TexasCHLforum.com

and where in that link does it refer to any case law that would make one believe that the federal government has any jurisdiction over waterways within the interior of the State of Texas? We aren't Colorado, New Mexico, Illinois, or any other state. We were formerly a sovereign nation that retained control over our public lands and inland waterways.

Just for kicks, do a bit of research to find out the extents of our claim to coastal boundary in the Gulf

Jacob Staff wrote:mr surveyor, I believe you nailed it.

Texas has many unique land laws because of our history.

State of Oklahoma v. State of Texas 258 U.S. 574

mr surveyor wrote:Now I'm wondering if I know Jacob Staff professionally???

It is very possible that we have met, I am in the Houston area. Did you make it down to The Woodlands last year?


Welcome aboard!!

No, we didn't make that trip. We did make the trip year before last down to Silsbee to see Darrel and Nedra, and did their float trip seminar on the gradient boundary. That was a blast. By the way, I don't recall seeing you on the POB board recently, or did you change your sign in name in the last couple of years?

J.D.

the only cases I can certainly confirm where fed law supercedes Texas law concerning disposition of land and or waterways is in shared state or international boundaries, or in lands set aside as National parks or National forests . Texas retained sovereignty of its lands and waters when taking statehood. Generally in the case of waterways, particularly small streams and creeks, land owners can, and do share ownership to the center of the stream, although the water in the stream may be considered shared by the public, particularly land owners downstream that may depend on the water for agricultural needs. Although the feds do wrench certain control away from the state in certain matters concerning their interpretation of "wetlands", most laws goverening Texas waterways are still State of Texas. The mention of the "gradient boundary" by Mr. Jacob Staff is an interesting subject. This became the model for establishment of the boundary line between the State and the upland uwners as a result of the settlement of a 1930's (petroleum related) boundary suit between the State of Texas and the State of Oklahoma (mainly the Federal government using Oklahoma). This case actually went back to the original description of the claimed boundaries of the Republic of Texas, which unfortunately was interpreted to intend the South bank of the Red River. An engineer/surveyor, Col. Arthur A. Stiles, was instructed by the Federal government to determine a proper and reproducable method of establishing a boundary line on a dynamic physical monument such as a river bank. After the state/federal border issue was settled, the State of Texas did adopt the method of Stile's gradient boundary as a means by which to determine boundaries of navigable rivers, but the state does have control of those waterways, not the federal government. Consider the Sabine River Authority, or the Trinity River Authority, or others that control the use, quality, safety, etc., of those watershed areas. They are state agencies, not federal. In the case of other states that were originated from the federal domain, i.e. "public lands", the federal government did/does retain the water as well as any unpatented lands. This includes states that originated from conquest as well as purchase. Texas was never taken by conquest, nor purchase by the federal government. The U.S. government did purchase several million acres of our previously claimed panhandle that extended northward to Wyoming, prior to statehood, which allowed the "Republic" to pay off many of it's debts and retain it's sovereignty over the land and waterways.

I know there are attornies on this forum that can probably better describe this subject (with the exception of the boundary determination procedures), and hopefully one will take the opportunity.

I am open to be corrected if I am wrong.

casingpoint

you need to look at Texas law... not U.S. law concerning riparian rights. They are NOT the same. I will let the legal experts here make that distinction. Since lurking here for quite some time now, I know there are some very knowledgeable legal experts on board, and all in all a very intellegent group of folks in general.

Now I'm wondering if I know Jacob Staff professionally???

jacob staff has nailed it with the link he posted describing the state owned river bed per the gradient boundary. It sounds to me like "rambo boy" is actually performing a dangerous act within the boundaries of a state owned river bed.