Please give me 10 reasons why NOT to move to the Austin area. (Spring: work)

[Trainwreck20]

Not really PICKIN on you, but a couple comments:
People cannot own "waters of the state", which, to simplify, covers basically all the free-flowing creeks and rivers. You can wade, canoe, swim, etc. down any stream in the state, with one or two exceptions that date back to pre-republic of Texas reasons. Of course, you can't set foot on the shore, but if I remember correctly, the property ownerships ends at the normal water line, so even if a creek is temporarily dry, you can hike down it. Some guy summarized this for me a year or two ago, I should try to find it.

As for big names, I don't really miss them. I have never been a big venue type of guy, and it has never seemed worthwhile to go to a concert with 10 or 15 thousand other people.

[Driftwood1]

That could be true in many rivers n creeks, but I question it in regard to Wimberley. THEY say, their property lines run down the center of the river.. Also MANY rivers n streams have barbed wire accross them with plentiful "No Trespassing" signs .. they say theres even been shots fired..that may be rumor, but joe public isnt likly to risk it! Its just that the little town lures people to buy largely due to the scenery and water, yet unless you buy waterfront, you'll never see it.. but you will get some scenery..

Hey , we're back!

[twange]

Originally Posted by Driftwood1

#9. The Music... yes the music.. there may be plenty of live rock/folk/blues/country which is great , but if you want Jazz, classical or the Big names, the choices are very limited

As for the music thing...

As a musician myself, this sort of scared me off initially because while I absolutely LOVE the traditional Texas roots music (folk, blues, latino etc...) It's not really my area of expertise. I'm more of an experimental hybrid type with an academic classical background with folk, rock, jazz, country and other odds and end mixed in...I'm convinced that Austin has a lot of things that get overlooked because of the dominant culture(which is the case just about everywhere). Here's an article you might find informative. It's from a site called NewMusicBox, that has a feature called "Scenescan" that features the new music scene of different cities:

NewMusicBox

[achtungpv]

Pretty sure the State owns the river and I think 10' of bank on each side. This may only apply to navigable rivers & streams. For some reason that prerequisite sticks in my mind.

[manbehindthecurtain]

Originally Posted by Driftwood1

#6 Many of the rivers and streams pictured In the real estate/tourism propaganda are PRIVATE? You can look, but dont touch them! (ok this is mainly true in Wimberley!

Hahahaha, so true. This has been a complaint with my wife and I since we moved here. If you want to go to swim in a lake/river, you have to pay a minimum of $5 to do so.

[love roses]

I was reading something someone posted in the Galveston/Houston thread about shoreline and water rights, that I think extends to other types of waterways. It was about some people who had bought beach houses on Galveston and tried to make the beach in front of their houses private and the court said they couldn't because Texas allows for most? water access to be public. I agree too. I think it's stingy to try and keep people from enjoying a river or beach or lake that they have been enjoying for decades, and as soon as some developer decides to build on it, noone except the homeowner can enjoy it. I don't mean that people should traipse over their lawns or anything. That was an issue in Denver and the foothills. People were chopping up the rivers and getting violent with kayakers and canoers who were only going down the rivers and not even stepping on the land. Why would people be that stingy with little sections of river, etc...Especially when the boaters are being courteous, not littering or trespassing?

[mrsengle]

I think the state owns the land from the waterline to the vegetation line.

[Trainwreck20]

Sorry, a little long, but lots of info:
If a River Runs Through It, What Law Applies?
by: Boyd Kennedy; Staff Attorney, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department*

(Reprinted from the July/August 2002 issue of the Texas Prosecutor
with permission of the Texas District & County Attorneys Association)
* This article does not represent official views of Texas Parks And Wildlife Department, and is not intended as legal advice.

It may start with a call from a deputy sheriff or the local game warden: "I just handled a trespass call from a landowner on the river. He wanted me to arrest a fisherman, or at least run him off. But the fisherman insisted that he had a right to be there, and wanted me to arrest the landowner. I ID'd them both, the fisherman moved on, and I left to talk to you." Or it may be a canoeist who wants to report that a fence has been erected in the river, and is a hazard to navigation. Or it may be a lakeside landowner, worried about vandalism and theft, who doesn't want fishermen coming around his dock in their boats.

