TPW Commission
Commission Meeting, January 23, 2025
Transcript
TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE COMMISSION
JANUARY 23, 2025
TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT
COMMISSION HEARING ROOM
4200 SMITH SCHOOL ROAD
AUSTIN, TEXAS 78744
COMMISSION MEETING
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Good morning. (Inaudible)
Ms. Allison Winney: Mr. Chairman your mic.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right, we’ve got a lot to do today so let’s get started.
Before we start, I’m going to take roll.
Chairman Hildebrand, I’m present.
Vice-Chair Bell?
VICE-CHAIRMAN OLIVER BELL: Present.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: COMMISSIONER Abell?
COMMISSIONER JAMES ABELL: Present.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: COMMISSIONER Doggett.
COMMISSIONER LESLIE DOGGETT: Present.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: COMMISSIONER Galo?
COMMISSIONER ANNA GALO: Present.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: COMMISSIONER Patton?
COMMISSIONER BOBBY PATTON: Present.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: COMMISSIONER Rowling?
COMMISSIONER BLAKE ROWLING. Present.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you.
This meeting is called to order January 23, 2025, at 9:10 A.M.
Before proceeding with any business, I believe Dr. Yoskowitz has a statement to make.
DR. DAVID YOSKOWITZ: Public notice of this meeting containing all items on the proposed agendas has been 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: All right, thank you.
First is the approval of the minutes from the Commission meeting held November 7, 2024, which has already been distributed.
Is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER BOBBY PATTON: Move to approve.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER JAMES ABELL: Abell, Second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say, "aye."
[CHORUS OF AYES]
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 BLAKE ROWLING: Rowling approved.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OLIVER BELL: Bell second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say, "aye."
[CHORUS OF AYES]
Any opposed?
Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you.
Next is the Consideration of Contracts, which have also been distributed.
Is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER JAMES ABELL: Abell so move.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER LESLIE DOGGETT: Doggett, second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor say, "aye."
[CHORUS OF AYES]
Any opposed?
Hearing none, motion carries.
Now for the Special Recognitions, Retirements and Service Award presentations.
Dr. Yoskowitz, please make the presentations.
Dr. YOSKOWITZ: Chairman, Commissioners, we have a full house today on our awards recognitions.
We’re going to be commissioning new canine and retiring a few old canines.
We have what I call a small class reunion here of some game wardens.
Stapleton told me not to mess it up.
I will try not to do that, Steve.
And we have just a great opportunity to recognize the great work of our department.
So, let’s get started with our canines.
I guess they are all staged somewhere?
Is that right, Dee?
Ok, good.
We’ll go ahead and get started.
Today we’re going to be commissioning four canines.
The canine program at Texas Parks and Wildlife was created in 2013 and staffs over ten specialized canine teams that support the agency’s core mission and serves as a force multiplier in incidents requiring high‑risk law enforcement response.
These specialized canine teams supplement game warden capacity regionally, as needed, serving a valuable role in border operations, inter-agency law enforcement assistance, and other similar law enforcement situations.
Canine teams are currently trained in a variety of disciplines and certified by instructors and judges. These disciplines include search and rescue, tracking, wildlife resource detection, cadaver detection, firearms detection and narcotics detection. The use of canine teams reduces search time and increases evidence recovery, which leads to a more complete court prosecution.
The secondary purpose of the canine teams is education and deterrence through canine demonstrations and presentations for interest groups, schools and media groups as well as high visibility patrol.
By providing resource management information during canine demonstrations and presentations, a sense of resource management stewardship is developed.
Each canine resides at home with his or her handler and is provided needed equipment, nutrition and veterinary needs through state funding as well as funding through generous donations routed through our gear up for game wardens.
On behalf of the canine team, thank you for everyone’s continued support and for joining us on this very special day for our retired canine partners and our newly commissioned canine partners. So, starting with the commissioning, we have Canine Bailey.
She’s a Labrador Retriever.
Her handler is game warden Sargeant Matt Zitterich.
Her certifications are Wildlife Resource Detection, which includes odors of dove, waterfowl, red snapper, oysters and shark fin, Article Evidence Recovery.
Also certified in Wildlife Resource Detection and Article Evidence Recovery with the North American Police Working Dog Association.
