END OF AN ERA

The end of an era….The Government of Saint-Martin has decreed Arrete no001-06 no more nudity on Tintamarre. On our last cruise to Tintamarre Capt Philippe was approached by the Reserve Naturel and told no more nudity on Tintamarre. On the boat and around in the water ok..but a swimsuit or pareo to stroll the beach… we hope that Club O can convince them to grant an excemption for TIKO TIKO on the grounds of acquired rights over 16years…

Wow. Now that's sad..

I know I know....first the mud baths now this....

Do you think it will also apply to Green Cay? Isn't it part of the reserve also?

Very sad indeed ......... had some fabulous trips on TIKO TIKO to Tintamarre. <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/cry.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/cry.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/cry.gif" alt="" />

Green Cay is part of the Reserve.

So pointless...

Possibly a change to Happy Bay could be done?

This does not Bode well for Phillip.
What the hell could they be thinking?

BobandJeana

What a shame! We have some great memories of our trips to Tintamarre on the Tiko Tiko. Seems so pointless to do this. <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/duh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/cloud.gif" alt="" />

Very sad news. We loved our Tiko Tiko cruises to Tintemarre. Hopefully, they'll change their minds. But, for now, one must wonder what's next. <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/cloud.gif" alt="" />

I certainly would be interested in hearing the justification for this, as it makes no sense..

Perhaps people on other boats who go there for excursions were complaining. The squeaky wheel always gets the grease! It was families on Disney cruise ships that complained about nudity at Orient Beach and look what happened there.

We're staying at Clubo in March. Planning on doing the Tiko Tiko (again). Hopefully Philippe will have alternatives to
Tintamarre. Have thoroughly enjoyed prior trips.

No, I highly doubt it, the 9 boats we work with, none of us have complained, Bob knows Captain Phillipe personally so please don't include us.

Orient Beach was more about local French families complaint from what I have been told.

<img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/handshake.gif" alt="" />

Yes, that's what we were told too.

I never said the boat captains complained. I said the [color:"blue"]people[/color], meaning passengers on the boats complained.I am certain the captains would not complain; sorry if you read this wrong. <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/handshake.gif" alt="" />

Cruise ship people haven't any control over excursions not sold on the ship, the excursion to Tintamarre is sold mainly through private companies like ours through the internet, the passengers would complain to Bob not to the ship. And Bob has never complained to anyone.
He also explains to families when they ask about topless on the beaches, that you are in a foreign country, the adults are more concerned than the children & most clients from cruise ships still book the excursion.
<img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/handshake.gif" alt="" />

So Lyn, do you have a theory as to why this action was taken?

We were as surprised as you to see the post, for now there will only be second hand information swirling. We don't want want to be included in any misinformation. <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/handshake.gif" alt="" />

And Carol, I highly doubt the French Reserve or whoever else is involved gives any thought about cruise ship people's concerns. Believe me.

I have to say I am not a nudist and have no interest but this is very sad to me. This is very much a part of what st. Maarten is about and I have always loved that aspect of being there that you accept everyone as long as they are hurting no one. Very sad indeed! Further trying o sterilize our world

Not that I am into nudism or naturism, but I find it ironic, to say the least, that "Naturism" is prohibited in a "Natural" Reserve...
However, to answer Carol's question, this action was taken in the pure line of government policies about nudity in "public". The Reserve Naturelle is turning as a bunch of obsessed people about regulations... They are evicting "Tropical Wave" from the Galion, evicting "Butterfly Farms" (which BTW was stupidly fined last week for not have special license and permit to handle "wild animals" (no kidding...), they are taking a bunch of action to sit their "new" authority recognized by the Government.. I am totally for protection of Nature, and I certainly do not want the French side to become a concrete jungle like the Dutch side, I am condoning protection and reservation of nature, but IMHO there are some limit to the stupidity of the action taken to achieve this goal! stupid, scilly and sad

Here is another example of government interfering with normal business and practices.

The other day I was approached by Dutch side immigration officers and questioned about what we do. I told them we have snorkeling excursions to the French side,. I was told that I now have to pass through immigration clearance in and out of the dutch side and pay a government fee to go to the French side. This is totally ridiculous and is totally against the treaty of Concordia signed in 1648 between the Dutch and French side guaranteeing free passage between the French and Dutch sides. I told the officers this but they were adamant that this is the law . I told them that we are no different than a taxi taking someone from the dutch side to the French side but they insisted they are right. If they push the issue I'm getting a lawyer! Obviously no one knows what they are doing or saying.

