Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
Durkin Tactical Franklin Armory
User Panel

Site Notices
8/16/2022 4:37:09 PM
Page / 8
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 1:58:03 PM EDT
[#1]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Your point? I said it's NON nagavitable.......What "statute" are you referring to that you know not one shit about? If it's listed as non negavatable I would bet that's the "statute" for the county in Texas.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 1:58:15 PM EDT
[#2]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

When I think of a creek the legal definition on navigable doesn't come to mind.
OP needs to be careful of thinking just cause his yak can be paddled up the creek does not mean
the creek fits the legal def of navigable.
View Quote
Wait until you get into SPCC and storm water permitting. The state will call an old dry ditch and underground water sources a navigable waterway.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 1:59:10 PM EDT
[#3]
When I used to take my dogs to the river by my house, in Oregon, I checked with the county sheriff.  He told me that state wide, everything, even shore land up to the high water mark is public  on any navigable waterway.  Land owner can bitch all they want, and call the sheriff, but the sheriff said they usually end up having to explain where the high water mark is located, and the land owner's ability to kick people off ends.  That was in Oregon though, no idea on other states.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 1:59:19 PM EDT
[#4]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
In NY, as long as you stay in the creek and the land owner does not own both sides you are good to go.

If the land owner owns both side of said creek, you can not anchor or step foot on the creek bed without permission or it is considered trespassing.
View Quote
I thought all waterways had a public right of way that extended a couple feet from the bank?
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 1:59:25 PM EDT
[#5]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Your point? I said it's NON nagavitable.......What "statute" are you referring to that you know not one shit about? If it's listed as non negavatable I would bet that's the "statute" for the county in Texas.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Your point? I said it's NON nagavitable.......What "statute" are you referring to that you know not one shit about? If it's listed as non negavatable I would bet that's the "statute" for the county in Texas.
My point is, is that if I can navigate it, it is IN FACT navigable. A mental midget could understand this. What does that make you?
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:00:07 PM EDT
[#6]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Your point? I said it's NON nagavitable.......What "statute" are you referring to that you know not one shit about? If it's listed as non negavatable I would bet that's the "statute" for the county in Texas.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Your point? I said it's NON nagavitable.......What "statute" are you referring to that you know not one shit about? If it's listed as non negavatable I would bet that's the "statute" for the county in Texas.
So is it physically navigable or not? Seems like it is, if you have to put up barriers to keep people off it.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:02:39 PM EDT
[#7]
That's one way to earn a Darwin Award.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:03:21 PM EDT
[#8]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

My point is, is that if I can navigate it, it is IN FACT navigable. A mental midget could understand this. What does that make you?
View Quote
Yeah, you know more than I do and I'm the mental midget. It's private property, listed non nagavatable and law enforcement enforces it. BUT you're the smart one.......yeah. People should listen to you than those of us that deal with it.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:04:50 PM EDT
[#9]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Yeah, you know more than I do and I'm the mental midget. It's private property, listed non nagavatable and law enforcement enforces it. BUT you're the smart one.......yeah. People should listen to you than those of us that deal with it.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

My point is, is that if I can navigate it, it is IN FACT navigable. A mental midget could understand this. What does that make you?
Yeah, you know more than I do and I'm the mental midget. It's private property, listed non nagavatable and law enforcement enforces it. BUT you're the smart one.......yeah. People should listen to you than those of us that deal with it.
So it is navigable.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:07:30 PM EDT
[#10]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

So it is navigable.
View Quote
It is on private property, stop gapped, listed as non nagavitable and posted.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:09:52 PM EDT
[#11]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
It is on private property, stop gapped, listed as non nagavitable and posted.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

So it is navigable.
It is on private property, stop gapped, listed as non nagavitable and posted.
Who listed it as an non-navigable? You? A lawyer? A county? The state? Is this information public domain?
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:11:06 PM EDT
[#12]
Where at in AR? In the twin lakes area everything is pretty much good to go, just don’t be an idiot
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:11:57 PM EDT
[#13]
You  can under federal law if the waterway is considered a navigable waterway. However, the feds only consider certain waterways navigable. It's up to state law on other waterways. Here the state considers all waterways navigable, so it's public land up to the high water mark.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:14:28 PM EDT
[#14]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Who listed it as an non-navigable? You? A lawyer? A county? The state? Is this information public domain?
View Quote
I never had a reason to ask the land owner but GD knows so much more, they must be wrong. I'll be sure to let the land owners know.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:16:47 PM EDT
[#15]
A link that may help the current argument.

