Texas Public Beaches Under Attack
An illegal geotube (photo courtesy Surfrider Foundation)
Banjo Jones calls attention to an SOS from Ellis Pickett, a member of the Surfrider organization and one of the most knowledgeable people on coastal erosion issues in the state.
It seems the state legislature is again considering various legislation that would damage the Texas Open Beaches Act (and the public's right of access to Texas beaches) while benefitting owners of beachhouses who are effectively violating state law at the moment. I added a link in Banjo's comments to this position paper from the Surfrider folks on this legislation, as it tells the tale pretty effectively.
It sure would be nice if some of the lefty bloggers who can find time to bitch and moan about the HORROR of requiring identification to vote or the HORROR of property owners wanting property tax appraisal caps might actually devote some of their attention to this clear case of private interests attempting to prevail over the current right of every Texan to have access to the public beaches of this fine state.
I mean, this should be bread and butter stuff for lefty bloggers, right?
It's kind of offbeat for me, but what can I say? I don't especially like the fact so many of those b@stard property owners openly flaunt the Open Beaches Act, even if some of them have Rs by their names.
Posted by Kevin Whited @ 04/20/05 19:22 | Texas | Technorati
Previous Entry | Home | Next Entry
TrackBack
There are currently no trackbacks for this item.
Incoming trackback pings have been disabled because of abusive spammers. Technorati is now used to track cross-blog conversation.
Comments
Thanks for the heads up on this. I'm really disappointed that Patterson seems to be supportive of the measure.
Posted by R. Alex @ 09:41 on 04/21/05
I don't know much about this particular bill, but I researched the erosion issue because we were looking at some property in Surfside.
The erosion problem is ongoing and not just the result of malevolence by the homeowners. If given a choice, I'd bet they'd prefer to have their house off the beach.
Anyway, GLO has a ton of info. Quintana Beach is really in trouble.
http://www.glo.state.tx.us/...
Posted by Rob Booth (Slightly Rough) @ 18:20 on 04/21/05
I never meant to suggest the homeowners were malevolent and, therefore, somehow connected to the erosion.
Mother Nature is, of course, reponsible for the erosion.
Where some homeowners are malevolent is in flaunting the Open Beaches Act.
Buying property near the beach in Texas is risky business, because of the Open Beaches Act and ongoing erosion. Property owners need to understand that risk before buying (and, after buying). And they need to be mindful that the beach in front the vegetation line in front of their property isn't "theirs" under Texas law.
Posted by Kevin @ 18:27 on 04/21/05
Redirecting that river was a huge mistake. I've wondered how much of the erosion is the result of that.
Posted by Rob Booth (Slightly Rough) @ 18:52 on 04/21/05
I don't think it's offbeat. It's a classic case of liberal thinking -- make a dumb decision, expect the state to bail you out. Even if the culprit is Mother Nature. Where do these morons come from?
Posted by Scott Chaffin @ 21:17 on 04/21/05
I don't want anyone to lose their property, but the fact is these people are responsible for their own loss. Everyone knows beach property is a risky investment. A saying in Texas is, "If you want a front-row house, buy one on the second row".
Not only that, a law in the 1980's requires purchasers of coastal property to sign 2 documents that acknowledge erosion, the line of vegetation moves, and if their house ends up on the beach that they must remove it - at their own cost.
What really gets me is they were warned, and now they want to change the rules.
What happened to that good old fashioned "personal responsibility for your actions"?
I would think conservative legislators would not want to subsidize risky behavior. Spending tax money to protect some knucklehead with more money than sense is not my idea of good government.
There are currently 116 houses on the public beach easement.
You can buy life ins, health ins, fire ins, but you can't buy erosion insurance.
Coastal banks won't make mortgage loans on front-row houses.
If you can't buy insurance, and can't get a loan, then maybe you shouldn't do it.
And the government should foolish discourage activity that will raise our taxes and insurance rates.
Posted by Ellis Pickett @ 12:26 on 05/04/05
Add Comments
While it is not required, creating an account for commenting provides a number of benefits (such as comment editing and bypassing the captcha challenge). You may log in to your account here.
No flames or impolite behavior. Any questions, see the site policies. Older posts are moderated (because of spammers), so if your post does not appear immediately, that could be why.
HTML will be stripped. URLs will be transformed into hyperlinks.
[b]text[/b] will produce bold text. [i]text[/i] will produce italicized text.
Comments for this post must be approved before being published. Thank you!
BLOG
» Create Account
» Log In
DISCLAIMER
Content and design copyright © 1997-2008, Kevin Whited.
Posts represent the views of Kevin Whited (and occasional guest bloggers) only, and do not necessarily reflect the views of employers, family, friends, or significant others.