Welcome, Canine Bailey, and congratulations on your commission.
[ APPLAUSE ]
[ BAILEY BARKS ]
[ LAUGHTER ]
SARGEANT MATT ZETRICK: Sit.
Mr. Chase Fountain: There you go.
One more.
Okay, got it.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Dr. YOSKOWITZ: All right, ready to go to work.
Excellent.
Next up we have Canine Cam.
She also is a labrador retriever, handler is Texas Game Warden Sergeant Joni Owen, certification human remains detection, forensic and reality.
Congratulations, Canine Cam.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Mr. Chase Fountain: Cam, Cam.
Dr. YOSKOWITZ: Next up we have Canine Piper.
She’s also a Labrador Retriever.
Handler is Texas Game Warden Sergeant Dustin Fleming.
Certifications include Police Search and Rescue, Human Tracking, Article Evidence Recovery, and Narcotics Detections.
Congratulations, Canine Piper.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Mr. Chase Fountain: Piper, one, two.
Dr. YOSKOWITZ: There’s an art and science to that for sure.
And finally we have Canine Rue.
She also is a Labrador Retriever, handler is Texas Game Warden Tim Tokash.
And certifications include Police Search and Rescue and Human Remains Detection and Recovery.
Congratulations, Canine Rue.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Dee, are we taking a picture with all of them at the end?
Ms.DEE HALLIBURTON: Yes, we are going to do retirements, and then we are going to take a group of the commission and the retirements and all the Commissioners.
And after that, we’ll do…
Dr. YOSKOWITZ: Just point me in the right direction.
[ LAUGHTER ]
Okay.
Next up two retirements that we want to recognize.
The first is Dexter.
Dexter is a German Shepherd Belgian Malinois breed mix, handler is Texas Game Warden Sergeant Kryssie Thompson.
Certifications include Human Remains Detection and Forensic and Reality. Canine Dexter was officially retired from service on April 30, 2024. He joined the Game Warden Canine Team in 2018 and proudly served the people of Texas as well as assisted in searches in Kentucky, Arkansas and Oklahoma.
He was Texas Parks and Wildlife Department’s first ever Human Remains Detection canine. Canine Dexter assisted with over 300 cases that included missing persons cases, criminal cases, natural disasters and large plane crash event.
Among these events included multiple searches for blood evidence recovery and searches for drowning victims. He had a passion to go to work every day and complete any search that was put in front of him.
Please join us in helping congratulate Canine Dexter for his hard work and dedication to serving the state of Texas. He will enjoy his retirement with Kryssie and receive plenty of treats, pets and naps in the sun.
We wish Canine Dexter the best in his years of retirement, and we have a shadow box as an appreciation from TPWD. This shadowbox will serve as an honor box to secure precious items obtained during canine’s partner’s career: working collar badge, favorite reward toy, pictures and items obtained along the way that hold precious memories for the canine and his partner.
Thank you very much for serving the people of Texas.
Thank you, Dexter.
[ APPLAUSE ]
SERGEANT KRYSSIE THOMPSON: He is after that ball. Here let me get on that side of you.
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Next we have Canine Sky.
She’s a Labrador Retriever. Texas Game Warden Sergeant Derek Nells is the handler. The certifications include Police Search and Rescue, Tracking and Firearms Detection.
As Canine Woodrow was nearing retirement in 2021, Canine Sky was welcomed to the TPWD canine team. Sky was trained and certified in Firearm Detection followed by certifications in Police Search and Rescue and Human Tracking. Sky followed in Woodrow’s footsteps and was‑‑ I guess that would be paw steps‑‑ and was very successful during her four years of service. She was asked during her career to locate firearms evidence associated with crimes ranging from hunting violations to homicide.
On 13 occasions Sky located firearms, shell casings or live ammunition related to these crimes including two pistols used to commit murder and one pistol used to shoot two victims and police officers.
Sky was requested twice to respond to rural schools due to concerns of possible firearms on the campuses. Fortunately, no firearms were located and the schools were able to continue business as usual. Sky was requested to assist in locating missing people on multiple occasions.
These situations can be difficult and most times the search is based on limited information. The Canine Sky was instrumental in clearing multiple search areas, aiding ground searches and drones to clear adjacent areas which resulted in safely locating the missing persons. All part of a team effort when life threatening situations occurred.
