TPW Commission
Commission Meeting, March 28, 2024
Transcript
TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE COMMISSION
March 28, 2024
TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT
COMMISSION HEARING ROOM
4200 SMITH SCHOOL ROAD
AUSTIN, TEXAS 78744
COMMISSION MEETING
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right. Good morning everyone.
Before we begin, I'll take roll. Chairman Hildebrand, I'm present.
Vice-Chair Bell?
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Present.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Commissioner Abell?
COMMISSIONER ABELL: Present.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Commissioner Doggett?
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: Present.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Commissioner Foster?
COMMISSIONER FOSTER: Present.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Commissioner Galo?
COMMISSIONER PATTON, JR.: She's here.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Here, okay.
Commissioner Patton?
COMMISSIONER PATTON, JR.: Here.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Commissioner Rowling?
COMMISSIONER ROWLING: Here.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Commissioner Scott?
COMMISSIONER SCOTT: Here.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Well-done.
All right. This meeting's called to order --
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Chairman, if I -- microphone, please. Microphone, please.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Oh, sorry. Apologies, apologies.
This meeting -- I'm not starting over. This meeting is called to order March 28th, 2024, at 9:05 a.m.
Before proceeding with any business, I believe Dr. Yoskowitz has a statement to make.
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Public notice of this meeting containing all items on the proposed agenda has filed in the Office of the Secretary of State, as required by Chapter 551 Government Code referred to as the Open Meetings Act. I would like for this fact to be noted in the official record of this meeting.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you.
First is the approval of minutes from the Commission Meeting held January 25th, 2024, which have already been distributed. Is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER SCOTT: So moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Commissioner Bell second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor say aye.
(Chorus of ayes)
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any opposed? Hearing none, the motion carries. Thank you.
Next is the approval of minutes from the Commission Meeting held March 4th, 2024, which have already been distributed. Is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER ROWLING: Rowling so moves.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER ABELL: Abell second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor please say aye.
(Chorus of ayes)
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries. Thank you.
Next is the acknowledgment of the list of donations, which has already been distributed. Is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER PATTON, JR.: Patton moves.
COMMISSIONER FOSTER: So moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER FOSTER: Second, Foster.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in a favor, please say aye.
(Chorus of ayes)
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries.
And once again, thank you, all of the donors for your gifts and contributions. It's greatly appreciated for the Department. It's a big part of what we do. So, thank you.
Next is the consideration of contracts, which have already been distributed. Is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER SCOTT: So moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Second, Commissioner Bell.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor please say aye.
(Chorus of ayes)
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries. Thank you.
Now for the special recognitions, retirements, and service award presentation. Dr. Yoskowitz, please make the presentations.
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Chairman Hildebrand, if you'll join Dee down here and then we'll --
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right.
DR. YOSKOWITZ: -- as we go through these.
This is -- I say this every time because every time it's true. This is one of the best parts of the Commission Meeting when we get to recognize those that have served the State and the Department for a number of years. Some of them are retiring. Some of them are going to continue in service. And it's just an opportunity to pause for a bit and do that.
We have a lot today in the room. This is -- this might be, I think, the biggest crew that I've been able to honor in their service so far.
So first off, every March meeting we recognize the Shikar Safari Officer of the Year and this year's Shikar Safari Officer of the Year is Dewayne Noble. Dewayne Noble is known for anything, it's his positive attitude and commitment to being the best he can be every day. Dewayne represents the true nature of the Texas game warden spirit with an upbeat, optimistic personality that is contagious to fellow wardens and the public alike.
Dewayne graduated from the 53rd Game Warden Academy in 2008 and was assigned to Gray County where he served that community as their warden until 2012. In 2012, Warden Noble transferred to Rains County -- a little further west -- where he continues to live. Dewayne has served Texas Parks and Wildlife with distinction for over 16 years and has made a vital impact everywhere he has traveled. He's viewed as a leader not only within the Department, but also within his community. Dewayne's work ethic is unequaled in the district and yet he strikes a great balance between family and career. In fact, his family is taking up, I think, the last two rows back there.
Thank you-all for coming.
He routinely demonstrates that willingness to go beyond the call of duty by doing more than others expect. Dewayne practices community policing and is active at many levels in his community, including civic and community athletic programs. This past year, Warden Noble personally volunteered for numerous events past his regular duties in Rains County. Some of his many assignments and accomplishments this past year included search and rescue operations, drownings, boat wrecks, hunting accidents, kid fish events, youth hunts, wildlife permit inspections, high profile Lake Fork bass tournaments, and multiple tours of Operation Lone Star.
He's a master peace officer and serves as a Texas Commission on Law Enforcement instructor, firearms instructor, and firearms armorer in the division. As well he has served on the Rural Operations Group for 11 years, where he has been instrumental in border operations, security details, and numerous search and arrest warrant operations. Dewayne lives in Emory with his wife Emily and their three thriving children Railynn, Baylie, and Ross. It's my honor and privilege to announce Dewayne Noble as the 2024 Shikar Safari Officer of the Year.
Eric Stumberg, if you'd like to come up and say a few words on behalf of the organization, that would be great.
MR. ERIC STUMBERG: Thank you. Thank you, Commissioners. Shikar Safari Club is a group of international hunter conservationists. It's been around since 1955. One of the programs -- and it's basically based on two things: Ethical hunting and conservation. As we know, the biggest -- one of the biggest impacts is game laws and the enforcement of them. And as such, we have a program that's been running for 40 years in all 50 states and 10 Canadian provinces that's a peer-awarded Wildlife Officer of the Year. So Officer Noble is the MVP of Texas and as we know, Texas Parks and Wildlife is the best Parks and Wildlife in the North -- in North America. So you're the MVP of North America. So, congratulations and thank you.
(Round of applause and photographs)
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Next we'd like to recognize a couple of individuals that are saying goodbye to their service to the State and to the Department. The first one is Anthony Corcoran, who attended the 44th Texas Game Warden Academy in 1996. Anthony served with distinction at various assignments and stations, including Angelina, Montgomery, and Walker Counties. His tireless efforts have made a significant impact on preserving the wildlife and ensuring the safety of our communities.
Anthony's outstanding achievements such as being awarded the National Wild Turkey Federation Game Warden of the Year in 2004, speak volumes about his professionalism and expertise in the field. His contributions have not only been recognized locally, but also nationally, reflecting a high regard in which he is held. His dedication to continuous learning and skill development is evident through his roles as a licensed Texas Commission of Law Enforcement instructor, national firearms instructor, Simuntions instructor, Glock armorer, M4 armorer, and National Association of State Boating Law Administrators Certified Airboat Operator. His commitment to excellence sets a remarkable example for his colleagues and future generations of Game Wardens. His unwavering dedication to duty has ensured the safety and well-being of our communities and wildlife and his selfless service and will be remembered and appreciated. Retired with 28 years of service to the State and the Department, Anthony Corcoran.
(Round of applause and photographs)
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Next we'd like to recognize Anitra Hall. Anitra began her career with the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department in the Law Enforcement Division on November 1st, 2000. In 2015, Anitra transferred to State Parks Region 4. In 2020, Anitra became a certified Texas contract developer. She assisted in the implementation of the centralized accounting and payroll personnel system known as CAPPS to us all, which is no small feat. Thank you, Anitra.
Her contributions consisted of the development and maintenance of several parks, rebuilding the residence at Stephen F. Austin and Village Creek State Parks, and refurbishing both residences at Lake Livingston State Park. She was also involved in the repairs to Battleship Texas before its departure from the San Jacinto battleground. In 2023, she was an essential partner with American Youth Works to repair trails at Stephen F. Austin State Park and worked diligently to resurface and upgrade the basketball court at the park. Retired with 23 years of service to the State and to the Department, Anitra Hill.
(Round of applause and photographs)
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Next we'd like to recognize those that are still in service to the Department and to the State.
First is Hugh Glenewinkel who began his career at Texas Parks and Wildlife Department as a volunteer at the A.E. Wood Fish Hatchery on September of 1992. In January of 1993, he was hired on a fish and wildlife technician at A.E. Wood, where he served in that role until December of 1998 and was promoted to a biologist at the Old Jasper State Fish Hatchery.
In 2003, Hugh transferred back to A.E. Wood as a biologist and has continued to work at the hatchery since that time. During his tenure with the Department, Hugh has been responsible for developing many protocols and innovations that are used by the hatchery system today. Hugh has been responsible for writing culture manuals that are used in our hatcheries and is especially skilled in the culture of Largemouth bass.
Over his career, Hugh has been responsible for rearing and stocking of millions of sport fish in the public waters of Texas. With 30 years of service, Hugh Glenewinkel.
(Round of applause and photographs)
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Next we'd like to recognize Ava Sumners, who began her career with Texas Parks and Wildlife Department on December 15th, 1998, as an administrative assistant in the Lufkin Law Enforcement Office. Ava has always strived to assist Region 3 game wardens and supervisors with administrative tasks. She has been -- in her words -- mother hen to all her game wardens and supervisors.
Ava has assisted all four district offices within Region 3 in streamlining procedures to ensure the highest level of accountability and consistency in each office. She recently was part of a statewide planning committee to help implement consistency and accountability in the Department's Law Enforcement offices. She has a servant's heart for the public, game wardens, supervisor, and other personnels. She will do whatever it takes to deliver the best customer service and make sure that no goes -- no need goes unmet.
Ava is a valuable team leader to all. Among Ava's greatest accomplishment is her dedication to her family. With 25 years of service, Ava Sumners.
(Round of applause and photographs)
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Next up, we'd like to recognize Claudia Annette Armendariz. Began her career with the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department December 1st, 1998. She was hired as an accounting clerk and has advanced to an administrative assistant in the Brownsville Law Enforcement Office. Claudia has a servant's heart. Her passion for serving others has gained her a great support with her supervisors, coworkers, and general public.
In 2017, she was issued a Director's Citation Award for her compassion and willingness to serve her Law Enforcement Division in their time of need. Her dedication and assistance go above and beyond. Claudia is always ready to learn something new and take on new assignments. With 25 years of service, Claudia Armendariz.