Information:
Q: What is considered a public stream?
A: In Texas a stream is public if it is "navigable in fact," or "navigable by statute." There is no precise test for whether a stream is navigable in fact. The term is based on the idea of public utility. One court has observed that "[w]aters, which in their natural state are useful to the public for a considerable portion of the year are navigable."1
A stream is navigable by statute if it retains an average width of 30 feet from the mouth up.2 It is important to understand that the entire stream bed is to be included in the width, not just the area covered by water on a given day. A navigable stream may be dry part of the year, but does not lose its character as a navigable stream.
To complicate matters, some Texas land titles originated with Spanish or Mexican land grants, and the law of Spain and Mexico did not distinguish public and private streams on the basis of navigability. Streams were valued primarily as a source of water for household use and for irrigation, rather than a way to move people and goods. So when the sovereign granted land, perennial streams were retained for public use, regardless of navigability, so as to make as much land as possible capable of settlement.3 A stream is perennial if it flows most or all of the year. In determining the rights of holders of title under Mexican grants, the laws of Mexico in effect when the grants were made control.4 So in counties that contain Spanish or Mexican land grants, there are an unknown number of perennial streams which are public streams, even though they may not be navigable.

Q: How do I determine the boundary of a streambed?
A: The Texas Supreme Court has stated that the bed of a stream is "that portion of its soil which is alternately covered and left bare as there may be an increase or diminution in the supply of water, and which is adequate to contain it at its average and mean stage during an entire year, without reference to the extra freshets of the winter or spring or the extreme drouths of the summer or autumn.5 " Not clear? Again, the Texas Supreme Court: The streambed is that land between the "gradient boundary" on each bank. The gradient boundary is defined as "a gradient of the flowing water in the stream, and is located midway between the lower level of the flowing water that just reaches the cut bank and the higher level of it that just does not overtop the cut bank.6 " Clear as mud? Blame it on those civil judges.

Q: What if the stream is dry?
A: A navigable stream does not lose its public character during periods of low water. A stream is navigable if the bed of the stream averages 30 feet wide from the mouth up, regardless of the actual water level on a given day.

Q: What is a public lake?
A: The typical public lake in Texas was created by building a dam on a navigable stream. When a navigable stream is dammed, the resulting lake is a public lake, and the public may boat and fish on all of the lake's waters, not just that part directly above the streambed. Therefore, a property owner may not fence off any portion of such a lake.7 For other lakes, the test is whether the lake is navigable. Typically, the small natural lakes in Texas are held to be non-navigable, and therefore subject to private ownership and control. Manmade stock tanks and flood control ponds are usually non-navigable as well. The public has no right to boat, fish, or hunt in or on the waters of private lakes,8 and hunting or fishing without landowner consent is a crime.9 In order to encourage outdoor recreation, the legislature has limited the liability of landowners who allow the public to use their property for recreational purposes.10

Q: But doesn't the state own the waters of ALL lakes and flowing streams, plus the fish that live there?
A: Yes, the state does own the water of every lake and natural stream, and the fish that live there.11 But that does not give the public the right to fish or boat in private lakes or streams.12
Q: Some landowners in my county have deeds to the riverbed. Can they exclude the public from their part of the river?
A: Not if the river is navigable. The policy of the government of Texas, expressed in statute since the days of the Republic, has been to retain the beds of navigable streams as public property.13 However, the state surveyors did not always adhere to this law, and some land grants purported to include the beds of navigable streams. To remedy this situation, in a 1929 law known as the Small Bill, the state relinquished to the adjoining landowners certain property rights in the beds of some navigable streams. However, this statute declared that it did not impair the rights of the general public and the state in the waters of the streams.14 So even if a landowner's deed includes the bed of a navigable stream, and taxes are being paid on the bed, the public retains its right to use it as a navigable stream.
It is a fairly common myth that a person boating along a "Small Bill" stream may not set foot on the streambed if the landowner forbids it. This is based on the notion that a person who steps into the streambed has entered onto private property within the meaning of the criminal trespass law.15 This may have some applicability when the waters of a stream leave its banks and a boater navigates out of the streambed and steps onto the adjacent private lands, or on coastal land when tide waters cover private property. But the general public has the right to walk within the boundaries of any navigable streambed, even if there are private ownership rights under the Small Bill.16

Q: What is it legal to do in a public lake/stream?
A: Texas courts have recognized that a member of the public may engage in a variety of lawful activities in, on, and along a public lake or stream. Besides boating, persons may swim, float, walk, wade, picnic, camp, and (with a license) fish.17 Hunting is also lawful in some situations. These activities must be confined to the waters of the lake or stream and the streambed. The public does not have the right to cross private property to get to or from public water.18 In fact, that can constitute criminal trespass, if the other elements of the offense are present.