Sky has been deployed on almost 100 tracks. 81 of these tracks were during Operation Lone Star deployments during which he assisted border patrol agents in their duties. Sky was able to assist border patrol agents in the apprehension of over 200 subjects.
Thanks to everyone who has supported this canine team, congratulations on your retirement, Canine Sky.
[ APPLAUSE ]
MS.DEE HALLIBURTON: We are bringing all including retirement.
DR. YOSKOWITZ: All right.
We’re bringing them all in. This will be interesting.
[ LAUGHTER ]
Does this move?
MR. CHASE FOUNTAIN: Whistle, one, two.
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Next, we’d like to take a few minutes to recognize some of the great work that has happened within the department.
First, we’d like to start off by recognizing Rusk County Game Warden Kirk Clendening is the department’s recipient of the 2024 Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agency SEAFWA’s Officer Of The Year Award.
Kirk graduated in 2010 from the University of Texas at Dallas with a Bachelor’s degree in criminology. Kirk was accepted into 56th game warden academy class and graduated in 2011.
He’s a devoted conservation law enforcement officer and is a natural leader and demonstrates initiative, excellent judgement and outstanding communication skills.
He leads by way of example with his work ethic, teamwork and his professional interpersonal interactions with others.
Warden Clendening is dedicated to our enforcement efforts and is proactive in getting our mission accomplished with a can‑do attitude.
Kirk works extremely hard and is always top tier of the district for marine patrol hours, investigations and public outreach.
Warden Clendening has a true love for the outdoors and understands the importance of leaving a legacy of conservation for future generations.
Officer Of The Year, Kirk Clendening.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Next, we’d like to recognize the 2025 Shikar‑Safari Officer Of
The Year Jamal Allen.
Jamal was born and raised in Frankston, a rural east Texas town just southwest of Tyler. His character, hard work ethic and competitive nature manifested itself early on during high school through his passion for sports and success with high school football, which earned him and his twin brother a full ride scholarship to Stephen F. Austin State University.
Jamal graduated from the 63rd game warden training academy in late spring 2020 and was assigned to Jefferson County where he’s currently serving the community as their game warden with his wife Ellen and son Roland.
Warden Allen is a certified Texas Commission on Law Enforcement instructor and has been invited to teach saltwater law, defensive tactics simunitions to the game warden cadets at the game warden training center.
Warden Allen has proven his ability to influence and motivate others by earning their respect and leading by example.
He sets the standard for the district and the region, not by trying to be better or do more than others, but challenging himself to do all that he is capable of.
As Warden Jamal has many great achievements, among them was being honored by The Coastal Conservation Association as their Texas Officer Of The Year for 2022 due to his exhaustive enforcement efforts surrounding the commercial shrimping and crabbing industry the previous year. He was also honored by the Southeast Texas chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving in 2022 and 2024 as Officer Of The Year for his Boating While Intoxicated enforcement efforts.
Warden Allen has been instrumental in mentoring and teaching six of Beaumont district’s newest wardens, four rookie wardens that he helped train this past year and filed a combined 11 DWI cases and assisted with seven commercial Gulf shrimp closure cases referred to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for enforcement.
Over the past year Jamal has continued to answer the call for his agencies, his peers and his constituents to help conserve and protect the natural and cultural resources along the upper Texas coast primarily in Jefferson County.
Shikar‑Safari Officer Of The Year Jamal Allen.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Next we have a couple of retirements we’d like to recognize.
First is James Barge, who began his career with the department on May 1, 1997.
On that day, he walked into the game warden training academy that was here in town at 100 West 50th street with 24 strangers and forged bonds that will live as long as the members of that 45th academy.
James’ first duty station was in Tyler County. He got his first mention in the newspaper when he located a person who had been missing for several days and was presumed likely to be dead but was found very much alive.
On January 1, 2000, James moved back across the river to Angelina County and back home where he had been raised.
The next 25 years would be full of adventure and accomplishments.
James quickly got his Masterpiece Officer certificate and Instructor certificate as well as his Standardized Field Sobriety Testing certificate and Firearms Certificate.
In 2007, he won the National Association Of State Boating Law Enforcement, Law Enforcement Officer Of The Year award for Texas.