(Round of applause and photographs)
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Being from Flour Bluff, just outside of Corpus Christi or inside of Corpus Christi -- depends on how you look at that -- Mike Felts aspired from an early age to work for Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. As he watched the redfish wars unfold in the 70s and 80s, he knew he wanted to make a difference. On January 8th, 1999, Mike joined the Department in the State Parks Division at Mustang State Park. And in 2003, he accepted a position at the CCA Marine Development Center -- or Hatchery -- in Flour Bluff.
In Mike's tenure at the Marine Development Center, he has been part of a team which has raised over 200 million Red drum, Spotted seatrout, and Southern flounder that have been stocked into our bays and estuaries. Mike has personally stocked 17 million of these, and he has counted every one. In 2007, Mike was part of the Green sea turtle rescue team that was awarded the Outstanding Team Award at the employee recognitions awards.
Aside from the fish culture, Mike oversees all maintenance projects at the hatchery without outsources many of these. In fact, he showed off -- I was there a couple weeks ago -- showed off a nice, new tank transfer for our stockings. He has been intimately involved with many infrastructure projects at the Marine Development Center, working along side the Infrastructure Division and private contractors.
Throughout his career, Mike has been a great mentor to many at the hatchery, technicians, and biologists. With 25 years of service, Mike Felts.
(Round of applause and photographs)
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Craig Bonds, better known by his colleagues as Skippy, began his career with Texas Parks and Wildlife Department in 1999 as a young assistant direct -- district fisheries biologist in Inland Fisheries Division at Tyler and San Marcos. He later became a District Supervisor in San Angelo and Regional Director in Tyler before accepting his Division Director role in 2015.
Since last July, Craig has served as our Chief Operating Officer. He is a graduate of the Governor's Executive Development Program, National Conservation Leadership Institute, and the Department's former Natural Leaders Program. Craig led our Agency's efforts to development and implement our strategic Recruitment, Retention, and Reactivation Plan, known as R3; sponsored the creation of the Department's mentoring programs. Craig has championed countless other collaborative endeavors with partners inside and outside of the Department. With a 25 years of service, Craig Bonds.
(Round of applause and photographs)
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Next we'd like to recognize Nathan Reynolds who began his career with the Department in June of 1994 with a summer internship at Possum Kingdom State Fish Hatchery. Passionate about providing outdoor recreational opportunities, Nathan temporarily ventured beyond the Department, only to return back in March of 2004 as a fisheries technician at A.E. Wood State Fish Hatchery.
Over the next 16 years with the Inland Fisheries Division, Nathan consistently contributed to the Department's success with aquaculture knowledge and expertise in maintenance and repair of plumbing, electrical, and mechanical systems. Nathan chose to pivot his career focus, joining the State Parks Division as the Maintenance Supervisor at Bastrop State Park.
In August 2023, Nathan was promoted to Superintendent at Palmetto State Park, where he continues to refine his management skills, spearheading park administration and operation efforts. With 20 years of service, Nathan Reynolds.
(Round of applause and photographs)
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Next up, we'd like to recognize Colonel Chad Jones who began his career with the Department in June 2004 with the 50th Game Warden cadet class held here in Austin. Prior to him being hired, he was fortunate to be introduced to the local game warden in Huntsville, who assisted him gaining an internship and numerous opportunities to work alongside and witness firsthand the professional community and conservation work that the Texas game wardens are so well-known for.
After graduation, he was assigned to his first duty station in Brazos County. He served there for five years before transferring to Trinity County in East Texas. While in Trinity County, Chad earned a promotion to Lieutenant at the Game Warden Training Center in Hamilton. Chad assisted with cadet training until he was promoted to Captain in Region 5 District 2, Uvalde County.
Chad remained in Uvalde until his promotion to Major Game Warden in Region 8 in Corpus Christi and a subsequent transfer of duty station as Major for Region 3 in East Texas. In July 2020, Chad was promoted to the rank of Colonel for the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Law Enforce -- Law Enforcement Division. With 20 years of service to the State and to the Department, Colonel Chad Jones.
(Round of applause and photographs)
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Next -- next we'd like to recognize Russell Hooten who began his career with the Department in January of 2004 in the Wildlife Habitat Assessment Program, recently reorganized as the Ecological Environmental Planning Program. During his tenure with the program, he has reviewed and commented on over 4,000 proposed development projects in South Texas, providing comments and recommendations on each to help conserve the state's fish and wildlife resources.
Russell has participated in or led several multi -- multidivisional teams in responding to complex development projects. He's a member in several interagency working groups as well. In 2019, Russell began working with the Department's Wildlife Diversity staff, university researchers, and industrial developers to develop a Texas tortoise relocation project to evaluate the efficacy of translocation as a conservation mitigation option for Texas tortoises. With 20 years of service to the State and to the Department, Russell Hooten.
(Round of applause and photographs)
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Next we'd like to recognize Johnny Heaton. Began his career with the State of Texas in the corrections with the Texas Department of Criminal Justice on May 2nd, 1994. While working there, he earned a bachelor of business administration from Sam Houston State University.
On January 1st, 2004, Johnny began his career with the Department. He served as a Grimes County game warden until promoting to Lieutenant in Lubbock in January of 2011. In February of 2014, Johnny started serving as a Captain in the College Station district. Throughout his career, he has committed himself to providing Texans with the highest quality of conservation law enforcement possible and strives daily to project this virtue onto his staff.
While working in College Station, Johnny earned masters of science from Sam Houston State University and a master of arts from Dallas Theological Seminary. He's very involved in his community, where he cofounded Brazos Valley Crusaders baseball with his wife Jennifer. With 20 years of service to Texas and the Department, Johnny Heaton.
(Round of applause and photographs)
DR. YOSKOWITZ: And now we'd like to recognize Joann Garza-Mayberry who began her career with the Texas Parks and Wildlife on January 1st, 2004. After graduation from the Texas Game Warden Academy in Austin, Joann was assigned to her first duty station in Caldwell County, where she continues to serve -- Dee you know --
MS. HALLIBURTON: I know that town.
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Throughout her tenure, Joann has been a leader in game warden recruitment and emergency management operations where she received numerous condemnations for her work as the Public Information Officer for Caldwell County Emergency Operations Center throughout COVID. She serves as the Region 7 Public Information Officer where she has represented the Law Enforcement Division in training videos; local, national, and international news; magazines; podcasts; radio and social media.
She created and annually recognizes that a Caldwell -- she created and annually organizes -- excuse me -- the Caldwell County Girls Outdoor Workshop. A unique program toward teaching young women skills in archery, kayaking, fishing, shooting. Joann earned the Director's Lifesaving Citation in 2016 for saving a man who was thrown from his boat on Lake Bastrop and later performed heroic actions to stop the runaway boat.
In 2021, Joann was awarded the Best Police Officer in Caldwell County, that honor from the Lockhart Post Register. With 20 years of service, Joann Garza-Mayberry.
(Round of applause and photographs)
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Chair -- Chairman, that concludes my presentation.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, Dr. Yoskowitz.
And thank you and congratulations to all the honorees. You sit there -- I say this many times. You sit there and you look at the plaque and you see 20, 25, 30 years and, you know, it's easy just to pass that by quickly; but, I mean, that's a lifetime of work and I just I cannot tell you how much we appreciate the dedication and service to the Department. You guys are fantastic. So, thank you very much. All right.
(Round of applause)
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: At this time I'd like to inform the audience that everyone is welcome to stay for the remainder of the meeting. However, if anyone wishes to leave, now would be an appropriate time to do so. Thank you for coming. All of you. Families as well.
(Recess taken)
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right. Thank you very much.
Action Item No. 1, License, Permit, Boat, and Motor Fees and 2024-2025 Statewide Recreational and Commercial Fishing Proclamation, Oversized Spotted Seatrout Tag, Recommended Adoption of Proposed Changes. Mr. Dakus Geeslin, please make your presentation.
MR. GEESLIN: Good morning and happy opening day of major league baseball, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, Dr. Yoskowitz.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Go Astros.
MR. GEESLIN: For the record, my name is Dakus Geeslin, I serve as our Deputy Director in the Coastal Fisheries Division. Today I bring you a proposal for Spotted seatrout regulations, specifically related to that tag and associated fee and today I'll really try to articulate the changes or modifications made to that proposal that we discussed yesterday in our Work Session.
So just as a reminder, the current regulations that went into effect on Tuesday as a result of that January Commission Meeting and following action, the current regulations we have at this moment include a three-fish daily bag limit, a 15- to 20-inch slot limit, and allowance of one oversized trout greater than 30 inches as part of that daily bag. That's what we have into effect and those will remain -- assuming the proposal is adopted as-is -- those will remain in effect until September 1.
Now based on our discussion yesterday, I've modified my proposal slide accordingly and attempted to really kind of highlight those changes through the strike-through and highlights here. So that proposal incorporating those modifications includes that one Spotted seatrout over 28 inches per licensed angler per year via a tag system, just like our Red drum tag. That is proposed to go into effect that next license year September 1. This also includes the optional purchase of an additional bonus tag per year for that $3 fee for licensed anglers or purchasing an oversized tag for exempt anglers.
You'll note that I did remove the component that included that would have removed a -- the oversized fish until the tag system is in place. I've removed that. So if adopted, these regs would go into effect on September 1, 2024. Just those two bullets at top.
We talked extensively yesterday about the small percentage of larger trout we see in our creel surveys and in the population reflected through our gillnets. So I won't belabor that point too much. The simply just don't account for a large portion of the population there. This slide and the next one kind of highlight the rarity of those fish within our creel surveys and within the population, but we certainly recognize their incredible value to the fishery and to our anglers. They have told us time and time again through public hearings, public scoping that they want that opportunity to catch a trophy trout of a lifetime. Simply by protecting those larger trout and leaving more of them in the water, we're going to move in that direction. Similarly our gillnet, our gillnet data from the past ten years shows us that size structure of the population and you see just a small percentage of those. Very small percentage of those are 30 inches and larger and 28 inches and larger. You've got about two and a half percent. And even when you get down to 25 inches, not even 10 percent of that population is that size or larger. Again, over time by protecting those larger fish, we'd expect those percentage to increase within the population, but also increase -- we'd see those increase with our angler -- angler harvest as well.