Left cold...

https://agrilife.org/texasaglaw/2014/05/13/public-right-of-use-for-texas-waterways/

Courts will look to determine if a stream is “navigable in law” under the second test.  The “navigable in law” test is based upon a Texas statute and looks at the size of the waterway.  If the streambed maintains an average width of 30 feet from the mouth up, it is considered “navigable in law.”  See Texas Natural Resources Code Section 26.001(c).  This distance refers to the entire bed, not the portion where water may be flowing.  Although the court is the final decision maker as to whether a stream is navigable in fact or in law, state agencies, including the TCEQ and the General Land Office often make these determinations as part of their rulemaking authority.

Public Right of Use for Texas Waterways
Posted on May 13, 2014 by tiffany.dowell
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:19:12 PM EDT
[#16]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I never had a reason to ask the land owner but GD knows so much more, they must be wrong. I'll be sure to let the land owners know.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

Who listed it as an non-navigable? You? A lawyer? A county? The state? Is this information public domain?
I never had a reason to ask the land owner but GD knows so much more, they must be wrong. I'll be sure to let the land owners know.
I'm slightly curious in this as well.  No other reason than it's raining outside and I'm bored.

It honestly sounds like some good ol boy crap, which is very typical for Texas.  Don't get all offended, but private land ownership in Texas is what it is, laws written by politicians who own a bunch of land.  I couldn't give two shits, just keyboard warrior here
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:19:37 PM EDT
[#17]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

It is on private property, stop gapped, listed as non nagavitable and posted.
View Quote
Some hedge clippers will make nice work of that illegal barbed wire.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:23:00 PM EDT
[#18]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
It is on private property, stop gapped, listed as non nagavitable and posted.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

So it is navigable.
It is on private property, stop gapped, listed as non nagavitable and posted.
Yes you said that. But according to the TX law that was posted above, a waterway only has to be physically navigable to be considered navigable. It apparently is physically navigable or else you wouldn't have to put up barriers to stop it from being navigated. So it sounds like some typical good ole boy TX shit to me.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:25:17 PM EDT
[#19]
LOL, my bench is on one side of the creek and the berms are on the other.

Probably should keep your head down. I won't even mind that you'll need to portage at my crossing, but you should hurry.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:26:20 PM EDT
[#20]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Yeah, you know more than I do and I'm the mental midget. It's private property, listed non nagavatable and law enforcement enforces it. BUT you're the smart one.......yeah. People should listen to you than those of us that deal with it.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

My point is, is that if I can navigate it, it is IN FACT navigable. A mental midget could understand this. What does that make you?
Yeah, you know more than I do and I'm the mental midget. It's private property, listed non nagavatable and law enforcement enforces it. BUT you're the smart one.......yeah. People should listen to you than those of us that deal with it.
The question is who listed it as non navigable?  Is it non navigable because you installed barriers?  Do you have court ruling saying it is not navigable?
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:26:36 PM EDT
[#21]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Legal. People can’t own waterways.
View Quote
Wisconsin has a 15 ft. easement on all waterways, for access, not hunting or trapping.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:26:37 PM EDT
[#22]
Indiana you can on any federally navigable water.  Other rivers and streams like the one through my farm I own the land on both sides and the creek bottom.  If you as much as drag bottom with your kayak you are trespassing. It is a stocked trout stream and if we wouldn't allow fishing the state wouldn't stock it.  Many of us do post it but are very lenient on people using the property as long as they don't do damage or make a mess.  I have never turned someone down who asked permission. The creek is small enough that you would find it difficult or impossible to kayak without dragging bottom or getting out to pull over down trees.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:27:31 PM EDT
[#23]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
A link that may help the current argument.