Q: May a boater on a navigable stream lawfully go onto private land to check out or portage around an obstruction or hazard?
A: Navigable streams will sometimes have obstructions or hazards such as dams or log jams. For safety's sake, a boater must get out and scout to see if there is a safe route through. And sometimes it is necessary to portage the hazard or obstruction - carry the boat and gear around it on a reasonable, safe route. Navigation of the state's inland and coastal waters is one of several "public rights and duties" declared by the Texas Constitution.19 A right of portage has been recognized as a necessary part of the right of navigation in some other states, but there is no clear authority in Texas. The portage issue implicates the criminal trespass statute, and possibly the defense of necessity.20

Q: How can I tell whether a stream/lake is public or private?
A: Texas courts have the final say over this question, and there have been several cases recognizing particular streams as navigable or perennial, and therefore public. But there is no master list. Somewhere in the courthouse there's probably a map showing the original surveys of your county. From this map you should be able to tell which if any land grants were made by Spain or Mexico. Within these grants, remember that all perennial streams are public, regardless of navigability. Also, if a survey stops at a stream's bank and does not cross it, this means the original surveyor believed that the stream was to remain public, as a navigable or perennial stream. The reverse is not true, however, since as mentioned above in many cases the surveyor failed to stop at the bank of a navigable stream even though the law directed him to do so. In regards to statutory navigability, for some streams it may be fairly straightforward to look in the vicinity of several stream crossings and estimate whether the streambed averages 30 feet or more in width. The sheriff, landowners, one of your predecessors, or a local game warden may know whether the body of water has historically been treated as public or private. You could also check with prosecutors upstream and downstream. Sometimes a state agency (like TNRCC, the General Land Office, or Parks and Wildlife) will have made some kind of determination of navigability as part of its responsibility to administer some law or program. Sometimes it's helpful to do a word search in the cases and A.G. opinions for the name of the stream. Although this is a state issue, the federal courts occasionally issue an opinion containing helpful information about a stream, so take a look at the federal cases too.

Q: Is it lawful to fence a stream?
A: That probably depends on whether the stream is public or private. Since the public has a general right to walk and boat in a public stream, a landowner has no right to erect or maintain a fence that interferes with those lawful activities.21 Additionally, it is a crime to obstruct a waterway to which the public has access so as to make passage impossible or unreasonably inconvenient or hazardous.22 It is easy to imagine situations where a fence in or across a public stream would do just that. But does this statute prohibit a landowner from putting a fence in or across a private stream? That sounds unlikely, since the public has no lawful access to a private stream without the consent of the owner of the streambed. So it seems to be lawful for a landowner to erect a fence in a non-public streambed.

Q: Is it legal to fish from a highway bridge, or in the highway right of way?
A: It is an offense to fish from the deck or road surface of any bridge or causeway on a road maintained by the Texas Dept. of Transportation.23 However, no law prohibits fishing in public water from a highway right of way, or underneath a highway bridge. Keep in mind that, in private bodies of water, the owner of the bed controls the right to fish above his portion of the bed. But in some cases the state or county owns the right of way, which indicates that the public may lawfully wade and fish in the portion of the stream which lies over the publicly-owned right of way. In other cases, the entity which built the road has only acquired an easement for road construction and maintenance, leaving the fishing rights with the landowner.

Q: Can a marina operator or lakeside landowner keep boaters away from his docks?
A: Not on public water. If a lake is public water, the public has the right to boat the entire lake, and to fish from a boat (subject to regulation by government entities).24 A person who interferes with a lawful boater may be committing the crime of obstructing a waterway and/or harassment. Both are Class B misdemeanors.25 By the same token, a boater who unreasonably obstructs access to or from a dock or boat slip may be guilty of obstructing a waterway.