I'll now walk through our timeline of proposed new trout regulations and those that were adopted back in January. Again, we're -- today, we have that current -- the current regulation includes that three-fish bag, 15- to 20-inch slot, and one daily over 30. Those regulations went into place Tuesday. Today I'm here before you with a tag proposal with those modifications we discussed yesterday and if adopted, that tag system will be in place for license year 2025, with tags available for purchase -- both digitally and through our paper, traditional paper format -- on August 15th, with those regulations kicking in on September 1.
If adopted as-is, anglers are allowed to harvest one trout over 30 inches per day as part of their daily bag until September 1, 2024. At that time, we would then change to a tag system to allow for that one over 28, with the additional option for the bonus tag and that associated fee.
As part of our public comment effort, we held a virtual public hearing last week and as a means for gathering our public comment, we have the online public portal. We split that into two components. That first component is the tag system, the optional bonus tag and the associated fee. The second section relate -- is related to the oversized trout distinction at 30 inches or greater.
So as of yesterday at 3:00 p.m., we've received 916 public comments and you'll see -- and this is -- this is specific to the tag and the fee. We've got 47 percent of those in agreeance. 39 percent of those oppose the proposal and they suggest no tag, no oversize harvest, no bonus tag, the tag fee should be higher, and again government overreach. 14 percent of those that commented on this remained neutral.
Of note, our Coastal Resources Advisory Committee recommended that we prohibit the take of an oversized trout until such time that an oversized tag can be implemented. They also recommended the oversized tag be for one fish over 28 inches per person per year, just like our Red drum tag. The Coastal Conservation Association, as an organization, has also provided official comments. They're in support of the proposal of the tag system for oversized Spotted seatrout, except for the digital bonus tag. They remain neutral. CCA Texas also suggests an oversized tag for 25 -- for trout 25 inches or greater.
Now related to the length determination for oversized trout -- and remember, this proposal as it went out for public comment had the proposal of an oversized trout at 30 inches. So that reflects the public comment related to that 30-inch trout. You'll see that 46 percent of those that commented, of those 916 comments, were in full support of the proposal as-is. 42 percent of those opposed. They felt that the length should be at -- the length determination for oversized trout should be at 25 inches, no oversized harvest whatsoever, they didn't want a bonus tag, don't want a tag system, and felt that there was government overreach. Again, 12 percent provided a neutral position on the proposal.
So with that, Mr. Chairman, I recommend that the Commission adopt the proposal as articulated on this slide, with those modifications as we discussed yesterday in our March 27th Work Session, and those would define the oversized Spotted seatrout as greater than 28 inches in length. That would go into effect on September 1, the new license year. But during that time, from this time and current in the regulations as of today, anglers would be allowed to harvest one oversized trout per day inside the daily bag limit until implementation of a tagging system goes into effect.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay. Thank you.
Any questions for Dakus?
All right. If not, we've got several people via teleconference and then a few in person.
So first, first person up will be David Dillman of Jamaica Beach. He's on the phone. Mr. Dillman.
MR. DAVID DILLMAN: Hello.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: And, Mr. Dillman, just -- and for everyone -- same rules apply that have always applied. Three minutes to speak and there will be a light that comes on for those that are here present in the room. So with that --
MR. DAVID DILLMAN: All right.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: -- take it away Mr. Dillman.
MR. DAVID DILLMAN: So first, I want to thank you-all for giving me the opportunity to speak. Second of all, I want to wish you-all a good Good Friday and a very happy Easter.
So why are we here? You know, I think we all can agree that there is some problems with our Spotted seatrout, especially when it concerns fish above 20 inches. So I've been fortunate enough to be a guide fisherman in Galveston Bay for 30 -- I'm going into my 35th year. I've got two more years until I reach 65. So I just want to get there so I can get my -- whatever it is -- the government insurance. So, anyway.
But here's where -- here's where I'm at. The truth be told, less than one -- it's a million license holders. Less than 1 percent of those license holders have ever caught a Speckled trout over 25 inches and that number will drop drastically when it comes to 28 inches. It will be even further when it comes to 30 inches.
In 1996, the late Jim Wallace caught the state record trout and he caught it on conventional tackle. It should be listed in the record book, but it's not. They have a uniform fish, but Wallace's fish was weighed and witnessed on certified scales. In 2007, the Lower Laguna Madre went to a five-fish limit and one over 25 and that state record has not been broken yet. They just held a Legends tournament down there with some of the best trout fishermen on the Texas coasts. One 9-pound trout was caught in two days, no 8-pound trout, and 13 7-pound trout. So do limits really change anything?
I'm on the fence with that. I don't think they ever have, and I don't think they will. But I do support what the Coastal Fisheries Division came up with. A 28-inch fish is a true trophy for most trout anglers on the Texas coast and I'm talking for the general guy. The guy that may come two or three times a year and fish and by chance he catches a 29-inch fish and you're going to tell that individual he has to throw it back. I think that's wrong.
When a trout reaches 28 inches, it's like a big buck. You know, ranchers say, Hey, harvest the old, mature male bucks. Why? Because they know that they're not fertile, that that sperm doesn't swim. Same thing with a trout. When it starts reaching 28 plus inches, those -- while it may produce eggs, those eggs are not fertile. The fish that are fertile, the vast fish that we have to protect are those 20 to 25 inchers. They are the prolific spawners of the bay system. They will spawn three to four times in a season. I don't know a lot about anything, but I do know a little bit about Spotted seatrout.
So I am for the proposal as written, as with the Coastal Fisheries Division. Put forth, I believe that they are -- you know, you-all are facing -- you know, the State of Texas gives them -- you know, places their trust in them on how to manage the fish and what happened in coastal -- I mean, what happened in community meeting --
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Mr. Dillman.
MR. DAVID DILLMAN: -- was egregious -- yeah.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: I apologize. Just your three minutes is up. Do you want to wrap up?
MR. DAVID DILLMAN: (No response).
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank -- all right. Well, thank you for your comments. We certainly appreciate it very much.
Next up is David Rowsey of Corpus. David? Mr. Rowsey?
AT&T OPERATOR: Mr. Rowsey, if you are on the line, please press pound to identify yourself. Mr. Rowsey is currently not dialed into the phone line.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay. Thank you.
And then we have a third now, a Shane Bonnot -- Bonnet. Mr. Bonnet, if you're on the phone. Oh, in person. Okay, sorry. Okay.
MR. SHANE BONNOT: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners. My name's Shane Bonnot, and I'm here to speak on behalf of CCA Texas. First off, I want to thank the Commission and Department staff for all the time and energy spent on this subject, especially over the last seven months. I think about -- I think back to last August during the Annual Public Hearing, you guys listened to comments from anglers. All the way to today's decision, staff has conducted six public scoping meetings up and down the coast from Port Arthur to down south in Harlingen; sent out over 10,000 surveys, e-mail surveys to the public; has reached out through public hearings, again, all across the coast; conducted online and virtual scoping and public hearings. So a tremendous amount of work has been conducted by the staff to get us to this point. And all the while they're doing their normal day-to-day operations of managing our fishery. So much appreciation is extended to them.
At the same time, you guys have reviewed the information and listened to public feedback and developed a proposal that was on the screen today, balancing conservation and opportunity. And it's those two words -- conservation and opportunity -- are why CCA Texas has maintained the position of setting the tag limit at 25 inches or greater. Anglers in Sabine Lake and Galveston Bay don't encounter large trout as often as those on the lower coast do. And no matter where any angler fishes, they should have that opportunity to harvest one large trout per year. That opportunity should be present.
You put a great deal of thought into the motion that's before you this morning, into developing this program. You've done so with that balanced approach. And this is current proposal also envelops the KISS principle and while there's no perfect answer, there is value in keeping it simple. And so we appreciate your thoughts to get us to this point where we're at this morning. Thanks for your actions last January and you're continued actions today. We look forward to what the trout fishery holds in the future. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great. Thank you very much, Shane.
All right. With that, I'll just say anecdotally, some friends of mine were on a fishing trip in Baffin Bay and they caught a 28-and-a-half and 29-inch trout, which is quite amazing in one trip. So I think we're doing something right hopefully.
So with that, is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER ABELL: Abell so moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER PATTON, JR.: Patton second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor please say aye.
(Chorus of ayes)
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you. That's been a long process, but good regulation. Thank you.
All right. Action Item No. 2, 2024-2025 Statewide Hunting and Migratory Game Bird Proclamation, Recommended Adoption of Proposed Changes. We've got three presenters: Mr. Fitzsimmons, Mr. Hardin, and Mr. Korzekwa. Mr. Fitzsimmons.
MR. FITZSIMMONS: Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. For the record, my name's Owen Fitzsimmons. I'm the Webless Migratory Game Bird Program Leader for the Department. Today Wildlife Division staff are seeking the adoption of the proposed changes to the 2024-25 statewide hunting and migratory game bird proclamations.
Staff propose the following items pertaining the migratory game bird proclamation and I'll go through each of these in more detail in the following slides and I will provide public comment for you as well.
As presented yesterday, the Light Goose Conservation Order was established by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 1999 outside of the normal federal frameworks for hunting seasons as a special management action with the intent to use harvest as a means of population control for what was, at the time, an overabundance of Mid-continent light geese. Given the current rapid and substantial decline of the overall population of Mid-continent light geese, along with the continual decline in the number of light geese that winter in Texas, staff view this as a serious resource issue that requires immediate attention to conserve and recover this valuable state resource.
