Oyster Ruling Released

[Root Canal]

I don't know if many FWE members have heard about this. I don't like it one bit.

http://www.myfoxhouston.com/story/27675546/half-of-galveston-bay-oyster-beds-handed-to-company-in-controversial-lease

[Curmudgeon]

Yeah. I think they're in for one heck of a fight.

[Diablosandwich]

Wow!! I'm ashamed that I never heard of this coming and spoke up. Surely there was some type of legal public notice? It sure seems like it would be tough to keep everyone out of that area, too.
Not to mention the fact that all this is happening in"public" waters.

Just some knee jerk random thoughts.

[JT]

I quit reading after the Ukranian who owns Mishos said "the biggest land theft since we stole Texas from Mexico"

wtf!

[JT]

hes probably a long lost relative of MG

[plugger]

Aside from Michael Ivic being a moron , this is an incredible development that I don't think will proceed . Keep me informed , Dale . I 'll be interested to hear the motive behind this ..... Power grab ? Relative of the oyster company ? Environmental kooks ?

[Root Canal]

Henry,
There is a lot of information on 2Cool. I've been trying to go through it.
What I find strange is (TPWD Chapter 76. Oysters) says this:

Sec. 76.007. MAXIMUM ACREAGE UNDER LOCATION. (a) The department may not issue a certificate of location for a location that includes more than 100 acres of land covered by water.
(b) A person may not own, lease, or control more than 300 acres of land covered by water under certificates of location. A person who does not own, lease, or control more than 300 acres of land may act as an agent for persons who, in the aggregate, own, lease, or control more than 300 acres of land.

Acts 1975, 64th Leg., p. 1405, ch. 545, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1975. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 968, Sec. 41, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.

[SCHU]

I would think the TPWD would have the final say in this. Aren't the prvate reefs leased from the "state"? IMO.

[Ibtsoom]

Oyster Ruling Released

I can guarantee you guys this lease wasn't executed without the input of a bunch of lawyers. I'm sure there was some legal loophole that was exploited to make this happen. It'll most likely change but not without bunches of money spent on both sides on legal fees and as much negative media coverage as they can throw at it to get everyone riled up. Everyone seems to be quick to judge but the truth is that we don't have the entire story and there's not enough information out upon which to make an informed judgement.

[mgstei1]

I never have liked and disagree with any government entity, private ownership of beachfront, bay front, river front, etc. where access by and for the public is restricted or prohibited.

[Oleander Kayaker]

Check out www.oysterstorm.com



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[mgstei1]

Tx's Oleander!!! The hype is all for nothing!!

[Ibtsoom]

That's my family's side mg. Now let's see what the others is..

[Oleander Kayaker]

I never have liked and disagree with any government entity, private ownership of beachfront, bay front, river front, etc. where access by and for the public is restricted or prohibited.

Doesn't apply in this case. Do your research.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Ibtsoom]

Oyster Ruling Released

The Nelsons are my relatives on my fathers side. They're honest, hard working people that came from absolutely nothing.