I wonder how the Govt can enforce the nudity ban on an uninhabited deserted Island. Are the Gendarmes going to make routine patrols by boat to check??? They cannot possibly have the manpower or resources to monitor the activity on Tintamarre. If they have the extra manpower to do this, wouldn't it be better spent targeting the robberies and auto burglaries that are happening?
Unless they act on a complaint of a passing boat, I just don't see how this could happen. When looking at Tintamarre from Orient Beach, you can't even see someone on the Beach much less if they are wearing a bathing suit or not.

Sad sad sad

Not only Gendarmes (which BTW have a marine patrol) can give fines for this kind of issues, but the Reserve Naturelle's Officers (equivalent to "Park Rangers") which are paid for that, beside more, by the organisation : "monitoring activities within the Natural Reserve"
<img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/handshake.gif" alt="" />

@soualigacapt Back in Oct. there was this thread Parliament Member Responds to French Border Issues in which trouble was apparently brewing with the borders... maybe negotiations haven't been going so well... putting you in the middle!

Ok, now what can we do about it as he economic engine, this must stop! I am willing to do whatever I can if there are viable options!

Stupid and unenforceable. Hopefully sanity will prevail.

How does this action preserve nature???<img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/cloud.gif" alt="" />
Time for the government to deal with the more serious issues on the island. <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/duh.gif" alt="" />
Hope common sense eventually prevails.

If you want to be nude in public why not just stick to Club Orient since it is really the only approved legal beach to be totally nude in St Martin. Tintamarre is visited by many fully clothed boat excursions and total nudity isn't always appropriate nor appreciated by many visitors. Same as walking down Orient Beach off the Club O boundary. Why force this life style on another beach frequented by fully clothed people when you know it's not acceptable, legal or appreciated. Personally I can care less if nudes are walking around but I can see others viewpoints that don't want it.

I have no clue about any political decision on the nudity ban at Tintamarre between the Reserve Naturelle and the government. Since the Reserve fosters people appreciation and use when environmental protection allows, it would be good to let the Reserve folks know your interest and request their support in having the government ban rescinded. Director of the Reserve… [email]nicolas.maslach@rnsm.org.[/email] If you are at SXM, stop by their office at Anse Marcel. The Reserve Naturelle deserves everyone’s support; the government with this decision? … Jim

Force nude lifesyle, what are you talking about. It has been commonly accepted there for 20+ years. I don't get this whole nude being upset thing. So if a women or man wear the smallest of thongs and go topless it's OK. Tell the people before they visit that they may encounter nude people and let them decide if they want to visit there.

<img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Thumbsup.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Thumbsup.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Thumbsup.gif" alt="" />

You got that right! They couldn't care less. This being said, I'd like to know the reason. It makes no sense whatsoever.

On first take, your comment seems to make sense. However, St Martin in known for allowing nudity in certain area's and beaches, most people understand and accept it. To change the policy now will only hurt tourism. For those who are offended, I suggest they go to those area's that fit their style, rather then expected others to adjust to theirs.

The Reserve patrol every day and the other forces occasionally...and I have posted a photo taken an hour ago on Tintamarre of the official sign on our facebook page...

I don't know the full history of all this so maybe I'm off base but I was under the impression that the Club O beach was the only place where full nudity was officially allowed. I thought that in all the other places it pops up, it was merely tolerated and you were subject to being told to cover up at any time. Is that true?

If so, then it looks like they are simply enforcing the rules that are already in place. Look at this this way. Say I'm a tourist who decides to avoid the full nudity of Club O because it goes against my morals or whatever. So, I decide to go to Tintamarre. But, much to my surprise, there are nudies there! Isn't that against the law? Aren't they supposed to keep it to the Club O beach. What? I should have somehow just known that they allow it there? WTF? Now my kids are scarred for life. :-)

The argument that "it's always been tolerated" holds some weight but it would always be trumped by the actual laws in any debate wouldn't it? I also think it's a bit of a stretch to presume that the tourists will stop coming if they ban nudity.