Staff held two public scoping sessions in November for public input. The results of which were presented in the January Commission Meeting and based on that feedback and the unanimous support of our Migratory Game Bird Technical and Advisory Committees staff propose the following changes: The elimination of the Light Goose Conservation Order in Texas, decreasing the daily bag limit from ten to five during the regular season, standardizing the possession limit to three times the daily bag limit for consistency with all other migratory game birds, and extending the regular hunting season by 19 days into February in the Eastern Zone for geese.
On the proposal to eliminate the Light Goose Conservation Order, as of this morning, we've received 300 total online responses. We've also received one letter opposing. We received one letter this morning strongly in support. And we've received two e-mails, one in support and one in opposition. Total, we've got about 26 percent in support and 74 percent that disagree.
Many of those who disagreed commented about a loss of opportunity. Staff view the elimination of the Conservation Order as part of a package of proposals designed to reduce hunting exposure and pressure on a rapidly declining resource that has had little to no reprieve from continuous hunting pressure for 25 years. The days of opportunity lost by the elimination of the Conservation Order would be offset, to the extent possible, by the 19-day increase in the regular season in the Eastern Zone, which would result in a full 107-day regular season which is the maximum allowed for any migratory game bird under federal frameworks.
We've also had several comments stating that this proposal is unnecessary, as the reason for the decline in wintering geese in Texas is habitat related. Staff agree that loss of habitat was a significant factor in the decline, but it was exacerbated greatly by the continued high level of hunting pressure and exposure on light geese in Texas while this habitat footprint was shrinking over the past two decades.
Again, this proposal is part of a package designed to reduce hunting pressure on the remaining wintering geese, while minimizing a loss of days of opportunity. And also as noted yesterday, there's still a lot of misinformation this population of light geese remains overabundant and needs to be reduced, which is simply not true.
On the proposal to reduce the bag limit from ten to five, we've received a total of 295 online responses and one e-mail in support. 32 percent in support total, with 68 percent in disagreement. Comments primarily revolved around reduced hunting participation. And again, this proposal is part of a package designed to reduce hunting pressure while minimizing a loss of days of opportunity. And also again, several comments that the population remains overabundant.
On the proposal to standardize the possession limit to three times the daily bag limit, so far we've received 243 online responses and one e-mail in support, which puts us at a total of 70 percent in support and 30 percent that disagree. We had a couple of comments that agreed with this if the Conservation Order is eliminated, and we had a couple of comments again that the population remains overabundant.
And then finally the proposal to extend 19 days in the Eastern Zone during the regular season, we had 263 total online responses, including one e-mail in support. 54 percent agree. 46 percent disagree. And I'd like to note that about a quarter of the comments that disagreed were not germane to this proposal. And for these, we received a number of comments relating to season structure and timing, as well as several that agreed with this proposal if the Conservation Order is eliminated, but did not want to see the Conservation Order eliminated. And we also received comments that extending the season would be no different than keeping the Conservation Order in place.
Staff feel strongly that the extremely liberalized regulations in the Conservation Order are counterproductive to the recovery and long-term conservation of wintering light geese in Texas and moving to standard federal frameworks will yield a positive long-term impact.
Moving on to dark geese. As a result of new information from research, Greater white-fronted do not appear to have a high fidelity to wintering areas and have expanded their range in parts of Texas. Thus, a restriction on daily bag limits for this species in the Western Zone in Texas was removed from the cooperative management plan for the Mid-continent population of Greater white-fronted geese.
To be consistent with this cooperative management plan, staff propose to remove the Greater white-fronted goose bag restriction of no more than two in the Western Zone and create a simplified dark goose aggregate daily bag limit of five with no species restrictions. And this slide illustrates that change.
To date, we've received 264 total responses. 60 percent in support. 40 percent that disagree. Those that disagreed, primarily the comments revolved around making the daily bag would be too high and it would result in too much pressure and we had several comments that the bag should be the same in both the Eastern and the Western Zones.
The proposal regarding Mexican ducks, staff recommend amending state regulations to make them consistent with federal regulations by reducing the term Mexican-like to Mexican. Dusky ducks will then be defined as mottled ducks, Mexican ducks, black ducks, and their hybrids. So far on this, we've received 186 total responses. 81 percent in agreement. 19 percent that disagree. The majority of those who disagreed misunderstood the proposal.
Staff propose changes to the season structure for the Special White-winged dove area pictured here in yellow. Due to this year's calendar progression, staff recommend the dates in yellow for the Special White-winged dove season to remain consistent with providing as much hunting opportunity as possible during this special season prior to the regular season opening on September 14th, as shown in gray.
As of this morning, we've received 169 total online responses and one e-mail in support. 86 percent of these comments agree, and 14 percent disagree. Those that disagreed, we had a couple of comments that it should -- the Special White-wing day -- dove days should open on the first Friday of September every year. We did have a comment that it should open the first full weekend of September every year and we did have a few comments that came in yesterday that we should add the September 3rd, which would be a Tuesday, onto the front part of this to have two continuous two three-day weekends before September 14th.
And for the North Dove Zone, staff propose moving a week at the beginning of the second segment to the end of the second segment for more hunter opportunity when people are off work and school for the holidays.
We've received 156 total responses online, including one e-mail in support. 77 percent agree with this, and 23 percent disagree whole -- in whole or in part. The majority of the comments in disagreement were not germane due to misunderstanding of the proposal and several disagreed because of a perceived conflict with deer and waterfowl seasons.
For all other migratory game birds, staff are proposing calendar progression and no changes to seasons and regulations.
For doves, we received 199 total responses and one e-mail in support. Putting that at 81 percent of those commenters in support and 19 percent that disagree. For webless migratory game bird seasons, we've received 181 total responses, including one e-mail in support. 87 percent in agreement. 13 percent disagree.
For goose seasons, general goose seasons calendar shift, we've received 233 responses, one e-mail in support. 83 percent agree. 17 percent disagree.
And then finally, for calendar shift of the duck seasons, we've received 242 comments, including one e-mail in support, with 79 percent in agreement and 21 percent that disagree. About a third of those who disagreed in whole or in part with these proposed seasons for the rest of the migratory game bird proclamation were for reasons outside of the federal frameworks or not germane to the proposals and we received a wide variety of comments related to season structure and timing.
That concludes my presentation on proposed changes to the migratory game bird proclamation. Are there any questions I can address before I turn it over to my colleagues for statewide hunting?
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any questions?
Thank you.
MR. HARDIN: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. For the record, my name is Jason Hardin. I'm the Wild Turkey Program Leader for the Wildlife Division. I'll present the statewide hunting proclamation this morning.
Staff propose the following changes to the statewide hunting proclamation, including statewide mandatory reporting for wild turkey hunting, removing wild turkey subspecies from regulations more geographically based, changing wild turkey hunting regulations in select counties, and closing additional counties or parts of counties to wild turkey hunting. I'll expand on these in the slides that follow.
Staff propose to expand mandatory harvest reporting to all wild turkeys harvested in the state for all seasons. Currently, we have mandatory harvest reporting in all counties with a one-bird bag limit. In addition, all hunting -- all hunters utilizing a digital license have mandatory harvest reporting requirements for wild turkeys.
Our current small game harvest survey no longer meets the detailed information that's required to manage this resource. The harvest survey do not produce harvest estimates until nearly 18 months after the season -- spring season closes. And currently, 32 of 49 states with wild turkey hunting seasons require some form of mandatory harvest reporting in some fashion to gain more accurate harvest statistics for migrating populations.
Staff received 80 responses, with 77 percent of responses who agree completely and 23 percent who disagree in whole or in part with the proposed regulation change. Those who commented in disagreement generally expressed that Rio Grande wild turkey populations are strong and expressed opposition to new or additional regulations in general.
Next staff propose to close the southern half of Fannin, Lamar, Red River, and Bowie Counties, which is the area south of Highway 82 in these counties, to support ongoing wild turkey restoration efforts south of the Sulphur River.
Staff received 59 responses on this item, with 76 percent in agreement and 24 percent who disagreed in part or all of the proposal. Those who disagreed with the regulation change, generally expressed concern with reduced hunting opportunity and some requested excluding southern Red River County alone from the rule change.
Expanding on closures, staff propose to close Williamson and Bell Counties east of I-35 and all of Milam County to wild turkey hunting. In the last couple of years, the Army Corps of Engineer staff at Granger Lake have requested a wild turkey restocking effort on Corps of Engineer lands and private properties surrounding Granger Lake. To get input from surrounding landowners, TPWD and the National Wild Turkey Federation hosted a regional scoping meeting on October 25th in Davilla, Texas. Approximately 40 people showed up to the meeting and there was a near consensus to move forward with restocking the area while closing the wild turkey hunting season. 59 responses were received, with 78 percent in agreement and 22 percent who disagreed in whole or in part with the proposed regulation change. Those who disagreed expressed a concern with reduced hunting opportunity.
Next staff propose to change the season structure in areas of the state with limited wild turkey populations. As you can see from this map, we already pointed out the potential to close all or a portion of several counties in the red hatched area east of I-35 on this slide. Staff also propose to reduce the season length and bag limit in the black hatched portion of these counties from the current North Zone four-bird bag limit to a spring only season, April 1 to April 30, with a one-gobbler bag limit per county. These areas, which are all east of I-35 in the Blackland prairie, have been highly developed over the last decade and only a few pockets of connected habitat remain that hold populations of wild turkey.
Staff propose the same changes to these counties west of the Pecos River, where limited wild turkey populations occur; but currently, these counties have a four-bird annual bag limit. Moving these seasons to April 1 to April 30, with a one-gobbler per county restriction, will be more commensurate with the current population status. 58 responses were received, with 74 percent in agreement and 26 percent who disagreed in whole or in part with the proposed regulation change. Those who disagreed expressed a concern with a lack of biological data and a perceived reduction in hunting opportunities.
Finally, staff propose to remove subspecies from the wild turkey hunting regulations to simplify regulations and the tagging processes. As you can see, there are lots of variation in the coloring these birds, which may lead some hunters to think these are different subspecies. However, the birds pictured are all the Rio Grande wild turkey.
