Just got this from a friend of mine. It's flat out wrong.

I stopped by with Adam on Sunday (on our way back from Arkansas), and fished Rowlett Creek for several hours. It was bitter cold (very hard frost). We fished from first crack of light until about 10:00, with about 30 or so sandies landed. Only one "big" one, the rest were all 10 to 11" range. We didn't keep any. Then, the Garland Police came and rounded everyone up and kicked us all out. They said that the owner of the gun range didn't want people there fishing, because they have to shut down the shooting in case there are people in the line of fire. Now if you look at that whole situation, it's totally absurd. They're gonna kick people out of the creek (20' below ground level of the shooting range), so stray bullets won't hit anyone. Hmmmm. Miles Rd parallels the creek. Are they saying that those bullets will also cross Miles? And the Police are OK with that?

Well, I had to pipe up and argue with them. I told them that respectfully, I had to disagree with them about their ability to kick people out of there, unless they crossed private property in getting to the creekbed. He said that since the landowner owned and paid taxes on both sides of the creek below the bridge that he could keep people out. I said that he was wrong. Point blank. I don't think he liked me arguing with him, in front of all those other fishermen and about five other cops. I told him about the state law that says that you cannot prevent someone from walking in a riverbed up to the annual high water mark on any navigable water in the state of Texas. He said he didn't know of that law. I told him that I would get a copy and take it to the Police Station, and then they would have to stop harassing the fishermen. I also told him that I would check with my lawyer and see if I could do anything about the gun range denying access to the public without a legal right to do so. Maybe even something like a lawsuit. I took a picture of the police and all the 30 or so fishermen that they were escorting out. I think I shook them up a little. I know they were pissed. They sorta followed Adam and I to the car and were looking to see if there was anything we did that was illegal.

I know there is a law which covers trespassing and our rights to use the waterways but I haven't been able to find it yet. If someone knows a site where I can retrieve it please let me know. When I do I'm going to the Police hedquaters in Garland and ask for an explaination from them.

Did anyone else have the same experience there?

Roger

Damn. I wish I was there when that happened. Until that gun range kills somebody they're gonna harrass people, unless they build a Golf Course close by there and the Rich members do something about it.

I was fishing just the other day nad there wen at least 30 or 40 bullets above our heads and hit those trees, I swear the guy shooting them was either drunk or he knew what he was doing, I think a call to Chanell 8 News would help a little as well.

------------------
Please Visit My Forums!

It's my understanding about navigatable water that the land under the water belongs to the land owner. Navigatable water implies you are in a boat and not touching any land, therefore you are in the right-of-way. If you are walking the river bed, you are trespassing.

------------------


[This message has been edited by redfin (edited 04-03-2003).]

Please check out: http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/texaswater/rivers/navlawarticle.htm

Great article, but remember getting shot, hit with a ricochet or brained with a nightstick will all ruin your day.

L. C.

I've been fishing Rowlett Creek for 20years and never heard of such harassment by the police. There must be a new Chief in town or something. Roger, post those photos for us all to see.

HB22

[QUOTE]Originally posted by lcclower:
[B]Please check out: http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/texaswater/rivers/navlawarticle.htm

Clear as mud to me....fishermen interpret one way, landowners the other. By the time you take it to court, the spring spawn run is over.

Just more "guilty until proven innocent" tactics. Keeping the constituents happy....

I am going to be the bad guy here. I agree 100% that you were perfectly legal being there, however, its not the gun ranges fault. Its the police!

Gun ranges are under fire (pardon the pun) from every freaking liberal, gun grabbing person in America. I have personally spoke in front of city council meetings on behalf of the 2 gun ranges i frequent in Collin county. People are trying to shut them down for every reason under the sun..noise, the "people" that hang out at them, etc.

Just think, if someone did get injured as a result of being in the area of a gun range...they would be sued RELENTLESSLY! I dont blame them for not wanting people behind them...in todays sue happy world, someone is just waiting for a big payday from a personal injury suit...i bet those sleaze bag attorneys are the ones doing the shooting!

I too have spent 1000's of hours back on that part of the creek fishing for some 10+ years now and I dont like what the cops are doing either...however, dont screw with the gun range folks!

i hope no one takes offense to this post. if you do, email me.

As soon as my friend gets the film developed he'll be sending me the pics. He lives in Houston and stopped by the creek on the way home from Ark.

When I get the pics I'll find out how to post them.

Roger

boils down to you own and have the right under or above water.You might be mad if you had 30 acres and I stopped and shot a deer you fed all year .

Call me crazy, but doesn't the gun range have a larger problem if ANY bullets can reach beyond the intended shooting area??? I mean if they do then they can reach whatever is beyond the creek. Even a .22 can travel WELL over 1 mile. I'm sure most everyone there is shooting something more powerfull than a .22

I'm a staunch gun advocate but every gun range should be designed for TOTAL safety.

Z

Ricochets can do strange things and end up killing someone who doesent know any better.I dont think this is a personal vendetta against the fisherman on behalf of the Police Department.They are out there trying to save the stupid and ignorant people of this world.

Garland cops have always had there panties on too tight. Never-the-less, We were fishing down stream from gun club 1 yr and tearin em up; A large caliber bullet almost knocked down a tree behind me and I've never been down-stream again. Sandies are fun but not THAT much fun!

The land owner can stop you from crossing their land to get to the creek. Anyone who is on that land without permission is trespassing.What you need to find out is if the creek is a state owned river bed.Land owners do not own the land under the water in state owned river beds in texas.I can tell you this, If you are not in a boat,standing in water,gravel,or sand you are probably trespassing.The best way to stay out of trouble when fishing rivers is to make shure you dont get on any vegetation, If you are standing in the weeds you are probably trespassing.I have fished Texas rivers all my life and I know what I am talking about here and from what I have read here you guys are definatly Trespassing on someone, So make shure that you are legal before you give the cops a bad time or you may end up in court with trespassing charges filed on you. Capt. Steve www.txfishingguide.com

Anyone consider fishing there after the gun range closes. Maybe a night fishing approach would draw less attention.

From The link that LCCLOWER posted ealier:
http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/texaswater/rivers/navlawarticle.htm


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