Left cold...

https://agrilife.org/texasaglaw/2014/05/13/public-right-of-use-for-texas-waterways/

Courts will look to determine if a stream is “navigable in law” under the second test.  The “navigable in law” test is based upon a Texas statute and looks at the size of the waterway.  If the streambed maintains an average width of 30 feet from the mouth up, it is considered “navigable in law.”  See Texas Natural Resources Code Section 26.001(c).  This distance refers to the entire bed, not the portion where water may be flowing.  Although the court is the final decision maker as to whether a stream is navigable in fact or in law, state agencies, including the TCEQ and the General Land Office often make these determinations as part of their rulemaking authority.

Public Right of Use for Texas Waterways
Posted on May 13, 2014 by tiffany.dowell
View Quote
The highlighted part just demonstrates how corrupt legislative and regulatory bodies in this country are. They don't care about standing law when making new laws and regulations, they just do whatever they want and make people to go to court and force them to just do what they should have done already.

At any rate, if all it takes to be considered navigable under TX law is have an average stream bed width of 30 ft then I bet a creek that maintains enough flowing water to be navigable all the time easily meets that definition.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:28:40 PM EDT
[#24]
https://www.livewaterproperties.com/how-stream-access-laws-affect-landowner/

Lists several states, Wyoming, Idaho, Colorado, and Oregon.

Wyoming and Colorado, land owners owns the stream bed, you can float through but no touching the bottom.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:28:50 PM EDT
[#25]
First question should have been

1. Does this increase the likelyhood of me getting shot at?

A. Yes, then DON'T DO IT
B. No, proceed.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:29:07 PM EDT
[#26]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

This. And I don't even own the creek my neighbor does, we just watch out for each others ranches. Mainly because of poachers. My fence stops at the creek. Where I don't have fence the creek side is large enough I don't need it. It's more for cattle to keep from crossing over. And granted this creek is huge, you could take a speed boat up it at times of the year but it's still non negavatable and the game wardens and sheriffs know and handle it when called.
View Quote
Sounds like your "neighbor" has stop gapped a navigable waterway under Tejas law.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:29:38 PM EDT
[#27]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
The question is who listed it as non navigable?  Is it non navigable because you installed barriers?  Do you have court ruling saying it is not navigable?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

My point is, is that if I can navigate it, it is IN FACT navigable. A mental midget could understand this. What does that make you?
Yeah, you know more than I do and I'm the mental midget. It's private property, listed non nagavatable and law enforcement enforces it. BUT you're the smart one.......yeah. People should listen to you than those of us that deal with it.
The question is who listed it as non navigable?  Is it non navigable because you installed barriers?  Do you have court ruling saying it is not navigable?
It's non-navigable cause Bubba the local game warden is his drinking buddy and no one has been smart enough to sue him for breaking the law yet.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:29:57 PM EDT
[#28]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
LOL, my bench is on one side of the creek and the berms are on the other.

Probably should keep your head down. I won't even mind that you'll need to portage at my crossing, but you should hurry.
View Quote
Wasn't there a range in south dallas shut down because they were shooting across a navigable water way?
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:31:29 PM EDT
[#29]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Yes you said that. But according to the TX law that was posted above, a waterway only has to be physically navigable to be considered navigable. It apparently is physically navigable or else you wouldn't have to put up barriers to stop it from being navigated. So it sounds like some typical good ole boy TX shit to me.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

So it is navigable.
It is on private property, stop gapped, listed as non nagavitable and posted.
Yes you said that. But according to the TX law that was posted above, a waterway only has to be physically navigable to be considered navigable. It apparently is physically navigable or else you wouldn't have to put up barriers to stop it from being navigated. So it sounds like some typical good ole boy TX shit to me.
People have livestock here that require that the creek be gapped to keep the livestock in, which in turn creates a non navigable waterway. Water flow is not restricted. Or in my case, crossings create a non navigable condition.