With this change to the Texas Administrative Code, staff also propose to specifically describe the East Zone in the same manner as the description of the North and South wild turkey zones for consistency. 77 responses were received, with 73 percent in agreement and 27 percent who disagreed in whole or in part with the proposed regulation change. Those who disagreed feel hunters should be responsible for identifying the subspecies in question like waterfowl.
At this time, I'm happy to take any questions you may have before I turn it over to Mr. Blaise Korzekwa.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you. Thank you.
Any questions for Mr. Hardin?
Thank you.
Mr. Korzekwa.
MR. KORZEKWA: Good morning, Chairman and Commissioners. For the record, my name is Blaise Korzekwa, White-tailed Deer Program Leader. This morning I will present proposed changes to the statewide big game hunting regulations that will be considered for adoption.
The first proposal is to adjust the Desert Bighorn sheep season. Currently, the season runs from September 1st through July 31st. The season has been closed when Department staff have conducted Bighorn sheep surveys. Historically, surveys were conducted in August. However, after review of our Bighorn sheep survey protocol, the survey period has been changed to October 1st through November 14th to allow for cooler temperatures and safer flying conditions. And due to this change, staff are proposing that the Bighorn sheep season be changed to November 15th through September 30th to avoid hunting during the survey period.
Staff are also proposing changes to terminology used when referring to Pronghorn. These changes would remove references to Pronghorn antelope and antelope and simply replace with Pronghorn because they are not, in fact, a true antelope. This change would help simplify language used in regulations.
The next proposal is in regard to the expansion of doe days. Although doe harvest is permitted throughout much of the state for the entire duration of the general season, there's currently 89 counties that have some form of doe days. These counties with doe days have restricted season dates in which does may be harvested with a firearm, which allows for a conservative harvest, while still allowing for hunting opportunity.
The 43 counties shown in green on the map currently have a 16-day doe season and are located in the Oak prairie and Pineywoods ecoregions. Staff are proposing that these 43 counties be expanded to a 23-day doe season.
The State of Texas is divided into deer management units, which the Department uses to estimate populations and to monitor impacts of harvest regulations. Those 43 counties represented in green are comprised of Deer Management Units 15 through 21 North. Based on the Department's deer surveys, these deer management units have seen an increase in deer density, as well as a skewed sex ratio of 3.9 does per buck.
Even with the current 16-day doe season, antlerless harvest is only about 45 percent of the total harvest. Staff have also received feedback from hunters, landowners, and farmers that have voiced their concern with the increasing deer population. Many farmers on the western edge of these 43 counties have voiced concern over an increase in crop damage. These same hunters, landowners, and farmers have also requested an increase in doe days.
This slide shows a calendar view of the current 16-day season on the left and the proposed 23-day doe season on the right for the month of November. The 16-day doe season occurs during the first 16 days of the general season. Hunters have provided feedback that the 16-day doe season does not incorporate the Thanksgiving holiday, which is when many hunters are able to spend time afield. The proposed 23-day doe season would incorporate the Thanksgiving holiday and would run from the opening Saturday of general season through the Sunday following Thanksgiving. The additional days added are shown in orange on the calendar.
Although it's called a 23-day doe season, due to calendar progression and the week that Thanksgiving actually occurs on, some years may extend slightly longer than 23 days. The bag limit in these 43 counties will still remain at two antlerless deer all seasons combined.
The next proposal is the modification of rules regarding the method of take for youth harvest of branched antlered bucks on properties enrolled in the Managed Lands Deer Program harvest option. Under current regulations, during the first 35 days of the MLDP harvest option season, bucks without at least one unbranched antler can only be harvested with archery equipment. This applies to all hunters on the property, including youth hunters.
However, these 35 days overlap with the early youth-only season in which youth hunters may use firearms to harvest any legal buck under county regulations. This overlap and difference in method of take has caused confusion among youth hunters. Under current regulations, even though it may be the early youth-only weekend, youth hunting on properties enrolled in the MLDP harvest option still must use archery equipment to harvest branched antlered bucks.
Staff are proposing that youth hunters on properties enrolled in the MLDP harvest option be allowed to harvest any buck with a firearm on the same days that correspond to the early youth-only weekend for county regulations. The calendar below shows the early youth-only weekend for the upcoming deer season. Because harvest option tags are regulated and issued by the Department, there's no consequences of allowing youth on these properties to harvest bucks with a firearm on the same day that is already allowed for all other properties.
I will also note that the next proposal would add a day to the early youth-only weekend and that change would also be reflected on this proposal regarding youth weekend on properties enrolled in the MLDP harvest option.
Lastly, staff are proposing that the youth-only seasons in the fall include Friday for White-tailed deer, squirrels, and wild turkey. The calendar below shows the early youth-only season for White-tailed deer in yellow for the upcoming season, with the orange date representing the addition of Friday. Based on the Department's harvest and survey data, hunting pressure from youth hunters is low and the addition of Friday would provide additional hunting opportunity and have little to no impact on the population.
In regards to the Desert Bighorn sheep season, we've received 44 responses, with 96 percent in agreement and 4 percent who disagree in part with the proposed change. Reason cited for disagreement were not germane.
In regards to the changes in Pronghorn terminology, we've received 49 responses, with 90 percent in agreement and 10 percent who disagreed in whole or in part with the proposed regulation change. Reason cited for disagreement were not germane.
In regards to the expansion of doe days, we received 91 responses, with 89 percent in agreement and 11 percent who disagreed in whole or in part with the proposed regulation change. Reasons cited for disagreement included too much hunting pressure and other comments that were not germane.
In regards to the MLDP harvest option, we received 75 responses, with 91 percent in agreement and 9 percent who disagreed in whole or in part with the proposed change. Reason cited for disagreement were not germane.
In regards to the fall youth-only seasons, we received 92 responses, with 87 percent in agreement and 13 percent who disagreed in whole or in part with the proposed change. Reason cited for disagreement were not germane.
Staff is recommending that the adoption of proposed changes to Title 31 of the Texas Administrative Code Chapter 65 regarding the statewide hunting proclamation and migratory game bird proclamation as published in the Texas Register on February 23rd, 2024.
That concludes my presentation, and I'm willing to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great.
Any questions for the speakers?
Okay. If not, we've got a few people by -- that want to speak by teleconference. The first is Michelle McBryde. Michelle. Ms. McBryde.
MS. MCBRYDE: I am Michelle McBryde, a businesswoman, a grandma, a sixth generation birthright descendent of some of Kerr and surrounding counties original pioneer stock, dating back to before appointment of offices in 1856. I stand against Action Item No. 2 on basis of opinion. First order of business must be the necessary requirement of immediate action needed on five provisions listed as tabled, not postponed, from action Item No. 5 during November's Commission Meeting. Formally presented as statewide carcass disposal, movement restrictions, also titled as amendments to disease management and response regulations contained in recently updated February 21st, 2024, Chapter 65 Wildlife Subchapter B Disease Detection and Response proposed for action today in Item No. 2 by Pronghorn antelope name change and requalification.
In my opinion, proposed statewide hunting proclamation and a nonnative species, specific third part deer, with first part listed as antelope, is being used to interject tabled provisions to achieve action. When rules are hindering game warden's abilities of enforcement and proposal preamble mentions zoonotic potential, yet no focus is given, there is valid reason for concern.
By adoption of Action Item No. 2, I believe skepticism of Department's regulations will increase by the people of Texas. The creation of more confusion about Chronic Wasting Disease's regulations based on fear of CWD is depleting cervid species contradicts with the thing needed: Season extension. Disruption of wildlife to hunting balance by elimination of hunting Desert Bighorn sheep during peak breeding season and removal of subspecies distinction from turkeys. We're seeing the beginnings of increased escalation and zoonotic potential I forewarned of for years, with detriments to landowners, hunters, and to follow, processers, taxidermists, and eventually mom-and-pop founded groceries, lumber, and hardware stores.
Thank you, Commissioners, for hearing me. I invite all to pray with me for God's will in seeking resolve.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you. Thank you, Ms. McBryde.
Ms. Bonnie Elbert.
AT&T OPERATOR: Ms. Bonnie Elbert, if you are on the phone line, please press pound to identify yourself.
Ms. Bonnie Elbert is not on the phone.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right. Mr. Craig Estes.
AT&T OPERATOR: Mr.Estes, please press pound to identify yourself.
Mr. Estes is not on the phone.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Mr. Cole Edwards.
MR. COLE EDWARDS: Hi. How are you guys doing today? My name's Cole Edwards and I am calling mostly in regard to raising the limit of Specklebelly geese to five in the aggregate instead of two and I -- I'm opposing this issue. I think five is a very drastic change. Specklebelly geese are extremely sensitive to pressure and the need for them to be hunt, it's extremely noticeable than the amount of outfitters that are out there now in the last couple years putting pressure on nothing but Specks because we've lost most of our dark geese -- or Canada geese. And it makes them extremely hard to hunt.
And especially in the drought, drought conditions, you lose more and more birds every year. Changing it to five is going to do terrible things for the area. If you guys have seen the banding data, Specklebelly geese will move very quickly and they can be in West Texas one day and they're in Louisiana the next day, down on the coast, something like that. And I believe that changing it to five birds is going to be extremely detrimental, not only for the freelancers, but the well-established outfitters that are in the area. And I say that because there is a lot of fly-by-nighters that have popped up in the last couple years and those are the guys that we're worried about. They're going to ruin everything for everybody and letting them hunt all day and shoot five birds is going to really affect the scenery and Specklebelly geese will eventually be gone, just like the Canada has been in our area.
I'm going to keep it short and sweet. I appreciate you guys' time. Thank you. Y'all have a good day.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you very much.
Next, Mr. Justin Hill.
MR. JUSTIN HILL: Good morning. My name is Justin Hill. I was raised in a farming family here in Haskell, Texas. I actually harvested my first goose back in 1988 with my lifetime waterfowl grandfather. Since then, I have owned and operated Guided Outfitting since 1998. I, along with my partner -- which is retired Senator Craig Estes -- own the largest WRP Program in North and West Texas. Tens of thousands of dollars of personal money have been spent to win an easement from windmill companies provides a 5-mile buffer protecting our roost lakes.
