Riperian Law in TX advice

[Ætheling]

Was told by a friend of mine that in The Woodlands they have run a cable with a no trespass sign across the mouth of Bear Branch that we used to canoe up and fish for decades. Isnt that illegal? Its navigable fishable waters. Lets make sure we cut off what little nature is left to kids and teenagers so they can go drive the streets high because they are bored.

I have contacted the GW office as I intend on taking my children up that creek one day. Some private land owners or businesses rights do not trump what is afforded to us by law.

[Ætheling]

Tests for Navigability in Fact

Texas courts have sometimes found navigability as a result of capacity for commercial use. See, e.g., Jones v. Johnson, 25 S.W. 650, 651 (Tex.Civ.App. 1894, writ ref’d) and Orange Lumber Co. v. Thompson, 126 S.W. 604, 606 (Tex.Civ.App. 1910, no writ). The Texas Supreme Court in Selman v. Wolfe, 27 Tex. 68, 71 (1863) (quoted on p. 1) has recognized a broad concept for navigable streams that of “common highways of trade and travel.”

The case of Welder v. State, 196 S.W. 868, 873 (Tex.Civ.App. Austin 1917, writ ref’d) has discussed the concept underlying the “navigable in fact” tests:


Behind all definitions of navigable waters lies the idea of public utility. Waters, which in their natural state are useful to the public for a considerable portion of the year are navigable. Boats are mentioned in the decisions because boats are the usual means by which waters are utilized by the public, and commerce is usually mentioned because carrying produce and merchandise is the usual public demand for such waters. But floating logs has frequently been held to be navigation, and hunting and fishing, and even pleasure boating, ha[ve] been held to be proper public uses.

[Briar Friar]

Navagability determination lies with the Texas General Land Office...loosely determined by a measure 30ft wide at mouth.

Laws are different throughout Texas depending upon which Land Bill the property and stream were initially surveyed under...in the 1800s. Small Land Bill was one...and there are others.

Call the GLO...to find the real deal...nice folk. The GW wont necessarily know. He/she will have to do the same thing if not known.

[simek]

This is common on the Guadalupe west of Kerrville. Touch subject with ranchers, for sure. The law is about as clear as mud.

[Tuffbroadhead]

The navigable waters information is pretty simple in Texas, If the "stream bed" is 30ft or wider to the 50% gradient line it is public access even if it is seasonal and dry.

Please understand that some people have no idea how gradient lines work , from stream bed/waters edge to the area that vegetation grows is the gradient line by definition, so back off of that by 50% and you have public access, it has ZERO to do with flood plain or high water lines.

[Johnny Dangerr]

I got in a huge fight in Montgomery county over this 25 years ago. They were charging home owners tax to the middle of a creek. Had to get the state Attorney General to tell them to stand down.
Navigable is defined by {sitting on a log and floating down the stream}
Judge told me to never appear in her court again.

[Ætheling]

Im hearing about this second hand so will go by today if I have time and verify the cable is still there and what signage is being used. Our kids are going to have no use of nature within a hundred miles of the city before we know it. No wonder all these kids are having a mental health crisis. Artificial society is destroying us. Kids need to get in the woods and streams.

[bowhuntertex]

I can tell you the Blanco river is privately owned. Each landowner along the river owns to the middle. That being said you can legally float down the river, you just can't stop and hang out anywhere. As long as you are floating and moving there are no issues. I would be willing to bet this creek is much like the Blanco.

But I do see landowners sides to not wanting people on the river/creeks by their property as lots of people like to get out and walk around or leave a bunch a trash.

[Ætheling]

I can tell you the Blanco river is privately owned. Each landowner along the river owns to the middle. That being said you can legally float down the river, you just can't stop and hang out anywhere. As long as you are floating and moving there are no issues. I would be willing to bet this creek is much like the Blanco.

But I do see landowners sides to not wanting people on the river/creeks by their property as lots of people like to get out and walk around or leave a bunch a trash.

This is fishing from a canoe or kayak and no landowners along the creek. You get out of the canoe in that mess and you are gonna be tangling with a lot snakes. Never seen more cottonmouths and banded water snakes in such concentrations in my life. Fishing is good and its beautiful.

[bowhuntertex]

This is fishing from a canoe or kayak and no landowners along the creek. You get out of the canoe in that mess and you are gonna be tangling with a lot snakes. Never seen more cottonmouths and banded water snakes in such concentrations in my life. Fishing is good and its beautiful.

Not familiar with the creek or the Woodlands, but someone owns the property on either side of the creek. My guess is that is who put up the cable. I would be willing to bet that as long as your in kayak or canoe there is nothing the land owner can do.

[35remington]

Riparian.

[Ætheling]

Riparian.

Thank god you came along before this grave injustice was allowed to stand.

[WItoTX]

Im hearing about this second hand so will go by today if I have time and verify the cable is still there and what signage is being used. Our kids are going to have no use of nature within a hundred miles of the city before we know it. No wonder all these kids are having a mental health crisis. Artificial society is destroying us. Kids need to get in the woods and streams.

Contact back country hunters and anglers. They fight for protection of public access. Great group of young people.

Problem is Texas has such a European model of land ownership, there is little to zero public land. So public access fight takes place more out west than here.

[quarterback]

This kind of nonsense sticks in my craw. I'm betting that if it is indeed a "navigable water" the cable is illegal and should be removed. Best of luck finding out. It either is or it isn't as defined by law.

We've canoed a lot of places but the Mulberry River in Northern Arkansas ended up causing a landmark case if I'm not mistaken. It seems that certain landowners would stand on the bank and threaten canoers with a shotgun so one got sued and he lost. Guess what....he still does it! Or he did the last time we floated the river. Some people...

[Lungbustr]

I can tell you the Blanco river is privately owned. Each landowner along the river owns to the middle. That being said you can legally float down the river, you just can't stop and hang out anywhere. As long as you are floating and moving there are no issues. I would be willing to bet this creek is much like the Blanco.

But I do see landowners sides to not wanting people on the river/creeks by their property as lots of people like to get out and walk around or leave a bunch a trash.

Doubt it's quite that simple.