Q: What agency/agencies have regulatory authority over activities that take place in and on the public streams of this state?
A: The legislature has retained much of this regulatory power for itself, and delegated out some functions in a piecemeal fashion. TNRCC regulates the building of dams and diversion of water.26 The General Land Office regulates mineral development in public streambeds, and has some authority to remove unauthorized or dangerous structures from state-owned land.27 Texas Parks and Wildlife Department regulates fishing and hunting, as well as the removal of sand and gravel from public streambeds.28 Local government entities have some authority to regulate boating on public waters.29

Q: What are the rules on the coast?
A: The seaward boundary of the State of Texas extends three marine leagues into the Gulf of Mexico from the coastline.30 This is a distance equal to nine nautical miles, or 10.359 statute miles.31 Within this boundary, the state owns the water and the beds and shores of the Gulf of Mexico and the arms of the gulf, including all land which is covered by the gulf and the arms of the gulf either at low tide or high tide.32 It is well-settled that the public has a general right to boat and fish in the waters of the Gulf of Mexico within Texas, including all of its bays and arms.33
Due to a variety of manmade causes (including subsidence, dredging, and the construction of levees and canals), some private land along the coast is covered intermittently or continuously by tide waters. The general rule in tidal waters is "if you can float it you can boat it," even though the land beneath the waters may be privately owned.34 It is not settled whether a fisherman who wades in tidal waters on private land submerged by artificial means may be guilty of criminal trespass.35
ENDNOTES
1. Welder v. State, 196 S.W. 868 at 873 (Tex. Civ. App. - Austin 1917, writ ref'd)
2. Nat. Res. Code Sec. 21.001
3. Motl v. Boyd, 286 S.W. 458 (Tex. 1926)
4. Manry v. Robinson, 56 S.W.2d 438 (Tex. 1932)
5. Motl v. Boyd, 286 S.W. 458 at 467 (Tex. 1926)
6. Diversion Lake Club v. Heath, 86 S.W.2d 441 (Tex. 1935). For a thorough discussion of the history and development of the gradient boundary and the method of applying it on the ground, see "The Gradient Boundary - The Line Between Texas and Oklahoma Along the Red River" by Arthur A. Stiles, 30 Tex. Law Rev. 305 (1952)
7. Diversion Lake Club v. Heath, 86 S.W.2d 441 (Tex. 1935)
8. Taylor Fishing Club v. Hammett, 88 S.W.2d 127 (Tex. Civ. App. - Waco 1935, writ dism'd); Reed v. State, 175 S.W.2d 473 (Tex. Civ. App. - Eastland 1943, no writ)
9. Parks and Wild. Code Secs. 61.022 and 66.002
10. Tex. Civ. Prac. and Rem. Code Ch. 75
11. Water Code Sec. 11.021; Parks and Wild. Code Sec. 1.011
12. Taylor Lake Fishing Club v. Hammett, 88 S.W.2d 127 (Tex. Civ. App. - Waco 1935, writ dism'd)
13. Nat. Res. Code Sec. 21.012; State v. Bradford, 50 S.W.2d 1065 (Tex. 1932)
14. Tex. Civ. Stat. Art. 5414a
15. Penal Code Sec. 30.05
16. A.G. Op. S-208 (1956)
17. See Tex. A.G. Op. S-208 (1956) and cases cited therein
18. Diversion Lake Club v. Heath, 86 S.W.2d 441 (Tex. 1935)
19. Tex. Const. Art. XVI, Sec. 59
20. Penal Code Secs. 30.05 and 9.22
21. Port Acres Sportsman's Club v. Mann, 541 S.W.2d 847 (Tex. Civ. App.-Beaumont 1976, writ ref'd n.r.e.); A.G. Op. S-208 (1956)
22. Penal Code Sec. 42.03
23. Parks and Wild. Code Secs. 66.008 and 66.012
24. Diversion Lake Club v. Heath, 86 S.W.2d 441 (Tex. 1935)
25. Penal Code Sec. 42.03; Parks and Wild. Code Sec. 62.0125
26. Water Code Sec. 11.121
27. Nat. Res. Code Sec. 51.3021 and Ch. 52, Subch. C
28. Parks and Wild. Code Ch. 61 and Ch. 86
29. Parks and Wild. Code Sec. 31.092
30. U.S. v. Louisiana, 363 U.S. 1 (1960); Nat. Res. Code Secs. 11.012 and 11.013
31. Employers Mut. Cas. Co. v. Samuels, 407 S.W.2d 839 (Tex. Civ. App. - San Antonio 1966, writ ref'd n.r.e.)
32. Nat. Res. Code Sec. 11.012
33. See A.G. Op. M-1210 (1972)
34. A.G. Letter Op. 97-079 (1997); A.G. Op. DM-169 (1992)
35. A.G. Letter Op. 98-117 (1998)

[twange]

Great info. A bit thick, but a good resource to have around

[Trainwreck20]

Yeah, very legalistic looking. I got it from our canoeing website, which has a lot of members who are very interested in access .