Allan Weisbecker, Can’t You Get along with Anyone?
By Dylan Jenkins
Primary builder of Pavones, Costa Rica, Daniel Fowlie and popular writer about Pavones Allan Weisbecker, formally friends, recently had a falling-out. When I interviewed Fowlie, he provided me with all the e-mail correspondences between Weisbecker and him. Upon reading them, I quickly learned that a dispute between them over some Pavones land precipitated their falling-out, a split which also reveals a stark contrast between their histories in Pavones. On the one hand, Dan Fowlie longs to return to Pavones and reclaim its land, which he principally owns and built (land called “Danny Land” by many)—the same land that was stolen from him and sold repeatedly with bogus titles during his exile from Costa Rica. On the other hand, Weisbecker curses Pavones on his way out of Costa Rica after selling property that originally belonged to “Danny Land.”i To unravel this fateful divergence between Pavones’s star-crossed pioneer and profiteer story teller, you should start where the story began.
When Daniel Fowlie found surfing’s Eden, he had worked his whole life in and on the sea, so he was able to fulfill his greatest
dreams by obtaining a stretch of Pavones’s heaven on earth. He had loved the ocean most of his life and known its ways and life forms as much as anyone—being a historic pioneer of California surfing, surfboard design, diving, and fishing. When Dan was just thirteen, he’d set out before dawn to skin-dive beneath Crystal Pier in Pacific Beach, collect from his bonanza of lobster-brimming barrels beneath, and sell a wealth of them to local restaurants before school started each morning. Through this practice, he earned more money than his airplane-engineer stepfather earned, and at thirteen (1946) Dan bought his own car, although cars were still rare just after WWII (1939-1945). This young entrepreneur, no doubt the envy of his classmates, continued to work as a fisherman for many years and later as a successful leather-business owner.
Dan and Chuck
Fowlie heard about Pavones as a fisherman from his surf-and-dive buddy Kenny Easton, who never quit talking about the waves in Pavones after he found them while harvesting copra along the southeast shorelines of Golfo Dulce and selling the coconuts in Golfito. Kenny Easton likely body surfed Pavones as a virgin wave.
When Dan, the successful water-and-business man, found the place of Kenny’s dreams in 1974, he did more than just buy Pavones and save it as his little vacation surf spot. He moved his whole family there and
devoted his life to his love for the place and its culture. Not surprisingly, the kid who had a knack for accomplishing so much also succeeded as an adult to build Pavones into a flourishing region for all its people. For over five years, he employed almost every Pavones local and built nearly every public amenity found in Pavones today. Locals await the day Fowlie returns to finish his improvements of the land.
Dan Fowlie at cantina luau
When the hard-working Fowlie became the envy of the world by sapiently acquiring Pavones’s emerald shores, he never quit working to make them a prosperous place for his family and Pavones natives. Though some of this paradise has been unjustly taken away from him by illegal land sales during his exile from Eden, he has no intentions of discarding his desire to benefit Pavones through hard work once more. He has already begun to win back all of his Pavones land in court, to secure his immanent return to the land and people he loves, and to implement his plan for restoring Pavones’s environment, economy, and public health and safety.ii
Contrast this Pavones pioneer with a man who became what he formally detested: another one of the “[. . .] many examples down here [in Pavones] of people selling land that is morally and ethically (and probably legally) Fowlie’s [. . .].”iii That is, Allan Weisbecker unscrupulously bought and sold a piece of Danny Land with illegal title, bragged to Fowlie about the profit,iv and shared nothing with its rightful owner—all just to say in an e-mail to Fowlie, “good fucking riddance” to Pavones.v
Though Weisbecker sold his land, Fowlie was willing to absolve Weisbecker of future lawsuits by surrendering future pursuits of the 3.1 hectares in court if Weisbecker wrote a series of articles that cleared up misinformation about Dan in Costa Rican newspapers and in Weisbecker’s own writing. In simple terms, this deal ensured that Dan got something for his property and that the people who bought the property from Allan for $550,000 after a long line of illegal sales would not have to reacquire their money from Allan when Fowlie reacquires the 3.1 hectares in court (just as he has been winning back many other properties in Pavones). Though Weisbecker denies that he verbally agreed to write articles for Dan in exchange for Fowlie’s cooperation, he also admits in an e-mail to Dan that the Tico Times refused to “[. . .] print a letter [he] wrote to them defending [Dan] [. . .]”vi—a fact which exhibits that Weisbecker agreed to write for Fowlie in some capacity. As for Dan, he has simply maintained what he considers their verbal agreement. All he ever wanted for the little piece of land taken from him was a series of articles, and he continued to believe that Allan would live up to his word and help him by writing them; he writes to Weisbecker, “[. . .] although we have not sat down and discussed the text of how many articles and to whom, I’m sure it will be forthcoming.”vii
Yet, Weisbecker never helps himself by writing the articles that Dan demands in exchange for not legally pursuing the land. Instead of reasonably fulfilling his end of the bargain and ethically fulfilling his end of the friendship by doing Dan this favor, Weisbecker brags about how he profited on Danny Land: “i’m netting 350k, with an investment of about 200 total, so not bad. being a writer, i see this as a bit of a cushion [. . .]. having said that: if you have a problem and need a few bucks here in CR I would be glad to help you. as you know, i’m more than talk [sic].”viii In retrospect to Weisbecker’s offer, however, he submitted little more than talk. Fowlie was willing to accept Weisbecker’s offer for financial assistance, even though Fowlie never forgot about their verbal agreement. Fowlie asked Weisbecker to assist his land defense by giving Fowlie’s attorney Franklin Morera $40,000. In response, Weisbecker claimed that he already gave Dan $10,000 dollars for Dan, saying that he might at best be able to help Dan with “7,500” more.ix Regarding the $10,000 in question, Weisbecker actually used it to purchase legal services from Franklin Morera to stop the road being built by Mark Sherman through “Allan’s” property. Morera did his job very effectively, nearly having Sherman’s tractor driver arrested, so Allan got what he paid for.