He led his district in Boating While Intoxicated enforcement and was teaching standardized field sobriety testing at the Game Warden Academy. James received several other awards throughout his career including Directors Lifesaving Awards for rendering aid on an individual who attempted suicide, rescuing three individuals from high waters above Sam Rayburn Lake and helping an injured game warden in Neches River between Houston and Cherokee County and responding to massive flooding in Deweyville, Texas.
He is also one of the founding members of the critical incident team known as The Peer Support Team. He was lead for that peer support team for the eastern half of the state.
Retiring with 27 years of service, James Barge.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Patricia Whittle began her career with the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department on August 2, 1999 as an accountant.
She immersed herself in the comptroller classes to learn all about State of Texas statewide accounting policies and procedures.
Good on you, Patricia, for that.
She became the key senior accounts payable subject matter expert and is routinely called upon to train and assist others and coordinate sensitive payment matters with all agency divisions supported by Accounts Payable.
She has seen more than her fair share of accounting software changes in her career especially at TPWD. Back in 2010, Patricia served on a special task force project team to identify gaps between the legacy accounting system and industrial financial system and the newer accounting system being implemented at that time, business information system.
Her most memorable training presentation occurred in 2014 at the State Capital where she led a discussion before more than 250 other agency employees on a wide variety of accounts payable topics.
Retiring with 25 years of service, Patricia Whittle.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Next, we’d like to recognize service given to the department in the state of Texas.
Ramiro Medrano began his career with Texas Parks and Wildlife Department in 1989 as a Park Ranger in the State Parks Division at Lake Corpus Christi and Lake Casablanca State Parks.
In October 1998, he transferred to the inland fisheries crew in Mathis, Texas, as a fish and wildlife Technician II.
In Spring 2013, Ram was promoted to fish and wildlife Technician III.
He has improved the district stocking procedures by decreasing the amount of handling necessary to stock fingerling fishes, worked on numerous research projects such as Alligator GAR project and two passive angling gear projects.
He’s helped design and implement numerous aquatic vegetation control plans for water bodies within his district, advised other districts about aquatic vegetation control methodologies and continues to coordinate with the parks staff on the planning, organizing and implementation of a Lake Corpus Christi State Park annual youth fishing event which typically brings 500 kids to participate in that event in a single day.
With 35 years of service, Ram Medrano.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Kevin Mayes began his career with the department in 1989 as an intern for The Resource Protection Division’s river studies program.
In 1992, Kevin was hired as an aquatic biologist in the river studies program reviewing surface water right permit applications, instream flow, water level conservation and water quality protection to ensure healthy aquatic ecosystems for all fish, wildlife and people.
From 1998 to 2011, Kevin served as river assessment team leader to oversee multidisciplinary studies to determine water quality and quality needs of rivers and streams including hydropower licensing and relicensing and state and regional water planning.
In February of 2022, he joined the inland fisheries division senior leadership team as chief of fisheries science and policy.
He currently oversees the Division Science Program, including The Heart Of Hills Fishery Science Center.
With 35 years of service, Kevin Mayes.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Todd Pilcik began his career with Texas Parks and Wildlife Department in August of 1994 in the wildlife division. He served with customer service phone lines and worked the migratory game bird program at Austin headquarters.
In 1997, he transferred to San Marcos as a technician with the White Wing dove program.
In 2000, he accepted a biologist position in Lampasas county, Coryell and Bell county as natural resource specialist.
In 2002, he transferred to Matagorda Brazoria in southern Jackson counties where he continues to work today conducting wildlife surveys and assisting private landowners with an emphasis on wildlife management.
With 30 years of service, Todd Pilcik.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Jason Singhurst began his career with the department in 1994 as a botanist and plant ecologist.
He received his BS and MS in Agriculture Science from Stephen F. Austin State University. He has a research affiliation with Baylor and The University of Texas Botanical Research Institute of Texas. He utilizes his GIS and remote sensing skills to map, survey and document rare habitats on private land statewide.
He’s involved with many regional conservation partnerships with state and federal agencies and land trusts. He supports ecological data collection for farm and ranch land easement conservation projects and oversees university research projects funded through the state and federal grant programs of the 226 rare plant communities tracking Texas conservation action plan.
He has described six plant species new to science that are endemic to Texas. He has published over 130 scientific publications on the flora and plant ecology of Texas.