I have firsthand helped with the collaring project in West Texas for several years that provided the data showing these Specks moved more laterally than expected. Almost every bird captured and collared in West Texas came off the places I own or lease.
I only tell all of you this so that you know how vested I am in preserving the hunting history we have in this part of West Texas. We spoke to the advisory committee, only to be told that it wasn't discussed and it was a waste of our time, the decisions were made. This is not what this committee's for and I feel it's important that you hear from people directly affected.
I have been here through the peaks and lows of migrations. Unfortunately since the drought in 2012, we lost the bulk of our peanuts, our ground water, and the bulk of our Canada's. The vast majority of the remaining birds we have are Specks.
I'm sure Kevin Kraai can vouch for what I say next. Our counties of Haskell, Jones, and Knox will be impacted the most with these proposed regulation changes. Our counties cannot sustain a 150 percent increase in allowed harvest. Parks and Wildlife has always been about opportunity for hunters. If they want to be about opportunity, they should think long term and incremental changes, not drastic changes. 150 percent increase from two to five will change our area for the worst.
Changing the limit to five only simplifies regulations, but it does not mean it's the best thing for West Texas. If Parks and Wildlife is determined to raise it because they can, let's raise it by one and see what happens. Think about this. We will be the only place in the country where five Specks can legally be harvest in the regular season and we are working with a smaller population to hunt.
Our Alaska population moves more than we thought. Kansas, Arkansas, and other places have higher counts during in midwinter surveys. I challenge you to ask what the mid-count surveys were for Specks in West Texas and ask yourself if it can sustain a 150 percent increase in harvest.
Last season was low. Last season was tough. We only had 25 to 35,000 Specks in the entire Rolling plains area. Areas further west don't have a consistent population to warrant an increase. We are blessed we have what we have and I pray that we can keep them around forever. Not making -- not making drastic changes will help ensure that. Thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, Mr. Hill.
And next is Mr. Jeff Stanfield.
AT&T OPERATOR: Mr. Stanfield, please press pound to identify yourself.
Mr. Stanfield is not on the phone line.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right. Thank you.
I think we have a few speakers in person. The first is Mr. Zach Fletcher.
MR. ZACH FLETCHER: Good morning, Commissioners. Thank you for offering me the chance to speak. I'm just your average Joe goose hunter, not a hunting guide. I'm here today to voice my opinion regarding the proposal to eliminate the Light Goose Conservation Order in Texas. And staff's explanation of this amendment, there's some conflicting information.
In one sentence, it states the increased hunting pressure as being part of the cause that Texas no longer winters a significant number of light geese. Then two sentences later, it states Department data indicates that the participation levels in harvests associated with the Light Goose Conservation Order has declined by over 90 percent since its inception. So which one is it?
Does staff want to close -- close it because of hunting pressure or is it the lack of participation?
I feel that the participation or lack thereof and/or success should not be a reason to end the Conservation Order. I do understand that the Light Goose Conservation Order was implemented as a tool and not as a season or to increase the hunting opportunity, but in a sense it has provided just that. I would personally not like to see the opportunity go away, even if there was added restrictions like a bag limit or plugged guns.
Staff claims the elimination of the Light Goose Conservation Order is expected to stabilize and possibly reverse the downward trends in Texas. I have yet to see the science behind that statement. U.S. Fish and Wildlife biologists and Texas Parks and Wildlife staff have stated multiple times that hunter harvest does not impact the overall survival or population of the geese in Texas. If this statement is true, then what does this accomplish other than taking away hunting opportunities?
I researched some of the numbers. If you look at the waterfowl harvest population survey data compiled by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service published January 4th, 2024, in the Central Flyway, the count in 1970 was 352,000. In 1999, it was 1.1 million. In 2023, it was 1.6 million. In the Mississippi Flyway in 1970, there were 424,000 counted. In 1999, it was 1.46 million. In 2023, it was 3.2 million. These are the totals of the state-by-state midwinter counts and this data does not reflect the crash that the linking estimate is showing -- or was showing on the Texas Parks and Wildlife graph.
The linking estimate is only as good as the data used to compile it and when they missed a couple years of banding due to COVID, it makes me question the validity of the graph. Texas numbers are low, but I feel it is not because of hunting pressure, but because of lack of water, change of landscape, and agricultural practices. It is for this reason that I ask you to reconsider ending the Light Goose Conservation Order in Texas as proposed. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great. Thanks, Mr. Fletcher.
Ms. Carie Fletcher.
MS. CARIE FLETCHER: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Good morning.
MS. CARIE FLETCHER: I come to you today as a wife, a mom, and a friend of avid goose hunters. I have listened to multiple conversations around the proposed ending of the Light Goose Conservation Order. My family's feelings are that staff want to close this because of moral and ethical versus data. If that's the case, be transparent. Say that that's the reason.
I can tell you from hearing all these conversations in the groups that my husband hunts with, that they have the utmost respect for Snow geese traditions and the -- and the traditions of goose hunting. His group has issues with how the birds are treated in other states. He often says that bird did not fly all the way down here just to get shot and not ate. Right? That's not the reason it came down here.
He -- how the birds are being treated in other areas is a problem. By harvesting three and 400 geese, I don't think that they're -- that that's the reason that there's an issue. When in northern states you have groups killing 500 in a day by jump shooting. He spends a lot of time and effort sharing this sport with others. Trust me, he is gone a lot. I think the only person in our family that enjoys goose hunting more than my husband is our Chesapeake Bay retrievers.
My nieces and nephews ask for goose at Thanksgiving and Christmas. It is something that is a part of our family history, and we would like for this to continue. During the LGCO, it is often a good time to take both time new and old out to experience goose hunting. The weather is usually better during this time and the electronic call actually increase the chances decoying geese making for a successful hunt. And listening to y'all's discussion yesterday, I think that y'all have some of the same questions that we have.
If the participation and the harvest are so low, then how does ending this -- how is it going to make a difference? If it is a moral or ethical issue, leave the opportunity there and just add restrictions around it. I think if you had open conversations with hunters in Texas, you will find that the majority of them -- majority of them respect the birds enough that if the science showed that this would make a difference, they would be 100 percent for it.
How will ending this in Texas make an impact when none of the other states are planning on ending it as well?
Ultimately, I don't think that ending the Light Goose Conservation Order only in Texas is going to give Texas Parks and Wildlife staff the results that they think that they're going to get. Thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you very much.
Next, Logan Smart.
MR. LOGAN SMART: Thank you-all for giving us this opportunity to come and speak to y'all about this. My name is Logan Smart. I'm a wetland ecologist by trade. I also own a waterfowl outfitting business outside of East Bernard at Eagle Lake area, southwest of Houston.
So back in 2021, Texas Parks and Wildlife kind of started this initial conversation of: Like, what are we going to do about the Snow goose? We kind of dropped bag limits. We started talking about: What are we going to do about the Conservation Order?
In response to that initial conservation, I attended the 2022 Arctic Goose Joint Venture Conference that was hosted by Parks and Wildlife staff and advisory committee staff down in Corpus Christi. The Arctic Goose Joint Venture is a joint venture with a specific goal of improving scientific understanding and management of North American geese. That is their stated goal. They hosted a conference here. I took the opportunity.
I attended this to get an understanding of the data behind the proposed changes, as well as have an opportunity to meet Texas Parks and Wildlife staff and discuss this with them. I knew who Kevin was. I knew who James Morel was. I just had never had the opportunity to meet the gentlemen and talk to them in person.
From this conference, I would really like to highlight three things that were spoken at the conference and then one thing that was published further by the Arctic Goose Joint Venture. First off during the conference, we had a -- the joint venture hosted a light goose roundtable. This was outside of the normal spiel of the conference to where it was just everybody in the room and let's talk about it. During this, it -- during which regulators from different states and provinces -- there were folks from Canada here as well and provinces -- were asked about opting out of the Conservation Order. While other regulators from different states and one province said that they were paying attention to the Mid-continent light goose population, they -- when asked directly about withdrawing from the CO, they each unequivocally responded no. Everyone in the room except Mr. Kraai.
Second point listed from that roundtable that really stuck with me, one of the -- one of, if not the premier Mid-continent light goose biologist Ray Alisauskas, was quick to remind everyone of how quickly this population boomed and that his recommendation as his own was to not let -- not let your foot off the gas pedal. Let's wait. Let's see. We don't really know what they're going to do. They can come back that quick.
As far as the remainder of the Arctic Goose -- or Arctic Goose Joint Venture, I would estimate that at least half of the other species discussed during the presentation were specifically studying effects of overabundant Snow goose and the changes that those geese have caused in nesting grounds for other birds. These birds included Greater white-fronts, Emperor geese, and other migratory and wading shore birds.
I'll kind of skip my last one. I'm getting a red here. I understand that Texas is not what it once was. We still all very much believe that that is habitat driven. We don't -- it's our opinion that shooting a small number of geese of our resource doesn't affect its long-term existence here, but allows us to continue to provide habit for these birds.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great.
MR. LOGAN SMART: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you.
Okay. Last to speak is Jake Huddleston.
MR. JAKE HUDDLESTON: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Good morning.
MR. JAKE HUDDLESTON: I'm going to try to do this simple. Okay. My name's Jake Huddleston. I'm a full-time hunting and fishing outfitter guide in Calhoun County, Port Lavaca, Port O'Connor, Seadrift area and I've been a full-time guide there since the introduction the CO in '99 and have participated in the 'CO every year. I've hunted waterfowl and fished there on the coast since I could walk and as many of y'all know, there's been a lot of changes to our environment and our landscape since 1999.
The changes in farming and the advancement of new machines capable of harvesting and not leaving any waste grain behind for these birds, leaves Snow goose very little when they arrive in November. Because of this -- also these birds have proven time after time to go where the food is. Because of this, a lot of us have went to planning and managing what geese we have left, trying to protect what we still have coming here and, more or less, create some of the habitat that's been lost.