Texas is not like AK ( I own property in both) there is more fencing in any one county of Texas than there is the entire State of AK. Also all the "easement" and "public use" shit, yeah forget that.

Two very different places when you get out in the periphery, but metropolitan areas are very similar in that they are both largely populated by leftists, parasites and shit heads.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:31:50 PM EDT
[#30]
Legal, likely but it would be a dick move especially if houses are in view.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:33:10 PM EDT
[#31]
Has more to do with floodwaters than anything else.  Years ago if you could get your boat there, you could duck hunt there.  Bottomland owners would have townies out in their pasture claiming their good given right to hunt there because they could in fact “navigate “ the waterway. Laws then changed a little, and to best of my knowledge still state that you can’t take your boat outside of the natural waterways, flooded or not . This includes dogs.  I used to have a copy of this, I’ll see if I can find it.  Assuming it hasn’t changed. Realize it has no bearing in Arkansas, just trying to help my Texas brothers out
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:33:58 PM EDT
[#32]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Some hedge clippers will make nice work of that illegal barbed wire.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

It is on private property, stop gapped, listed as non nagavitable and posted.
Some hedge clippers will make nice work of that illegal barbed wire.
Yeah let some farmers livestock and see how that works out for you.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:36:04 PM EDT
[#33]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
The highlighted part just demonstrates how corrupt legislative and regulatory bodies in this country are. They don't care about standing law when making new laws and regulations, they just do whatever they want and make people to go to court and force them to just do what they should have done already.

At any rate, if all it takes to be considered navigable under TX law is have an average stream bed width of 30 ft then I bet a creek that maintains enough flowing water to be navigable all the time easily meets that definition.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
A link that may help the current argument.

Left cold...

https://agrilife.org/texasaglaw/2014/05/13/public-right-of-use-for-texas-waterways/

Courts will look to determine if a stream is “navigable in law” under the second test.  The “navigable in law” test is based upon a Texas statute and looks at the size of the waterway.  If the streambed maintains an average width of 30 feet from the mouth up, it is considered “navigable in law.”  See Texas Natural Resources Code Section 26.001(c).  This distance refers to the entire bed, not the portion where water may be flowing.  Although the court is the final decision maker as to whether a stream is navigable in fact or in law, state agencies, including the TCEQ and the General Land Office often make these determinations as part of their rulemaking authority.

Public Right of Use for Texas Waterways
Posted on May 13, 2014 by tiffany.dowell
The highlighted part just demonstrates how corrupt legislative and regulatory bodies in this country are. They don't care about standing law when making new laws and regulations, they just do whatever they want and make people to go to court and force them to just do what they should have done already.

At any rate, if all it takes to be considered navigable under TX law is have an average stream bed width of 30 ft then I bet a creek that maintains enough flowing water to be navigable all the time easily meets that definition.
Even in the wet/green part of the State I live in, that criteria would eliminate 95%+ of the creeks/streams.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:36:21 PM EDT
[#34]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Legal. People can’t own waterways.
View Quote
Depends what state you are in
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:37:04 PM EDT
[#35]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Even in the wet/green part of the State I live in, that criteria would eliminate 95%+ of the creeks/streams.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
A link that may help the current argument.

Left cold...

https://agrilife.org/texasaglaw/2014/05/13/public-right-of-use-for-texas-waterways/

Courts will look to determine if a stream is “navigable in law” under the second test.  The “navigable in law” test is based upon a Texas statute and looks at the size of the waterway.  If the streambed maintains an average width of 30 feet from the mouth up, it is considered “navigable in law.”  See Texas Natural Resources Code Section 26.001(c).  This distance refers to the entire bed, not the portion where water may be flowing.  Although the court is the final decision maker as to whether a stream is navigable in fact or in law, state agencies, including the TCEQ and the General Land Office often make these determinations as part of their rulemaking authority.