I don't care one way or the other frankly.

Unless they ban toplessness... *That* would be cause for a revolution!!

For something that was decreed just yesterday, it didn't take long for a fancy sign to get dragged across the bay and planted in the sand! Whatever happened to Island Time?
Tiko-Tiko's - Tintamarre Sign Photo

Scarred for life because a kid saw a nude person..are you kidding? Are any of those same kids playing violent video games, sexting, or seeing Viagra commercials or just watching the violent news. Kids are not scarred by nudity and usually within a few seconds totally ignore it. It would not be a surprise to visit location where there is nudity as you would be forewarned..

Tintamarre is uninhabited, nudity has always been practiced there. There are no 'residents' to offend. For years, Tiko was the only boat that went there. Nudity or not has NO effect on maintaining the 'natural' state of the island. Ban boats from going there, or making campfires or whatever, or other things that actually have some EFFECT on the balance of nature. Banning nudity there is just plain government meanness, for no real purpose.

Totally enforceable. You can be arrested and convicted as a sex offender. How about that? Isn't that what would happen in your home beach if you walked around in public place butt naked? No one really had a problem when you were naked at Tintemarre when it was unused and pristine but things have changed and because of the increased use, it is now considered inappropriate. No one would mind if you sunbath nude but when people flaunt the nudity on others walking up and down the beach, it is simply different. Now days the naked walkers on the beach at Tintemarre are the laughing stock of the textiled users of the beach. If you only could see how ridiculous it looks! Sorry, this is from someone who was an avid naturist back in the days. Things have changed now and be glad you still have the beach at club O. There it works. A little discretion can go a long way

There were also several other boats that did similar c/o trips to Tintamarre before Tiko Tiko. I believe one was called the Sigried (sp) and operated by 2 Australian guys. I can also remember an English woman who operated the boat we took to Tintamarre on our 1st visit in 1985. So, this has been a tradition for at least 30 years. For those who say "why can't they just stay on Club O's beach?", I reply it's for the same reason that those wearing swimsuits enjoy different scenery for a change. We've always enjoyed our c/o trips to Tintamarre, and hate to see them end. Undoubtedly, this will have an adverse effect on Philippe's business. Not many people will want to leave Club O's beach and don a swimsuit (we don't even pack them) just to walk a beach on an uninhabited island. <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Mad.gif" alt="" />

Geez Bob - what got you so fired up on this? Does it affect business one way or the other?

Of course the Arrete is enforceable - it has been enforceable since January 9, 2006 - and operators like Philippe will have little choice but to comply unless they get some different message. As to arrests and sex offender status that is obviously an extreme worst case scenario that has very little likely relevance to tourists. Do you seriously think that the Maritime unit of the Gendarmerie will be out there making arrests of tourists, as opposed simply to asking people to cover-up?

What I think is most interesting about what has happened are the comments of the Reserve folks to Philippe that it is OK to be nude on boat or in water. It suggests to me that the Reserve is not behind the new sign or the change - I would guess the sign and new policy comes from the Prefet - but I know nothing beyond posts here.

All of Orient Beach used to be welcoming to nudists. Then some big businesses got involved and decided to limit nudity to one end of the beach. The same seems to be now occurring on Tintamarre. You used to go out there an never see another boat. Why are nudists unhappy with having the areas they used to be able to enjoy (and which they are mostly responsible for the popularity of) taken away? Is that a serious question?

Personally knowing the guys from the Natural Reserve , they are nice guys and really don't want to make waves. But they are just having to enforce the law. Again, there is a difference between swimming off the boat naked and being naked on the boat than walking up and down the beach in front of the people not into nudity. It's much less obvious. We had a boat in Great South Bay LI NY for 20 years in the 80's and 90's and my wife was topless all the time and no one even noticed.
Nudity does not affect my business at all but I do get questions about the fact that they may see nudity and some are concerned about this for the children.
Of course I explain that kids are the least affected by seeing topless and occasional nudity. it's the parents that make a big deal. If it is explained to children in a mature manner that nudity does not equate to sexuality, they will be come more worldly and isn't one of the reasons we travel to foreign places is to see something we don't see at home. This is really geared more toward topless than full nudity which we don't really see that often even on Tintemarre. The Tiko Tiko people are for the most part respectful and stick to their umbrellas and around the boat. Occasionally a customer of mine will swim to the beach and walk down to the Tiko Tiko people, strip down and hang out for a while. Then there are the occasional basic park" raincoat flashers" set loose on the beach that have to flaunt the fact that they are nude!
To be honest it is a bit uncomfortable with a boat fill of families when a 300 lb nude guy goes walking down the beach. I fell embarrassed for him! If he only knew how ridiculous he looks. I know it is not supposed to be about body image and all but people are people and they laugh or are disgusted.