In fact, Weisbecker’s small offers of assistance turned to threats when he viciously writes in an e-mail to Fowlie, giving the e-mail the subject “back to the clink[,]” that he has “decided to put [Fowlie] back in jail, where [he] belong[s]”x—what a cruel thing to say to someone, especially to the unjustly banished lover of Pavones who dreams of returning to prosper the land. Given this dramatic shift in Weisbecker’s demeanor, Dan finally grew doubtful that Weisbecker ever had any intentions of writing the articles. Yet, Fowlie graciously continued to exhibit willingness to compromise with Weisbecker: Fowlie writes, “I don’t know why you are in denial about just doing what you agreed to do. It seems it would be so much easier if you would just hold up your end of our verbal agreement and we would have no more ill feelings. The title of your new book should be Why can’t we all just get along? [sic]”xi But after more of the same e-mail belligerence from Weisbecker, Fowlie grew to consider Weisbecker just another land shark who (like Allen Nelson, Dan’s former attorney) profited on Danny Land under the guise of being Fowlie’s friend.
If Weisbecker wants to befriend Fowlie, he should at the very least rescind the falsities about Fowlie in his articles, like the claim in “Night at the Cantina” that the DEA was involved in Fowlie’s case, which they were not, and the slanderous suggestion in “The Investigation” that Fowlie bought Pavones land “with his ill-gotten gains”xii—when, in fact, Fowlie bought the land with money acquired in the profits and sale of his multimillion-dollar leather business, Leather Gypsy Inc. Journalists and land buyers alike should always deal with facts instead of fictions. In the case of the land thieves’ deceptive titles, may Fowlie continue to have success in separating legal facts from fictions. In the case of Daniel Fowlie’s land holdings and legendary history, the facts are simply better than fictions.
i. Weisbecker writes, “dan, my house deal is done, i’m out of pavones in every way you can name. good fucking riddance [sic].” Weisbecker, Allan. [E-mail]. Subject line: “one thing or another.” Message to Daniel Fowlie. 18 February 2006. [Cited 1 February 2008].
ii. See Mendez, Justice. “Why the Banished King Should Be Let Back into Pavones.” (Published on this site 1 February 2008).
iii. Weisbecker, Allan. “Dan Fowlie Returns, Part 1.” [Internet]. [Cited 1 February 2008]. Available at <http://www.aweisbecker.com/dsp/authors-corner/articles/dan-fowlie-returns-part-1 />.
iv. “i’m netting 350k, with an investment of about 200 total, so not bad. being a writer, i see this as a bit of a cushion [. . .]. having said that: if you have a problem and need a few bucks here in CR I would be glad to help you. as you know, i’m more than talk [sic].” Weisbecker, Allan. [E-mail]. Subject line: “still in CR.” Message to Daniel Fowlie. 25 January 2006. [Cited 1 February 2008].
v. Weisbecker writes, “dan, my house deal is done, i’m out of pavones in every way you can name. good fucking riddance [sic].” Weisbecker, Allan. [E-mail]. Subject line: “one thing or another.” Message to Daniel Fowlie. 18 February 2006. [Cited 1 February 2008].
vi. Weisbecker writes, “Dan [. . .] although i never agreed to specifically do a ‘series of articles’ for CR papers, i tried [. . .] [sic].” Weisbecker, Allan. [E-mail]. Subject line: “Fwd: more of the same.” Message to Daniel Fowlie. 27 February 2006. [Cited February 1].
vii. Fowlie, Daniel. [E-mail]. Subject line: “In response to your threat.” Message to Allan Weisbecker. 26 June 2006. [Cited 1 February 2008].
viii. Weisbecker, Allan. [E-mail]. Subject line: “still in CR.” Message to Daniel Fowlie. 25 January 2006. [Cited 1 February 2008].
ix. Weisbecker, Allan. [E-mail]. Subject line: “one thing or another.” Message to Daniel Fowlie. 18 February 2006. [Cited 1 February 2008].
x. (My alteration of pronouns). Weisbecker writes, “fowlie, I’m [sic] decided to put you back in jail, where you belong. [. . .] how would you like to serve the rest of your term on the RICO conviction for committing a crime while on parole? maybe some of the guys at the FBI would like to see that [sic].” Weisbecker, Allan. [E-mail] Subject line: “back to the clink.” Message to Daniel Fowlie. 25 June 2006. [Cited 1 February 2008].
xi. Fowlie, Daniel. [E-mail]. Subject line: “In response to your threat.” Message to Allan Weisbecker. 26 June 2006. [Cited 1 February 2008].
xii.Weisbecker, Allan. “The Investigation.” [Internet]. [Cited 1 February 2008]. Available at <http://www.banditobooks.com/ezine/investigation-begins>.