And in 2008, he co‑authored a book of rare plants of Texas.
He recently contributed a chapter on Eastern Texas prairie landscapes for a book on Southeastern grasslands, and he recently signed a book contract with three other co‑authors with Texas A&M Press to produce a book on rare plant communities of Texas to be published in 2026.
With 30 years of service, Jason Singhurst.
[ APPLAUSE ]
All right.
Here begins the class reunion.
Jerry Ash began his career with the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department in July. Just by way, they all just started in July of 1999. So, July of 1999 Texas game warden.
In January 2000, Game Warden Ash graduated from the Texas Game Warden Academy in Austin, Texas, and was transferred to camp in Titus Counties in Northeast Texas.
In June of 2009, Camp County opened as one game warden county and Warden Ash became the Titus County game warden.
He has assisted with numerous lifesaving events, and he’s responded to hurricanes and other natural disasters when needed.
Ash has been recognized for his team efforts with these deployments and was recently selected as Region 2 Game Warden Of The Year.
Ash routinely makes outstanding fish and wildlife related cases and has done so throughout his career. Warden Ash routinely participates in border deployments, and without hesitation volunteers for holiday shifts to lessen the burdens on wardens with young children. Warden Ash is a team player with a contagious, positive hard-working attitude. He’s a pillar in his community and with his district.
With 25 years of service, Jerry Ash.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Heath Bragg also began his career with the Department in July of 1999. After completing the 46th Texas Game Warden Academy in January 2000, he was stationed in Tyler County.
After four years, Heath transferred to Angelina County for five years and then Nacogdoches County for 11 years where he would stay.
In 2005, Heath was awarded The National Wild Turkey Federation Officer Of The Year Award. And in 2016, he was awarded The Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Association Officer Of The Year award. In 2020, he was promoted to Captain for Region 3 in the Nacogdoches District.
His greatest achievement is being married to Brandy Bragg and raising two wonderful children, Savannah and Peyton. Peyton hopes to follow in his father’s footsteps after he completes his degree.
With 25 years of service, Heath Bragg.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Brad Guinn started his career with the Department also, in July of 1999 with that 46th game warden cadet class. He was stationed in Freestone County after graduation and later transferred to Williamson County.
In 2008, he was promoted to Lieutenant Game Warden at The Game Warden Training Center. There he helped train hundreds of game wardens and numerous park police officers over 11 different cadet classes.
He was at the Game Warden Training center for almost 13 years.
In December 2020, he was promoted to Captain Game Warden and is now in Brownwood.
With 25 years of service, Brad Guinn.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Kurt Kelley also was part of that class, 46th game warden class.
And in January of 2000 after graduating, he was assigned to Wood County. Kurt has made his career in Wood County. During this time has made many unique cases and earned many recognitions.
Among these accomplishments are two director citations, 2015 Officer Of The Year for The Association Of Midwest Fish And Game Law Enforcement. And 2017, Outstanding Team Award for the TPWD critical incident response team.
Kurt has been part of the critical incident response team for over 15 years and currently serves as the team lead for peer support for the east side of Texas. Kurt also holds many certifications obtained throughout his career.
With 25 years of service, Kurt Kelley.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Kirk Permenter began with the Department also in that class, 46th Texas game warden class in 1999. Upon graduation, Kirk spent his 25‑year career at his original duty station in Rusk County.
He’s a Texas Commission on Law Enforcement instructor and simunitions instructor. He served as a field training officer in field training officer coordinator for Region 3. He was also a cadet mentor for the Game Warden Training Academy. One of the highlights of his career was being among the 53 Texas game wardens deployed when Hurricane Katrina struck Louisiana. The first time Texas game wardens were ever deployed for disaster relief outside of the state.
With 25 years of service, Kirk Permenter.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Captain Brandi Reeder began her career with that same class after receiving an assignment to Aransas County upon completion of graduation.
In 2012, she was promoted to Fishery Law Enforcement Administrator at Austin Headquarters. She embraced the opportunity to influence positive change for the department, division, and public with progress in fisheries law enforcement, and policy because of her work in conjunction with the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission, Texas legislature, Gulf States Commission, and other national committees.
