Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Welcome to kingsnake.com's message board system. Here you may share and discuss information with others about your favorite reptile and amphibian related topics such as care and feeding, caging requirements, permits and licenses, and more. Launched in 1997, the kingsnake.com message board system is one of the oldest and largest systems on the internet.

Click here for Dragon Serpents
Click for ZooMed
Click here to visit Classifieds

ROW definition

Herpo Nov 15, 2007 02:40 PM

Has anyone been able to come up with a legal definition of "right of way"? I can find lots of obscure stuff dealing with purchasing but not anything which defines what the ROW would be as it applies to existing roadways.

A while back someone posted something which came, I believe, from TPWD and defined it as the pavement, paved shoulders berms and ditches adjacent to the pavement. If this is so then walking the cuts off the pavement should be legal.

JH
Herping The Tran- Pecos

Replies (8)

archaeo1 Nov 15, 2007 09:36 PM

I don't know anything about Texas law, but in terms of the places I've worked, a highway right-of-way is defined as the legal easement owned by the highway dept and is often, but not always, marked by the fence on either side. It does not have anything to do with ditches or berms etc except that such features created by the highway dept. will be within the r-o-w. County assessor maps will show this. Hope that helps. -HW

lbenton Nov 16, 2007 12:57 PM

I think one question is that does a code exist in TP&W regs to clearly define a ROW? I know that the state has a definition, but if there is not one in the TP&W regulations it would make this new law a little less than perfectly clear.

Lance
-----
___________________________
Herp Conservation Unlimited

Joe Forks Nov 17, 2007 08:30 AM

If you are not on the ROW then you are on private property (in most instances). If you are on private property w/o permission then you are trespassing. If you have permission then you might as well be on private property rather than the ROW.

I do not advocate breaking the law, but at the same time I do advocate going out and looking / photographing. We have a civil right to be on those public roads. Make sure you know what is against the law (the definition of hunting) and go have fun.

If you are hassled or bullied get the details of the encounter and we will file a civil rights lawsuit.

Have fun, be legal, and be safe.
-----
http://www.hcu-tx.org

LBenton Nov 17, 2007 04:01 PM

>>If you are not on the ROW then you are on private property (in most instances). If you are on private property w/o permission then you are trespassing. If you have permission then you might as well be on private property rather than the ROW.
>>
>>I do not advocate breaking the law, but at the same time I do advocate going out and looking / photographing. We have a civil right to be on those public roads. Make sure you know what is against the law (the definition of hunting) and go have fun.
>>
>>If you are hassled or bullied get the details of the encounter and we will file a civil rights lawsuit.
>>
>>Have fun, be legal, and be safe.
>>-----
>>http://www.hcu-tx.org

Well the simple fact is that this law needs to be fixed because as it is there is no clear way to tell who is taking pictures and who is taking animals. Both may have live animals on them, both may have collecting gear and both may have a camera... But how do you tell who is in violation of the current regulation? I have heard of people taking captive animals outside to get some pictures, so even if they see you pick it up after you took the picture who is to say you did not bring it down with you for a natural photo setting in the first place.

In short we need it fixed on the books next session and in the mean time we need to deal with what is there and try every option to get this law held up with some kind of injunction.

Lance
-----
___________________________
Herp Conservation Unlimited

aspidoscelis Nov 19, 2007 03:47 PM

"Well the simple fact is that this law needs to be fixed because as it is there is no clear way to tell who is taking pictures and who is taking animals. Both may have live animals on them, both may have collecting gear and both may have a camera... But how do you tell who is in violation of the current regulation?"

I'm with you so far.

"I have heard of people taking captive animals outside to get some pictures, so even if they see you pick it up after you took the picture who is to say you did not bring it down with you for a natural photo setting in the first place."

But now this is getting silly. Yes, it is possible for perfectly law-abiding citizens to do things to look like they're breaking the law when they aren't. But, come on, that's just asking for trouble. I wouldn't have much sympathy for someone ticketed in that situation.

Patrick

lbenton Nov 20, 2007 07:05 AM

>>But now this is getting silly. Yes, it is possible for perfectly law-abiding citizens to do things to look like they're breaking the law when they aren't. But, come on, that's just asking for trouble. I wouldn't have much sympathy for someone ticketed in that situation.
>>
>>Patrick

My point is that this law is not a solid one and it has places that a legal activity can get you in trouble and the illegal activity can look legal. It is a mess.

Lance
-----
___________________________
Herp Conservation Unlimited

Aaron Nov 20, 2007 12:33 PM

I feel sorry for any hobbyist who gets a ticket under this roadban law. It's not based in any science, will actually expand the amount of habitat that could potentially get disturbed, forces herpers into dangerous areas at night, hurts small bussinesses like Roy's place and the little restaraunts in Sanderson, and was actually just a favor from a tricky politician bucking for a job in TPWD, who decided to help a small group of elite TPWD guy get revenge on a few herpers they had a long standing personal grudges against.

rustduggler Dec 27, 2007 10:54 PM

If stopped on a roadway/highway or pulled over and stopped on the shoulder it is a dangerouse situation. I used to collect on texas roadways and as much as i liked doing it, i realized even then that it was dangerous. Was danger the main motivator for the passing of the new law? Maybe/probaby not. However, no intelligent/reasonable person can argue that regardless of past records of no herpers being involved in accidents, it is not danger.I still wish we had the right to do so, even though I am no longer able to collect due to my current job which does not allow me to vacation during the summer. do I wish the law was reversed? Yes. Do I think road cruising is dangerouse? Yes. Regards, Rusty. PS: Any law enforcement officer from any state will confirm that road cruising for herps "Texas Style" is dangerous. Anyone who has been to any type of road/driving safety classes would agree. Regards, Rusty

Site Tools