I feel -- I feel my main issue is closing the CO here in Texas only doesn't make a lot of sense to me. We've already -- in '20 and '21 season, we already went from 20 birds per man to 10. We took a reduction in the bag limit. By doing that, if we reduced again and went down to five and did away with the CO, we would have the lowest limit in the United States. We -- it -- and also too, we're at the very bottom of the Flyway. So these birds are coming all the way down here to us. If we close the CO here and we leave these birds alone here or whatever, we're going to protect them, save them, whatever we're trying to do here. They still have to then fly all the way back across every other state back north where it's open. And I feel like we wouldn't be here talking about this at all if the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which is the one who started the Conservation Order, had decided that, Hey, there's an issue, we need to stop it.
I think it should be up to them and I think it would make sense if all the states participated in it. I think we could, you know, get somewhere with it. But by closing in Texas only, it just doesn't make a lot of sense and lowering our bag limit again from 20 to 10 and then from 10 to 5, I feel is not a good plan. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay. Great. Thank you. Question. How many -- how many geese do you shoot kind of post that one during the CO timeframe? I'm just curious.
MR. JAKE HUDDLESTON: How many?
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: How many?
MR. JAKE HUDDLESTON: This year, I hunted 20 days. My last hunt was on February 26th. We probably killed -- at an average, I have anywhere from five to eight people hunting with me on normal -- on a normal day. Anywhere from seven to ten geese on up to maybe 60 or 70 geese. This year was the high between five to eight people.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay.
MR. JAKE HUDDLESTON: So, now there has been years in the past, you know, where we killed more and then there's always times when you kill less. But it's not so much -- you know, I -- because this year was set up to be the last one, I quizzed all my hunters and I made it a point to ask them, you know, because they were, Oh, they're going to take it away and all this.
I tried to figure out why they come, you know, because we're not -- in Texas, we're not known for these massive kills like in other states. You know, we're not killing a thousand geese in a morning. We're typically killing 20 to 40 geese on a hunt and that could be anywhere from five to eight people. So I'm like, Well, why -- you know, why come here instead of going over there?
Well, a lot of people are here in Texas. They want to stay in Texas and hunt here and it's not just about killing a bunch. It's just a lot of it is being able to go out there and do it.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Understand.
MR. JAKE HUDDLESTON: Just being able to enjoy it and it's not so much about, you know, just killing a whole bunch.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: You may not have the data; but during pre-CO season, on average how many Snow geese will you shoot per hunter per day? Post-CO, how many will you shoot per hunter per day?
MR. JAKE HUDDLESTON: Well, for me being that I'm down there in Port Lavaca -- I'm, you know, way down there. I'm about -- I'm almost to the end of where the geese go to. We do have geese going into Mexico, and we have some geese going further. But for the most part, I'm kind of it. So there's a lot of times that we don't do any goose hunting in December because we don't hardly have any geese. We might not do any goose hunting until sometime in mid to late January as we start getting geese that have fed from the north, you know.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Uh-huh.
MR. JAKE HUDDLESTON: You know, even Garwood or Eagle Lake or whatever and feeding their way on down to the coast. Also in my area and for many years -- it's a lot of ranching, a lot of cattle. There you know, was a lot of rice. There's always been a lot of rye grass planted, winter grass for cattle and, you know, geese learned that. So they've learned when everything else kind of goes out, they come to those areas --
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Right.
MR. JAKE HUDDLESTON: -- feed.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay.
MR. JAKE HUDDLESTON: So we typically kill more later in my area.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Got it.
MR. JAKE HUDDLESTON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: More. Okay.
MR. JAKE HUDDLESTON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay. All right. That's quantitative. I like that. All right. Thank you very much.
MR. JAKE HUDDLESTON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay. Have a good day.
Okay. I think that's it. Any other speakers?
All right. So is there any discussion/comments by the Commissioners on these particular orders?
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Commissioner Bell. I guess it's for Mr. Fitzsimmons. The -- I'm trying to understand -- and we had this conversation a little bit yesterday during the Work Session. But there's the idea of what are the actual numbers that we're seeing, you know? And then we have the comments about part of it's impact of -- maybe less impact of hunting, more impact of habitat. But at the end of the day, the numbers also have to be part of the -- part of the issue.
So is there a -- is there any -- aside from what you proposed, is there any other middle ground that you see?
MR. FITZSIMMONS: Well, if I may -- and Owen Fitzsimmons, for the record, from the Department. I would like, if I could, clear up a couple things. I think --
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Okay.
MR. FITZSIMMONS: -- we're getting kind of -- that maybe I didn't clear up yesterday very well. Harvest has not had an impact on decreasing this population. That's true. But what is, is pressure. And so these birds, like these gentlemen mentioned, from Texas to the Arctic where there's subsistence harvest all the way back down essentially year-round, these birds are extremely pressured more than any other game bird on -- in North America. You heard the gentleman talking about dark geese and how the pressure's going to move geese out of those counties. So these Arctic nesting geese are under a lot of pressure and they're very sensitive to that and they're going to move -- based on the pressure and where the food is, they're going to try to go where they can find food, where they can find water, and where they don't get shot at.
And with these -- this Mid-continent population of light geese, throughout their range they don't really have a place to go where they don't get shot at. And so I want to clear up as far as the intent of our proposals. I think we've gotten a little off track. So real briefly, there's two issues. There's -- one, is the Mid-continent population decline at 86 percent decline. That's happening. That is an issue broad scale. It's an issue for Texas. It's an issue for every other state that has light geese and that's an issue that needs to be address at the Flyway level and that's something that we're -- staff are planning on taking a strong stance on with the Flyway, having those discussions and bringing that up when we have those discussions.
Our proposals are not meant to -- we can't fix that in Texas with our regulations and we're not trying to do that. What the big take-home message with that decline is that they're no overabundant. The Conservation Order -- the fundamental reason behind the Conservation Order has changed. The tundra is no longer under threat from these, you know, numerous geese from 20 million geese like we had 15 years ago.
So with that shift, we can now shift our focus away from that -- that overabundant population and that threat and in Texas, shift our focus on our birds and what's best for birds in Texas and our resource. And so what our proposal is, is essentially to relieve some of the pressure that these birds have been under for 25 years in Texas and beyond, but we're focused on Texas birds because we can only do what we can do here in this meeting in Texas.
And it's a habitat issue. Absolutely. We've lost rice acreage. We've lost coastal prairie. We've lost coastal marsh. Absolutely. But we still have habitat to support more birds than we support now. The only way that we're going to recover this population and boost those number is to allow those birds to use the habitat we have, at least some portion of a period when they're here in Texas without getting shot at.
And so our package of proposals essentially with the Conservation Order, the reduction of the bag limit, and a possession limit during the regular season, that will relieve some pressure. Removal of the Conservation Order with its extremely liberalized regulations, which honestly has probably been counterproductive for us several years in terms of recovery of light geese in this state, remove that and go back to a 107-day season of federal frameworks, which goes into February 14th. That's what we're proposing is an extra 19 days to try to capture some of that late season opportunity. And it's -- we're trying to minimize the loss of days of opportunity and relieve the pressure through reduction of bag limits and a possession limit.
And in terms of alternatives, staff recommendation would be if the Commission doesn't want to adopt the elimination of the Conservation Order, staff would recommend a status quo of basically a calendar shift from last year to this year, which would mean pull the proposal for the 19 days, have an 88-day season, and a Conservation Order that would start after that and go into February -- or March 9th. So I hope that clears a few things up.
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Yes. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any other questions?
Okay. Well, it -- we all understand the degradation of the population and it's due to a lot of factors, probably hunting pressure being one. So if we remove the CO, the hunting season terminates on Feb 19th?
MR. FITZSIMMONS: No, sir. With the removal of the Conservation Order, status quo calendar shift would mean that we would end in the Eastern Zone on January 26th.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: But you're adding 19 days in this change.
MR. FITZSIMMONS: Yes, sir. Typically in past years because dark geese only -- we only have 88 days that we can use in the Eastern Zone and because the Conservation Order targets light geese, we typically run 88 days and then after that -- even though we have 107 days for light geese that we could use, because the CO targets those, we just start the CO there and go. The Conservation Order when it's open, no other waterfowl or crane seasons can also be open.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Understood. So you eliminate CO and by this proposed change, you extend the light goose season by 19 days.
MR. FITZSIMMONS: Yes, sir. To use all 107.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: So all other species are -- the season's over.
MR. FITZSIMMONS: Essentially. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Essentially. I mean, when's duck season end?
MR. FITZSIMMONS: Duck season would end also -- I should have this all right here. Proposed duck season in that zone would be January 26th.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: So January 26th?
MR. FITZSIMMONS: January 26th.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: And then Specklebellies end when?
MR. FITZSIMMONS: January 26th.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: January 26th. What about Sandhill cranes?
MR. FITZSIMMONS: Sandhill cranes, in the Coastal Zone we have 37 days that we can use for those. That's limited because of the highly endangered Whooping crane that comes through there. So in the Coastal Zone we run 37 days from December 14th to January 19th and that's been a calendar shift for a few years now.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay. So by these changes, the reality is actually we're extending the light goose season and instead of an unlimited bag, you'll have a bag limit of five through Feb 19th.
MR. FITZSIMMONS: Yes. February 14th.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Feb 14th.
MR. FITZSIMMONS: Would be the 19 days. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Feb 14th. So you're giving hunters in that February timeframe more time to hunt, giving the outfitters more opportunity for revenue, all of these things. Okay. And once again, with the CO eliminated, plugs come back in the gun, no electronic calling, all of that.
MR. FITZSIMMONS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay. Got it. Got it.
MR. FITZSIMMONS: And if you adopt, it will be a possession limit of three times the daily bag like all other migratory game birds.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Say that again.
MR. FITZSIMMONS: In you choose to adopt, the other part of this proposal package --
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Yes.