Public Right of Use for Texas Waterways
Posted on May 13, 2014 by tiffany.dowell
The highlighted part just demonstrates how corrupt legislative and regulatory bodies in this country are. They don't care about standing law when making new laws and regulations, they just do whatever they want and make people to go to court and force them to just do what they should have done already.

At any rate, if all it takes to be considered navigable under TX law is have an average stream bed width of 30 ft then I bet a creek that maintains enough flowing water to be navigable all the time easily meets that definition.
Even in the wet/green part of the State I live in, that criteria would eliminate 95%+ of the creeks/streams.
That's fine, but he said earlier that it was big enough for a speedboat year round.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:37:05 PM EDT
[#36]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
So is it physically navigable or not? Seems like it is, if you have to put up barriers to keep people off it.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Your point? I said it's NON nagavitable.......What "statute" are you referring to that you know not one shit about? If it's listed as non negavatable I would bet that's the "statute" for the county in Texas.
So is it physically navigable or not? Seems like it is, if you have to put up barriers to keep people off it.
If it is physically navigable, you are not legally allowed to put barriers up to keep people off of it.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:37:08 PM EDT
[#37]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

negavatable
View Quote
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:37:42 PM EDT
[#38]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
It's in the post. And my username
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Your state name would be helpful, It's going to vary.
It's in the post. And my username
Just put in your profile already now that broke persec on your location.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:37:46 PM EDT
[#39]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Yeah, you know more than I do and I'm the mental midget. It's private property, listed non nagavatable and law enforcement enforces it. BUT you're the smart one.......yeah. People should listen to you than those of us that deal with it.
View Quote
Not saying you are wrong or I know any details about the situation here, but I am curious about where it is listed as non navigable. And where can I find these listings? Also what creek are we talking about here? I in the past have been able to find Navigable information, but not non. This would include seasonal navigable. This information would be good for future reference.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:37:52 PM EDT
[#40]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
IIRC, you can in my state as long as you don't touch ground.  Then you are a fucking trespasser.  We get idiots canoeing through, they think they can walk the sandbars, look for arrowheads, they legally can't.
View Quote
The dirty peasants thinking they can walk on the sand bars!

How did anyone make it out alive?
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:38:06 PM EDT
[#41]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
People have livestock here that require that the creek be gapped to keep the livestock in, which in turn creates a non navigable waterway. Water flow is not restricted. Or in my case, crossings create a non navigable condition.

Texas is not like AK ( I own property in both) there is more fencing in any one county of Texas than there is the entire State of AK. Also all the "easement" and "public use" shit, yeah forget that.

Two very different places when you get out in the periphery, but metropolitan areas are very similar in that they are both largely populated by leftists, parasites and shit heads.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

So it is navigable.
It is on private property, stop gapped, listed as non nagavitable and posted.
Yes you said that. But according to the TX law that was posted above, a waterway only has to be physically navigable to be considered navigable. It apparently is physically navigable or else you wouldn't have to put up barriers to stop it from being navigated. So it sounds like some typical good ole boy TX shit to me.
People have livestock here that require that the creek be gapped to keep the livestock in, which in turn creates a non navigable waterway. Water flow is not restricted. Or in my case, crossings create a non navigable condition.

Texas is not like AK ( I own property in both) there is more fencing in any one county of Texas than there is the entire State of AK. Also all the "easement" and "public use" shit, yeah forget that.

Two very different places when you get out in the periphery, but metropolitan areas are very similar in that they are both largely populated by leftists, parasites and shit heads.
The livestock part makes sense, of course he could have just said that instead of being intentionally obtuse.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:38:23 PM EDT
[#42]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Even in the wet/green part of the State I live in, that criteria would eliminate 95%+ of the creeks/streams.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
A link that may help the current argument.

Left cold...

https://agrilife.org/texasaglaw/2014/05/13/public-right-of-use-for-texas-waterways/

Courts will look to determine if a stream is “navigable in law” under the second test.  The “navigable in law” test is based upon a Texas statute and looks at the size of the waterway.  If the streambed maintains an average width of 30 feet from the mouth up, it is considered “navigable in law.”  See Texas Natural Resources Code Section 26.001(c).  This distance refers to the entire bed, not the portion where water may be flowing.  Although the court is the final decision maker as to whether a stream is navigable in fact or in law, state agencies, including the TCEQ and the General Land Office often make these determinations as part of their rulemaking authority.

