TEXAS BEACHES BELONG TO ALL TEXANS

www.e-thepeople.org ^ | 9/04/03 | John Beatty

[tx4guns]

Do you enjoy fishing, surfing, beachcombing, sunbathing, or just long walks on the beach at sunrise or sunset? Are you aware that the beaches of Texas belong to the citizens of Texas? Did you know that there is an ongoing battle, to take away YOUR right to access YOUR property? The "Texas Open Beaches Act" guarantees, the citizens of our great state, open and unrestricted access to all Texas beaches,from "mean low tide" to the "vegetation line." The current fight is over the last 3.2 miles of open beach, at San Luis Pass. By the way, that is the only, truly, open beach left on Galveston Island. I have recently joined a group of people, who are fighting to preserve our right to access this beach, as it is being planned for developement. If you are passionate about your rights, as a citizen; or if you just want to know more about this struggle; please go to www.texasopenbeaches.org. This is the website for the T.O.B.A.(Texas Open Beach Advocates). Or if you are just mildly interested, and would like to learn more about this, before considering involvement; try going to www.guidrynews.com and click on Forum. You wil get both sides of the argument there. We need your support! Thanks to The Chronicle, for this forum. Get involved, get educated, knowledge is power! Thanks

[Flyer]

Isawit and Hoosierham, y'all stepped in deep here without much knowledge of Texas. Every inch of beach in Texas belongs to the people. Pay attention before you shoot yourself in the other foot.

[Redbob]

You want to make a park?

Buy the land.

How would you like it if for example, the law was amended to read that "backyards belong to all the people of Texas"?
Can I come over Sunday and have a picnic in your backyard?
You won't mind cleaning up afterwards, will you?

Or how about rivers and riverbanks? Don't you think that rivers and their banks should belong to all the people of Texas?
Well, you might have a slightly different view if you happened to own some property in the Hill Country, and you wanted to prevent drunk, rowdy tubers and canoers from trashing your waterfront and perhaps tearing up your property, while serenading your family with their boomboxes and profanity.

But no, what YOU want is to take the use of someone else's property, or rather, have the State do it for you, without compensating the landowners.
How very Socialistic of you.

[RangerHobbit]

On a similar note, I sent this letter to our local newspapers way up here in far Northern California this past summer:

The Editor,

Regarding coastal Trinidad homeowners lamenting the fact that their expensive abodes are being threatened by eroding cliffs (Times-Standard 8/25), I would like to invite your reader's attention to Southern California -or more specifically to Ventura, my hometown- to witness what has happened there.

At low tide, from Ventura's Maud Adams Beach north to Rincon (the famous surfing beach just outside of town), one can spot circular concrete emplacements looming several yards out to sea. These were the foundations for huge coastal gun batteries erected during WWII. Back in 1943, these guns weren't threatened by high tides, because the maximum high tide left a wide track of dry beach between the guns and the water. Not any more.

The difference between then and now, is that most of the coastline between Ventura and Santa Barbara has been developed, and continues to be developed, and as a result, at least 80% of the sand that was once on these beaches in 1943, has been reclaimed by the ocean. California's beaches are quickly disappearing. Why? Natural tidal erosion of the surrounding cliffs -which is how the ocean creates beaches in the first place- has been halted by the installation of sea walls composed of huge boulders that act as a buffer between million-dollar homes and high tides. Since the ocean is halted from creating new sand, it just washes away the sand that is already there.

The erosion of the cliffs along the Trinidad coast is a natural phenomena which should not be impeded. People who build houses on ocean beaches are playing Russian roulette from the outset, and people who build houses on coastal cliffs in California are playing with three chambers loaded. I appreciate a spectacular ocean view as much as anyone, but I prefer getting mine while sitting on a surfboard or walking along a nice beach...preferably one that still has sand on it.

[Redbob]

" Some areas are not insurable, and I believe the whole beachfront should be that way. "

This of course is the answer to keeping beaches open - there should certainly be no state- or federally-subsidized insurance for ANY property owners. Remember what Padre Island looked like before the State guaranteed the property insurance there?

[tx4guns]

The state isn't taking anything. It already belongs to the state. The homeowners built the homes knowing the law (they're required to sign a waiver form that they understand the Open Beaches Act when they close on the propery), but now they want private beaches and to take it away from access to the public. Same for riverfront owners. The toobers have always been there, like it or not. It's part of the territory.

I question the sanity of someone who builds a house on the beach or on a riverbank anyway. How careless and foolish can you be with your money?

[RightWhale]

The Concepts of Marxism

Just so you know: Marxism has come off poorly in its test against reality. Much of Marxism has been put in the latest edition of the book of mythologies that primitive peoples used to believe.

[SevenDaysInMay]

Open beaches conflicts with rights to private property.

Nature's erosion moves the vegi line back and forth, but mostly back along coasts. That naatural erosion alone destroys private property. Prevention of private owners to replace storm lost property is a touchy issue.

One case I recall perhaps 20 some years ago involved home owners who wanted to rebuild after total destruction by a storm. They were blocked by permit officials. Owners sued. The judge dismissed their case "with prejudice". That legal action condemned owner's property for public use without "just compensation" under our Constitution's "takings" clause.