MR. FITZSIMMONS: -- that would be the standardized possession limit of three times the daily like we have for all other migratory game birds because currently we don't have a possession limit even during the regular season on light geese.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay. Got it. Okay.
All right. Well, I'm satisfied if everyone else is that these proposed changes are adequate and appropriate. And so do I have a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER ROWLING: Rowling so moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Bell seconds.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor please say aye.
(Chorus of ayes)
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you very much. Well-done.
All right. Action Item No. 3, Partition, Exchange, and Conveyance of Land, Marion County, Approximately 90 Acres at Caddo Lake Wildlife Management Area, Mr. Stan David.
MR. DAVID: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. For the record, I'm Stan David with the Land Conservation Program. This presentation will discuss the partition, exchange, and conveyance of land in Marion County. It's approximately 90 acres at the Caddo Lake Wildlife Management Area.
It's northeast Texas, close to the Louisiana border. It's kind of northeast of Marshall, City of Marshall. The WMA is approximately 8,900 acres. On this map it's outlined in gold. The Caddo Lake State Park is there on the very bottom of the map outlined in yellow. It's close to 500 acres.
Caddo Lake State Park is a Civilian Conservation Corps park developed in the 1930s. The Caddo Lake WMA was created in 1997 from land on the north side of Big Cypress Bayou, Caddo Lake that had been added to the state park over time. Today, the WMA consists of approximately 8,900 acres of open water swamps, floodplains, slope, and upland forest.
The WMA is a popular destination for hunting, fishing, and nature watching. The Goat Island unit of the WMA covers roughly 900 acres. Consists of particularly significant habitat and is a favorite destination for hunters. TPWD had shared provisional use of the only road that provides overland access to Goat Island with a neighboring family. Anomalies in the chain of title for the WMA and the neighboring property have complicated delineating the exact boundaries on the ground and TPWD historically shared road use only through a handshake agreement with the neighboring family.
Several years ago, the family denied road access to TPWD staff and the public. The Commission was briefed starting in 2020 and again last meeting and this meeting in Executive Session regarding efforts to reestablish overland access to Goat Island. The Commission directed staff to attempt an amicable resolution of boundary disputes with a priority on securing permit access to Goat Island and establishing good relationships with neighboring property owners.
TPWD currently owns an undivided 75 percent interest in what is known as Chew tract. A boundary survey of the Chew tract was completed in 2022. Currently, undivided interest owners have agreed to sell remaining interest to TPWD or participate in a voluntary partitioning of the Chew tract. The survey identified 240 acres within the tract and revealed numerous boundary overlaps with adjacent tracts on both the east and west sides of the survey. Based on this survey, TPWD staff has tentatively negotiated an agreement that would cede to an adjacent landowner land occupied by the landowner's family for much of the past century in exchange for suitable deeded road into the Goat Island Unit.
Staff also propose boundary agreements that would recognize the historic fence line boundary to adjacent landowners to the west. The red star is the location of the Chew tract. Blue outline is the Goat Island Unit. The red outline is the outline of the Chew tract. Each of these red circles are the survey anomalies that will need extra attention to solve an issue.
This map shows potential conveyances. The far west highlighted yellow area would be to amend the fence line boundary issues with the neighbors. The other shaded yellow area would be the conveyance exchange to the family in exchange for the red highlighted area, which would give us deeded permit access for a road to be built into the Goat Island Unit.
We had 12 responses. Eight in support. Four in opposition that weren't germane to the topic.
Staff recommends the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission adopt the resolution attached as Exhibit A. And I'll be happy to answer any questions that you might have.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any questions?
If none, is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER SCOTT: Scott so moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Second?
COMMISSIONER GALO: Galo.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor say aye.
(Chorus of ayes)
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you very much.
MR. DAVID: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right. Action Item No. 4, Land Acquisition Strategy, Jack County, Approximately 5 Acres at Fort Richardson State Park Historic Site and Lost Creek Reservoir State Trailway, Mr. Estrella.
MR. ESTRELLA: Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Chair, Commissioners. For the record, my name's Jason Estrella with the Land Conservation Program. This next item is a land acquisition strategy in Jack County, approximately 5 acres at Fort Richardson State Park Historic Site and Lost Creek Reservoir State Trailway.
Located in North Texas, just outside the town of Jacksboro. The preservation of the fort was started in 1936 by the Texas Centennial Commission. And in 1968, Parks and Wildlife acquired the site, which totals approximately 450 acres. The fort was built to house soldiers that protected settlers across the Texas frontier and today, visitors can experience a glimpse of life in the past while camping, hiking, biking, fishing, and horseback riding.
Staff prioritize acquiring state park inholdings and adjacent properties from willing sellers to minimize operational and management conflicts and ensure the conservation of TPWD public lands. Staff has identified several strategic tracts within and adjacent to Fort Richardson totaling approximately 5 acres.
Here we just see a map. The boundary of the park is in red. The green is a buffer surrounding the park, just to highlight various areas where some of the strategic tracts are generally located across and so we are seeking a strategy to continue to acquire these as they come open from willing sellers.
In public comment, we have received seven responses, all in support.
So staff recommends the Commission adopt the following motion: The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission authorizes the Executive Director to take all necessary steps to acquire strategic state park inholdings and adjacent tracts at Fort Richardson State Park Historic Site and Lost Creek Reservoir State Trailway. Happy to answer questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any questions for Mr. Estrella?
If not, is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER GALO: Galo so moves.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER ROWLING: Rowling seconds.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor please say aye.
(Chorus of ayes)
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you.
Action Item No. 5, Disposition of Land, Blanco County, Approximately .38 Acres at Blanco State Park. Mr. Estrella, you're up again.
MR. ESTRELLA: Thank you. For the record, my name's Jason Estrella with the Land Conservation Program. And this disposition of land in Blanco County, approximately 0.38 acres at Blanco State Park. Located in Blanco County in the City of Blanco.
The 90-acre park straddles the Blanco River for more than 2 miles within the city. It was acquired in the 1930s and is very popular with visitors, allowing access to the clear waters of the Blanco River for swimming, tubing, picnicking, and enjoying a picturesque hill country stream.
Since 2016, TPWD staff has researched title records and mapped results for state parks and wildlife management areas in order to improve the understanding of site boundaries and potential issues. Staff's research of Blanco State Park found no proof of TPWD ownership of a 0.38-acre tract on the east side. Recently the city reached out to the Department with documentation proving city ownership of the subject tract and requested that the Department works with the city to resolve ambiguities in the property records.
A quitclaim deed from the Department to the city will clarify that the city owns the property and dispose of any future claim the Department may have to the property. Staff believes that the disposition of this tract will not affect park operations.
Here we see an area map of the state park boundary in red. On the far east side is the proposed disposition in yellow. And here is a close-up of that .38-acre tract.
For public comment we have received 11 is responses. Six in support. Five in opposition. Opposition comment left simply states this bad optics, as the city approved -- recently approved a subdivision nearby.
Staff recommends the Commission adopt the following motion: Parks and Wildlife Commission adopts the resolution attached as Exhibit A. Happy to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any questions?
If not, is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER SCOTT: Scott so moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Second? Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER ABELL: Abell second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor please say aye.
(Chorus of ayes)
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries.
Action Item 6, Grant of Easement, Tom Green County, approximately .05 Acre at the San Angelo Fish Hatchery, Mr. Estrella.
MR. ESTRELLA: Thank you. For the record, Jason Estrella, Land Conservation Program. Grant of easement, Tom Green County, approximately .05 acres at the San Angelo fish hatchery, located in Tom Green County in the City of San Angelo.
The fish hatchery located along the banks of the South Concho was constructed in 1930 and originally consisted of 34 ponds and then later expanded to 40. The facility serves as administrative office for Department staff located in San Angelo.
The City of San Angelo has requested a long-term easement across approximately 0.05 acres, or a little over 2,000 square feet, to allow for the construction and placement of a wastewater pipeline which will benefit the citizens of San Angelo. The portion of the TPWD property that requires an easement for the pipeline is only a small portion of the project and is crossing land that was previously disturbed during the installation of the fishery ponds, minimizing any potential for harm to the land from this proposed easement.
Here we see a map showing the requested easement in red, the little triangle. Also in green adjacent to that is a temporary surface use agreement that we executed with the city for this project last year so that they could stage some of their vehicles.
In public comment, we have received four responses. Three in support. One in opposition. No comments left.
Staff recommends that the Commission adopt the following motion: The Parks and Wildlife Commission adopts the resolution attached as Exhibit A. I'm happy to answer questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any questions for Mr. Estrella.
If not, is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER FOSTER: I move, Foster.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Bell seconds.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor please say aye.
(Chorus of ayes)
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries.
And, Dr. Yoskowitz, this Commission has completed its business and I declare us adjourned at 11:10 a.m.
(Commission Meeting Adjourns)
In official recognition of the adoption of
this resolution in a lawfully called public meeting of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission, we hereby affix our signatures this _____ day of ______________, ________._______________________________________
Jeffery D. Hildebrand, Chairman
_______________________________________
Oliver J. Bell, Vice-Chairman
_______________________________________
James E. Abell, Member
_______________________________________
William "Leslie" Doggett, Member
_______________________________________
Paul Foster, Member
_______________________________________
Anna B. Galo, Member
_______________________________________
Robert L. "Bobby" Patton, Jr., Member
_______________________________________
Travis B. Rowling, Member
_______________________________________
Dick Scott, Member
C E R T I F I C A T E
STATE OF TEXAS ) COUNTY OF TRAVIS )I, Paige S. Watts, Certified Shorthand
Reporter in and for the State of Texas, do hereby certify that the above-mentioned matter occurred as hereinbefore set out.I FURTHER CERTIFY THAT the proceedings of such
were reported by me or under my supervision, later reduced to typewritten form under my supervision and control and that the foregoing pages are a full, true, and correct transcription of the original notes.IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my
hand and seal this Turn in date _____ day of ________________, ________.___________________________________
Paige S. Watts, CSR
CSR No.: 8311
Expiration: January 31, 2025