I really do not know any boat operator going to Tintemarre that has complained and they are the only ones bringing cruse ship people to the beach.

As Philipe said, it is an "end of an era!" Good or bad it is what it is.

I agree that it is the "walking the beach" that causes the most trouble. I always appreciate your posts and the information you provide.

<img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Clapping.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Clapping.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Clapping.gif" alt="" />

But, then, the 300 lb. guy would look less objectionable if he were wearing a Speedo? I know the officers are only doing their jobs, but as Jenni says, nudists, naturists or even textiled people aren't happy when something they look forward to is suddenly taken away. And, before someone says it, we're only visitors, "they" make the rules. I get that. The world is changing, and not always for the better. We've been going there for 30 years, many on here for even longer. And, I can remember many c/o options that have been taken away. Which makes one worry "What's next?". If I were mortified at the prospect of seeing a naked stranger, I wouldn't go where I knew they were, But, that's just me.

In my opinion a 300 Lb naked guy walking on a beach with clothed people is an exhibitionist and a 300 Lb guy in a speedo is a guy in a speedo, Big difference!

Unfortunately, we can agree to disagree, My friends, family are not going to stop going to Tintamarre because we may see naturists, nor will the other French families that come on weekends & holidays.

There was a time 30 years ago when Orient was different & there was only Club Orient, today you have many local families sharing the beach. Should they not go to the beach because they don't want to see naturists walking up & down the beach at Orient?

We will be picnicking there tomorrow with French friends, there will be many other French families enjoying their weekend as well.

The conversation started this evening in Marigot at dinner this evening with friends it will be an interesting conversation continued tomorrow at Tintamarre. <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/handshake.gif" alt="" />

You textiles have got to get over the idea that anyone else is dressing, or undressing, for your benefit. The 300lbs guy isn't interested in you looking at him (if he did care, he most likely wouldn't be so large), and therefore cannot be described as an "exhibitionist". He's just someone who doesn't like getting sand in his suit. How in the world is that harmful to anyone else?

<img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Clapping.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Clapping.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Clapping.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Clapping.gif" alt="" />

Perhaps the 300-lb man isn't as much an exhibitionist as the people staring at him are voyeurs.

Agree 100% <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Clapping.gif" alt="" />
I guess we should "pass inspection" before we parade up and down the beach nude to make sure we look good enough to go nude <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/duh.gif" alt="" />

Well gosh Bob, I bet whoever that was really cares that you thought he looked ridiculous. I sure hope I look good enough to meet your standards of beauty. Maybe you can tell me if my wife is attractive enough to be seen in public, too.

I tell you what, I will make sure not to ever book your charter so you don't have to worry about my appearance. As an added bonus, I won't have to listen to any of your pompous lectures.

[color:"blue"]lets keep it civil and without threats or this discussion will be closed.
[/color]

I'm just glad I had the opportunity to enjoy Orient Beach and by extension, St. Martin, "back in the day".
Its seems to me corruption of the place has removed much of the charm that used to attract us there.
I think they can forget the sales pitch of "The Happiest Island"...that is a fraud now.
But, thanks for the memories. It was great while it lasted.

We are also ones who have enjoyed the island for 25 years and sad to see the end. What has made it so special was not being corralled into the Club O beach. Spent many wonderful days on Tintamarre, Green Cay and other beachs on the island. This is what made St. Martin so special. I imagine soon respectful nude use of Happy Bay will be next to end. 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.

Unfortunately when you add up the naturist dollars we barely are a few drops in the bucket so our opinions really don't count and worse not even respected.

