Public Access to Galveston Beaches Should be Reconsidered

Because of the damage still left over from 2008’s Hurricane Ike, Galveston was going to begin a huge project effort to repair the six miles of eroded beach in mid-November. But on the day it was to start, the state government canceled the $40 million development on account of a recent Texas Supreme Court decision that undermined the Open Beaches Act, which guarantees free public access to beaches on the Gulf of Mexico.

Galveston has now joined main state agencies in asking the court to reassess a rule that allows private property privileges over public access to Texas shores. The mayor of Galveston, Joe Jaworski said he thought the Supreme Court needed to understand the impact of its ruling and the fact that they just changed Galveston Island's ability to nourish its beaches. The court’s ruling had to do with the “dry beach” area, from the high-tide mark to the vegetation line. Even if it’s privately owned, according to the Open Beaches Act, an easement normally guarantees public access to the dry beach.

But the court said that the public easement can move or shift because of the bit-by-bit erosion that happens on the shore, possibly reshaping the coast at times and causing buildings that are in the middle of the public easement to be moved, improperly breaching the property rights of the homeowners. Some members of the Supreme Court think that the ruling will risk the public's right to have free and open beaches.

I feel as though the Texas Supreme Court should rethink their decision. They cannot simply violate the public’s right to freely roam a piece of land, let alone a piece of land which is not privately owned. The only areas on the shores which are privately owned are the properties built on the “dry beach” area, which are usually houses and condominiums. So obviously the public cannot set foot within the premises of someone’s home, but they can surely freely roam the area outside of that person’s home, which is the actual shore.