Public Right of Use for Texas Waterways
Posted on May 13, 2014 by tiffany.dowell
The highlighted part just demonstrates how corrupt legislative and regulatory bodies in this country are. They don't care about standing law when making new laws and regulations, they just do whatever they want and make people to go to court and force them to just do what they should have done already.

At any rate, if all it takes to be considered navigable under TX law is have an average stream bed width of 30 ft then I bet a creek that maintains enough flowing water to be navigable all the time easily meets that definition.
Even in the wet/green part of the State I live in, that criteria would eliminate 95%+ of the creeks/streams.
Just like to point out that has to do with the “In Law” portion. There is also the “In Fact” portion that must be observed as well.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:40:17 PM EDT
[#43]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Wasn't there a range in south dallas shut down because they were shooting across a navigable water way?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
LOL, my bench is on one side of the creek and the berms are on the other.

Probably should keep your head down. I won't even mind that you'll need to portage at my crossing, but you should hurry.
Wasn't there a range in south dallas shut down because they were shooting across a navigable water way?
I have no idea, but if it was it was probably because some weenie who lives in an apartment bought a Costco kayak and paddled himself right into the middle of a shooting range.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:40:23 PM EDT
[#44]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Just like to point out that has to do with the “In Law” portion. There is also the “In Fact” portion that must be observed as well.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
A link that may help the current argument.

Left cold...

https://agrilife.org/texasaglaw/2014/05/13/public-right-of-use-for-texas-waterways/

Courts will look to determine if a stream is “navigable in law” under the second test.  The “navigable in law” test is based upon a Texas statute and looks at the size of the waterway.  If the streambed maintains an average width of 30 feet from the mouth up, it is considered “navigable in law.”  See Texas Natural Resources Code Section 26.001(c).  This distance refers to the entire bed, not the portion where water may be flowing.  Although the court is the final decision maker as to whether a stream is navigable in fact or in law, state agencies, including the TCEQ and the General Land Office often make these determinations as part of their rulemaking authority.

Public Right of Use for Texas Waterways
Posted on May 13, 2014 by tiffany.dowell
The highlighted part just demonstrates how corrupt legislative and regulatory bodies in this country are. They don't care about standing law when making new laws and regulations, they just do whatever they want and make people to go to court and force them to just do what they should have done already.

At any rate, if all it takes to be considered navigable under TX law is have an average stream bed width of 30 ft then I bet a creek that maintains enough flowing water to be navigable all the time easily meets that definition.
Even in the wet/green part of the State I live in, that criteria would eliminate 95%+ of the creeks/streams.
Just like to point out that has to do with the “In Law” portion. There is also the “In Fact” portion that must be observed as well.
Right, and it only has to be one or the other. So if someone can take a boat through it then it is considered navigable without anyone having to legally designate it as such.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:40:57 PM EDT
[#45]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Wasn't there a range in south dallas shut down because they were shooting across a navigable water way?
View Quote
Legal in Wisconsin, shotgun rifle or pistol.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:41:35 PM EDT
[#46]
Wanna have some real fun?  Get the Army Corps of Engineers involved.  
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:43:39 PM EDT
[#47]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Yeah let some farmers livestock and see how that works out for you.
View Quote
Sounds like his problem.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:44:38 PM EDT
[#48]
I would find out

Who will be enforcing the law where you are going.

And

What is their opinion on the topic.

All the rest of it is just “words” and “feelings” until you are fighting it in court.
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:44:50 PM EDT
[#49]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Wanna have some real fun?  Get the Army Corps of Engineers involved.  
View Quote
Oh shit!
Now you let the genie out of the bottle....
Link Posted: 6/9/2019 2:45:42 PM EDT
[#50]
Page / 8
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top