I have to tell you, it would seem that the Club O people always seem to THINK they are being stared at. I cannot tell you the number of times on this board I hear those who go nude saying how they think the people from the cruise ships are there to gawk.
Sometimes, people just like to walk the beach. I have NO desire to see the nudists nor am I there to gawk. The ship goes both ways between voyeurs and exhibitionists.
I couldn't care less about nude sunbathing in areas where I know I will encounter it.
But it really does irk me when I go somewhere NOT expecting to see it (IE ANYWHERE on the Dutch side where it is ILLEGAL) and encounter it. I don't care if it is EXPECTED on Cupecoy. It's on the Dutch Side and ILLEGAL.

I wonder how people would feel if I started taking pictures around Club O saying that I thought it was "expected".

<img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Clapping.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Clapping.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Clapping.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Clapping.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Clapping.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Clapping.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Clapping.gif" alt="" />

1. Naturists should care that they are a 'laughingstock'? Don't think so.

2. Sex offender? Doubtful?

3. 5 years ago you could go to Tintamarre on the Tiko Tiko and see maybe one other commercial boat. Now it appears others want in on Tiko's business and their 'textile' customers are uncomfortable with nudity. French palms greased. Stupid law. Greed ruins everything.

You are 100% incorrect, no one is greasing anyone's palms. That is ridiculous but you will believe anything I guess.

The French government could care less about the textile tourists on Tintamarre.

20-30 years ago there was no Orient Village, there was Club O & a sprinkle of beach cafés. Today there are French families that live & work & they aren't happy, maybe they should move back to mainland France so you can have your beach back?

What about the companies that offer both nude cruises & or textile cruises to Tintamarre. I wonder if they would agree with what you claim & think palms are buying greased. I know a few companies & we are all friends. Interesting.

C'est la Vie.

Please don't tell us that cruise passengers go to Club O just to walk on this specific beach. They could very well walk on the other side of Orient if they are uncomfortable at the sight of naked people. This would imply of course that they wouldn't mind seeing topless women wearing strings (and some men too).

As far as taking pictures of naked people, this is clearly a violation of their privacy.
I don't violate anyone's privacy when I lay naked on the beach at Club Orient so I expect everyone to respect mine.
Respectfully.

Huh? Was it not clear that I was playing the role of the outraged, over-protective parent? No reason to reply and argue, that person isn't really here to debate you.

With all the talk of government corruption and incompetence on this board, is it surprising that one would assume some euros changed hands? We here in the US know who pays for the laws that get passed - we just call it lobbying. No offense meant to anyone specific or any specific boat operators. BTW I wasn't aware any French citizens live and work on Tintamarre since it is uninhabited. <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Grin.gif" alt="" />

When you elect to be nude in public you have no expectation of privacy.

<img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Clapping.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Clapping.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Clapping.gif" alt="" />

Under French law, you have the absolute right to not have your picture taken without your permission, it doesn't matter whether you are nude or not.

Nude is not the point, I expect people to respect my privacy also when I'm dressed.

@Carol: Great minds think alike ..... at the same time.

I don't have a dog in this fight. But I do have an honest question.

There is another thread, called "at what age" did people discover. In it, Jeff Berger links to his everythingsxm site, where his story describes being in St Bart's ogling two 20 year old girls. Then the fear of arousal at Orient. These two situations seem fraut with overtones of sexuality. Or is it as individual as people? The reasons people chose naturism?

Perhaps you should read that story again. Nowhere does Jeff say HE was ogling anyone. It was, in fact, the so-called 'conservative' person walking the beach who came back and mentioned the girls. <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/duh.gif" alt="" />, as is often the case. Jeff simply said they looked comfortable and that he and his wife decided to try it.

I can assure you that most people who choose naturism do not do so for sexual reasons. And I can also tell you that in all our years of going to the Club O section of Orient Beach, we have never noticed any one of the naturists 'aroused'. I'm sure it happens from time to time, but not often. We see that a LOT more on the textile side of the beach where someone thinks the little string they wear over their privates prevents that. But then again, naturists usually keep their eyes where they belong.

The fact that you felt embarrassed for him, when he obviously did not feel embarrassed for himself, because he was simply enjoying a walk down the beach, says a lot more about YOUR character than about his.

