming to take our places. <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/handshake.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/handshake.gif" alt="" />

Funny, but we got yelled at when visiting a public german sauna for NOT being nude. We complied and put our suits in the locker.
Why are the French so against nudity on a remote island ?

I have no idea what you are trying to say but if it implies that I personally had anything to do with the changes or if I am going to benefit from the changes, you are really sorely mistaken. The first I heard about this change is right here. Nudity or not on Tintemarre, my business is not affected.

It's really too bad. Slowly the tourists that have enjoyed the ability to be nude while vacationing on SXM for so many years will stop coming.

Cuba has 4 resorts on two islands that have designated clothing optional sections on their beaches, spectacular beaches. They also all offer clothing optional catamaran charters through guest services at those resorts. Bad decisions and the end of the US embargo could hurt Saint Martin's tourism industry.

Jamaica has had nudist resorts for years with no impact on st martin.

All Inclusive packages from Montreal or Toronto to Cayo Largo or Cayo Santa Maria, Cuba are about $120-150 US a day pp. Jamaican CO resorts are almost double that and you're taking your life in your hands wandering off the resort. Google Cayo Largo Cuba beaches and tell me what the better deal is.

And this has what to do with nudity? The turtles don't like nudists? <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/jester.gif" alt="" />

Seriously, I can understand the mud baths, but the rest is nonsense. Before all the others started coming there, the 'majority' of tourists to Tintemarre were nudists. And they certainly never set out to restrict the general free use and enjoyment of textile visitors. It seems it was actually the other way around.

And the answer to 'why'? still hasn't been given by anyone, other than speculation.

Isn't it ALSO possible that diminished nudity could also HELP the St Martin tourist economy? It's possible people have avoided the island to avoid the nudity that is there. Read this thread on this board and it has been discussed that nudity is illegal on the Dutch side and yet the laws are flouted and ignored and nudity still occurs.

Watching this thread with interest. We didn't know about St. Martin back in the day. We discovered it in 2003. Before booking our trip, we did our research. For all of the people who are offended by the sight of nudity, there are other Caribbean destinations to go to. Part of the island's allure is that on certain beaches people can enjoy being naked. TAs far as what group of people are offended, there are 38 beaches. How does sunning or swimming naked harm anyone?




Think about this, Captain Phillip is losing his living because of an unfair law. To say "it is what it is", is a polite way of saying "tough s***! Deal with it!"
Secondly, history is filled with injustices towards others. Just cause it's the law, doesn't mean it's right. The folks who frequent and run Tiko-Tiko have ever right to challenge this law. The government is foolish. Running someone out of business who generates taxed income for the island. If the day ever comes that I no longer am allowed to enjoy the beach naked then neither is my money.

We were on the Tiko Tiko for the first time last year and enjoyed the trip.

I will continue to use that business regardless of the nude/not nude issue on Tintamarre.

Phillipe is a wonderful host and seems to operate his business very well. I am sure, with the continued loyal support of an existing customer base, he will be able to compete in the St Martin sailing excursion market.

All businesses have to adapt to government regulations and those that do adapt can continue to be successful.

Quote from lcote- "Isn't it ALSO possible that diminished nudity could also HELP the St Martin tourist economy? It's possible people have avoided the island to avoid the nudity that is there."

There are 37 beaches on the Dutch and French side of Saint Martin. If a visitor wants to "avoid the nudity" they have many options to do so.

I agree jameskleiss. We love the Tiko Tiko and will continue to sail with him on every visit. I certainly hope others will do the same.

Ah yes. Easy. Let's see...stay on the Dutch side.

Oh no. That doesn't work because well it is just "expected" that there can be nudity on Cupecoy.

Easy. Yes, because nudity is only allowed at the Club Orient Beach. Oh wait, no THAT doesn't work either. Because it is also "expected" on Baie Rouge and Happy Bay.
Oh yeah and Tintamarre too.
Have I missed ANYWHERE ELSE? It's not that easy to navigate just WHERE people CHOOSE to flout the rules and go walking around naked. It's not. And I have been going to St Maarten for 10+ years and each year, I learn where ELSE I shouldn't go if I don't want to see nudity.
I don't really CARE if I see it to be honest. But others MAY. And frankly, if someone is simply sunbathing nude, I probably wouldn't even notice.
But I WILL NEVER be able to get the memory of the short heavy guy POWER WALKING nude down the beach at Orient Beach my first trip to St Maarten. And I gotta tell you, I'd really LIKE to get that memory gone.

You saw a short heavy guy power walking nude on Saint Martin 10+ years ago and you're still thinking about him??? Wow.

It amazes me how Nude phobic people are. Out of 37 beaches 2 have full nudity (and even then not everyone is nude) and 35 have topless beaches. Do the 35 topless beaches bother you? There are no beaches where your not allowed to be topless. Maybe you should go to any of the British Islands where it's not allowed at all! But I guess, no you still come to St.Maarten/Martin? WHY??????? <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/duh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/duh.gif" alt="" />