CP really needs to do something about that beach

By opening up the beach to swimmers Cedar Point does indeed open them up to a liability claim if someone is injured/drowns in the water. While there is still a risk of injury in a smaller area, the risk is mitigated and greatly reduced when compared to a larger and deeper swimming area.

The beach resorts that you mentioned are on a different level than Cedar Point. Typically a beach resort's primary draw is the beach itself whereas Cedar Point's primary draw is the amusement park. The beach resorts and municipalities that allow swimming in large areas would be more willing to take on added risk than Cedar Point would. This is due to the fact that these resorts primary income and guest count is the beach itself.

There is no argument from me that CP cannot expand the swimming area as they definitely could do so. The costs associated with the expansion may not be worth it to them. Perhaps they do need additional life guard training as you mentioned, perhaps they would need more life guards stationed on the beach during swimming hours. More likely than not, Cedar Fairs corporate insurance underwriters, or internal risk management team would be the ones making the call about how large and how deep they are allowed to go.

By posting signs, and installing the rope line around the swimming area they have reduced their liability for anyone who ignores those rules and is injured. At the same time by having a smaller, and shallower swimming area they have further reduced their exposure to risk from those swimming inside the area.

Some people would be very, very surprised at how many policies are enacted at businesses due to risk management teams and insurance underwriting.

I totally agree that the swimming area isnt anything more than a kiddie pool. You cant enjoy the water when its just up to your knees. With everything the park is doing to enhance the guest experience on the beach, they are clearing missing this one.

The water around Cedar Point is fine and surprisingly clear. Its the water in the far western basin around Maumee Bay and Toledo that had the bad algae outbreak in August that shut the water off for for a good part of NW Ohio.

It probably is a risk management/cost policy as you state. But, if they open up the swimming area the beach may be a much bigger draw for hotel stays, which may make the extra cost worth it. When I was a kid in the late 60's, many people stayed at the Breakers because the beach was great for swimming, and then maybe enjoyed the park in the evening.

Totally agree Steve, they are missing the boat on this.

I completely agree that making it larger could indeed be a bigger draw for people. Perhaps with all of the attention the beach has received recently they will re-evaluate this policy.

I would like to see the swimming area opened up. After all, in the beginning Cedar Points draw was the beach, and the beach alone... Amazing that all of those people for the past 100+ years didn't need rope telling them where they could and could not swim. Somehow they, and Cedar Point managed to survive.

This is an interesting topic. I was under the impression that once you step foot into the water you're no longer on private property so I'm curious as to how CP limits swimming in what is considered public domain. The jurisdiction would fall to the State of Ohio at that point and would be regulated by the Ohio Department of Natural Resources. Does anyone know, is there some sort of a lease agreement for that area? Or is there a law regarding swimming off private property that extends to a certain point (and maybe that's why it doesn't go out as far as people would like?)

That is an interesting question. I know when I anchor off shore, as long as I stay in the water and not exit the water onto the beach, the CP lifeguards have no jurisdiction. However, if someone on the beach enters the water and tries to walk to a boat, the lifeguards chase them back either to the beach or the designated swimming area. The question is if there is a law backing that up or if that is just what they do based on CP policy.

I believe that the rule in Ohio is that public access to Lake Erie begins where the water normally stands. The state had been arguing at one point that it was the high water mark that determined where private property began. Ruling that its where the water normally stands was made by Ohio Supreme Court within the last 5 years.

Even though in the water is public property, access to the water from private property is subject to the rights of the private property owner (assuming you don't otherwise access the water from public property).

What rights Cedar Point has to determine what access its patrons have to the water is unclear to me. I guess they could argue that they have the right to grant access to their private property (the beach) to people who will use the water how they prefer (within the ropes). If you don't want to remain inside the ropes, they can deny you access to their private beach.

i dont understand this whole arguement, but i live in New Jersey. I go to ocean city new Jersey several times over the year were I'm charged for beach tags and such. There are rip currents and high waves. every year with storms coming up the coast people are pulled out and drown, but there is never a law suit.

They limit how far you can go out but its a lot further then most people think. I know lake erie is a lake that acts like a ocean but i can't see how someone could sue cedar point for someone drowning. i think they should open it up more, the more people that go to swim, the more it gets popular and the more people maybe stay at breakers(and not just for cp)
Also for the ppl who complain for what lake erie looks like, the atlantic ocean looks exactly the same, we're not in the caribbean with clear see the sand water

One of the problems according to lifeguards is distance. There's a lot of horizontal distance to cover before it gets deep, making coverage difficult. Disney's Castaway Cay has this issue, but they park lifeguards out on platforms in the water.

This reminds me.....I was at the park this Friday/Saturday and while riding giant wheel, we noticed two signs on the beach facing west along the stretch by windseeker and wicked twister. I didn't get a chance to read them because it got dark by the time we walked over by windseeker. Anyone know what they said?

There are signs down towards Sandcastle Suites end of the beach as well. If I remember correctly, they state no swimming is permitted in those areas.

Miss_Maverick07 said:
This reminds me.....I was at the park this Friday/Saturday and while riding giant wheel, we noticed two signs on the beach facing west along the stretch by windseeker and wicked twister. I didn't get a chance to read them because it got dark by the time we walked over by windseeker. Anyone know what they said?

I forget the specific wording but basically no guests past that point.

^ why? we always used to walk there. Are you sure that's what it said? wow. and one by sandcastle suites too? so you can't walk down there either?

You could probably walk on the beach but not into the water.

well if they're suddenly telling us we can't even walk there (at least) then I'm going to be pi$$ed. excuse my French on this site.....We were just discussing the tiny swim zone and now I see these "new" signs. what next? close the whole beach?
I hope no one drowned there though. :(

You can still walk the beach by Sandcastle Suites but your not supposed to enter the water. The beach area beginning by Wicked Twister towards the main parking lot has been restricted for years. There was a fence blocking that section for years, I think it may have to do with safety due to that area being used for fireworks on the 4th and during the beach party.

I just texted my friend who's a sweep and he said it says no alcohol past this point. that's what he remembers when he went on break today.

I knew you were allowed to walk (not swim) up to gatekeeper/twister. That fence was removed after windseeker was built...I know they put the jet skis there too. I was at the park this august too and those signs were not there. My hubby and I walked there as well as others.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe one of the marketed "selling points" of Sandcastle Suites the first year or two it or was open was a "private portion" of the beach. I believe that portion has now been closed for years.

Western Cruiser said:
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe one of the marketed "selling points" of Sandcastle Suites the first year or two it or was open was a "private portion" of the beach. I believe that portion has now been closed for years.

You are correct, the section of beach in front of Sandcastle looks awful most of the year now. Weed growth, debris, and black sediment build up. Extremely disappointing, I used to really enjoy that section because it tended to by much more adult friendly(less children).

Miss_Maverick07 said:
well if they're suddenly telling us we can't even walk there (at least) then I'm going to be pi$$ed.
I hope no one drowned there though. :(

Bit dramatic. When I think I want to spend time at the beach, the shores of Cedar Point don't come to mind. Most of Lake Erie for that matter doesn't either with it's nasty algae issue.