Irks you to see anyone nude on the Dutch side..the places you are talking about have been de facto nude beaches for over 35 years. You know that and if it irks you, why are you visiting them knowing there might be nudes? Name me one person who has been dangered by a nude person. How about enforcing laws like getting all the crazy scooter guys off the road who endanger everyone and clean up the drug dealers for the sake of the residents and tourists alike!

Will never get my buisness.

OP, where do you go from here? One of the big selling points of the Tiko Tiko is enjoying a day sans clothing at Tintamarre. If you do not come up with an alternative such as Happy Bay or the other side of Pinel then you are sunk. No pun intended. <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Spook.gif" alt="" />

It looks like Phillippe can still sail to Tintamarre but he has to tell his guests that they have to cover up if they set foot on land.

On my first few visits to St Maarten, I had NO idea that nudity was permitted on Cupecoy. Oh wait, it ISN'T.

As for it being illegal to take pictures, it is also illegal to be nude on the dutch side. So, why is ONE perfectly okay in your mind and the other not?

And btw, I don't walk the beach to Club O anymore because frankly, I don't care to see nudity. However, when I DID walk that beach, I can ASSURE you it was NEVER to see the nudists as I have to tell you, MOST of what I saw really NEEDED to be covered up.

We feel the same as Carlos II - "back in the day" we really looked forward to visiting St. Martin when we felt comfortable being nude on the Tiko and all of Orient Beach - but is seems the folks living on the island have ruined that - our last two visits have not been the same as the first 9 trips so we don't have any desire to spend our 5K or spend our valuable vacation time there again in the near future - with the attitude of the island folks why should we? But, thanks St. Martin, for the memories- it was fun while it lasted.

Not permitted? Cupecoy has been nude since the early 80's. Never seen 1 policeman in 30 years of going there ask anyone to cover up. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Do all nudist look like super models, no, but who cares. They are enjoying themselves and the freedom to be without clothes. Maybe I don't like the clothes your wearing. Should I ask you to change? What is so offensive to you to see someone nude? The offensive part is the commercialization of the beach at Club O with no open area!

<img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Thumbsup.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Thumbsup.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Thumbsup.gif" alt="" />

You might want to learn to respect the island folks attitude. Its their island and you are just a visitor.

There are many reason why and why not to be nude. In reality that has nothing do do with this particular circumstance.

The reserve is the reserve to some extent. It has been used long before other business interest had an effect, not that is an exception, but that does not mean it is expected either. That does not make it right or wrong, either, it is a change!

SXM has and still is noted for the nude availabilities. Yes things change, for the good or worse is a matter of opinion. Places change, that is a fact of life everywhere.

This is not about voyerism, nudism, parading around or anything else really. When it is done, this particular situation is about a no problem for over many, many years, and now it is a problem for a part of the people that vist the particular reserve (it appears, but not for sure).

Both side have legit complaints, but the tone of this thread is not about legit complaints, but getting into something that is not, that is something else. And that is NOT RIGHT! There are legit opinions on both sides and each side need to ACTUALLY AND REALLY LISTEN to each other as both have legitmate and valid concerns, neither is absolute right or wrong.

This is a major change in policy, so yes there are changes that effect tourism and business on the island. Again things change everywhere.

If I had to make a guess and that is all it is (a guess) -- this change was made on a whim to some extent. If you want to protect a reserve then do it unilaterally and that will effect many other operations. But that is not was currently being reported - maybe that will change, who knows?

However the this thread is not now being about the situation, but something else completely!

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="" />

TWO beaches have full nudity? Two? Which TWO? My understanding is there is ONE where it is legal.

What I have learned from this thread is that there are some nudists who don't give a damn about laws.

I give up trying to get those same people to try to understand another viewpoint. It is obviously a pointless argument. Go be nude somewhere it is against the law but don't come on here and talk about how rude it is to be taking pictures while you are being an exhibitionist anyway. If taking pictures of nudists is illegal, it ought to be remembered that it is also illegal to be nude in places on St Martin.

Can't beleive this thread has lasted this long ....

Cupecoy near the fallen rock area has been de facto nude for 35 years. You never answered the question, does topless bother you? I never said a word about pictures. If something like nudity bothered me so much, so would topless. Why would you continue visiting?

Agreed, I think it's time..