This situation can be better addressed by allowing "trespass" of all exterior developed property, but said property's insurance must not be subsized by "the public's" tax dollars as it is now. Even altering the "beach" by any artificial or sand replentishment adversely affects other beach front property by shifting or exacerbating erosion.

"It is a foolish man who builds upon the sand." It is a greedy social parasite who demands that taxpayers subsidize the above development foolishness.

[Tijeras_Slim]

All ocean front property in New Mexico belongs to ME! It is off limits to all Texans! That will show you.

[Ditter]

>>>>>>>beachfront will be many miles out to what is now sea>>> Just the opposite of this is happening on Galveston Island. The beach is eroding very rapidly. Every hurricane or storm takes more sand. A couple of years ago the city of Galveston spent millions of $ dredging sand & pumping it backup on the beaches. Houses on the west end that used to be several streets back from the beach are now beach front.

[RightWhale]

Yeah, that's what the Art Bell guest said. We probably wouldn't notice any change in beach erosion rates if the sea level rises or falls a couple inches in half a decade Tides and storms would have a much bigger effect.

There are new satellite readings, last summer in fact, that indicate a reversal in the direction of change shape of the planet lately, the past 5 years, a flattening in the equatorial region. This makes the whole sea level problem a little less simple. Legally, though, land ownership, the situation is covered by survey practice whatever happens to the shoreline.

[Ditter]

Storms also affect bay property. We had a house on Galveston Bay until last year. Several years ago a minor hurricane (I forget which one,maybe Alica) took the soil, 3 feet deep & 15 feet back from behind our bulkhead. I have a hunch that if a really bad storm took your house & sucked your entire lot out into the bay that you would *not* be able to fill your lot & rebuild your house. The EPA would probably come in & declare it a wetland. Bye bye bay front lot.

[rustbucket]

You apparently are neither willing or able, alone or with like-minded friends , to purchase the beaches you wish to enjoy.

In Texas, you can't buy the beach. What happens is that Galveston or developers put up barriers on the beach blocking cars. Prior to this sort of access piracy, people had free access to the beach in their cars ever since cars were invented. You can walk onto these restricted beaches if you can find any nearby public parking ($) but you can't drive onto them anymore. Lug your ice chest and supplies down to the beach from wherever you park.

The people who really enjoy the restricted access beaches are the people who own the land next to the beach. Want to bet some city council and developers didn't make out on this deal?

You prefer that everyone be forced to pay for the upkeep of something which only a few will find time to enjoy.

What does it cost to upkeep a wild natural beach like the west end of Galveston Island? Maybe an occasional beach patrol or trash pickup. But those are awfully darn infrequent.

Driving onto the beach at San Luis Pass is the ideal way to have access. You carry all your gear with you. Find a spot some 20-40 yards or more from the next car, then park. You can easily set up your own shade at your car, pull out the lawn chairs and ice chests, then let the kids play in the water. Once finished, pick up your gear and trash and drive home. That is what we had all along the west part of Galveston Island before the city and developers started doing this garbage.

I saw the same elimination of free and easy automobile access at Hilton Head and Daytona Beach. Got to pay the hotel or rent a condo or house to get decent beach access now.

[RightWhale]

Nature has been doing a lot of renovation all along the Gulf coast and the Atlantic for a long time. Those great sandy beaches just won't stay put. It's never ending even if sea level on average never changes. It's hard to judge sea level even with surveying gear because the surface won't stay put on a daily basis. An inch a decade would be hard to measure.

OTOH, if the Ice Age gets cranking and sea level does drop, eventually tides and storms won't reach the present beach. How would that affect State or public ownership? Of course access to the Bay won't be so convenient, either. The Art Bell guest said that when the climate tips into Ice Age mode, the transition will be quick, 3-10 years. Sea level change would then be rapid and we would notice--no question, no doubt.

[Ditter]

Art Bell said we are going to have an ice age? You put a lot of stock in his opinion, do ya?

[pulaskibush]

The beaches belong to the Aztecs. Along with your house and every inch of whatever land you bought. Here's the link to prove it.(sarcasm off)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/968000/posts

[RightWhale]

You put a lot of stock in his opinion, do ya?

Oh yeah, when he's talking about amateur radio.

Off topic now -- Our annual ice age is about to begin here in Fairbanks. Probably below freezing tonight. Time to put the boat away, take a look at the snowmachine and make sure it's shipshape. Hope we get some snow this winter, sure wasn't much last year. Have to wait a couple weeks until studded tires are legal, the first icy day is highly amusing on the road.

[fight_truth_decay]

The government takes 'private' property all the time by 'eminent domain' usually first by condemnation for development whether the owners want to sell or not with the excuse of revenues for the good of all thru the taxes that will be collected or the jobs that will become available. Public property is a much easier 'grab'. Good Luck!

[Ditter]

I could use a little ice age here on the Gulf Coast of Texas.

[Damagro]

Open beach laws are based on the same priciple as navivigle waterways laws. Private property doesn't and shouldn't include open or running water. If you like closed beaches, buy a beach house somewhere other than a state with open beach laws

[Colorado Doug]

Who would that be? Indians of course.

My Grandmother was a full blood Creek. You may give the beach to me. Glad I could step in here to help out. That said, I have to agree that private property MUST not be taken without just compensation and then only after a COMPELLING public need. Just citing what the government did to the Native Americans does not justify doing the same thing to the current owners.