In 2018, Brandi returned to the field as the Region 4, District 1 captain overseeing Fort Bend, Brazoria, and Matagorda Counties. Over the course of her tenure, she developed a women’s outreach initiative called Women In The Wild educating over 500 women during her ten‑year period in her efforts to inspire women to engage in the outdoors.
Brandi’s leadership in this initiative earned her a director’s citation in 2011 for her dedication to outreach and education while her quick and decisive action in the rescue of a distressed kayaker was recognized with a Lifesaving award in 2013.
Additionally, Brandi has served Boy Scouts of America in both Cub Scouts and troop, and most recently leading scouts on high adventure treks mentoring young leaders in challenging environments.
Currently, Brandi serves as Director of The Katie Dusters Sportsman’s Club, a competitive youth shooting club furthering her commitment to recruiting and developing youth in the outdoors.
With 25 years of service, Brandi Reeder.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Derek Spitzer began his career with the department with that ‘46 class, and in January was stationed in Harris County after he graduated.
Derek has taught waterfowl identification and law to game warden and state park police cadets since 2000 at the Texas Game Warden Training Center.
In 2008, Derek transferred to Wood County where he would stay.
In 2014, he was a recipient of the southeastern association of fish and wildlife agencies Texas Game Warden Of The Year. And in 2020, he was promoted to Captain in Region 3, the Tyler District Office.
During his career, Derek was a founding member of The Texas Game Warden dive team serving as a public safety diver and dive instructor.
With 25 years of service, Derek Spitzer.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Matt Thompson was part of that 46th game warden class. And after graduating from the academy, Thompson was then assigned to Hardeman and Foard counties in northwest Texas where he is still currently stationed. In 2007, he received the National Boating Safety Officer Of The Year. And in 2012, he was the National Wild Turkey Federation Officer Of The Year.
In 2020, he became the first ever Texas Game Warden Of The Year.
Warden Thompson is extremely active in the communities he patrols. His goal is conservation for future generations as he holds one of the largest kids fish events in the state since its inception in 2001. Community service is a passion for Matt, and exemplified by his rapport with all the citizens that he serves.
With 25 years of service, Matt Thompson.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Oh, boy, Steve Stapleton.
Steve began his career with that class.
Upon graduation, he was stationed in Van Zandt County.
Throughout his tenure, Steve has had an instrumental hand in many facets of the department and law enforcement division from being an original member of the Peer Support Team, Law Enforcement Strategic Planning Committee member, academy training and TV show called "Lone Star Law."
In 2006, Steve was named Texas Midwest Game Warden Of The Year, as has received multiple director citations for efforts involving disasters, rescues and investigations.
In 2014, he was promoted to Captain in Region 2, District 1.
He’s a recent graduate of the Governor’s Center For Management Development Program and TPWD’S Senior Leadership Development Program. Steve is married to the love of his life, Denise. They have two kids, Garrett and Lana, and his son Garrett is currently in the 67th game warden academy class.
With 25 years of service, Steve Stapleton.
[ APPLAUSE ]
CAPTAIN STEVE STAPLETON: Give me the ball.
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Next, I would like to recognize Brenda Iniguez.
She began her career with Texas Parks and Wildlife Department in October 1, 1999 in our States Parks Division.
Through her high school years, she worked as a seasonal employee at the Balmorhea State Park assisting in housekeeping, which then transferred to assisting in office operations.
She has worked her entire career at that state park. During her tenure as office manager, she contributed to maintaining exceptional office operations.
And in 2017, with almost $1 million in income and over 163,000 visitors to that state park, it was a badge of honor when her office received a “no findings” from an internal audit.
In 2023, she reached a long‑term goal set at the beginning of the fiscal year to sell over $100,000 in concession sales in a 12x12 foot store, which, she surpassed her goals. And she received the Texans for State Park Outstanding Staff Award.
Brenda has remained a pillar of strength upholding our agency’s core values with unwavering integrity. She consistently strives for excellence both in her individual performance and in management of her team.
Her leadership is marked by honor, respect and genuine concern for well‑being of citizens, guests and fellow employees. And every time I visit Balmorhea, she’s very courteous and lets me in the park.
[LAUGHTER]
Congratulations.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Heidi Bailey began her career with the department in 1999 as a wildlife technician in the Post Oak Savannah District of east Texas. As a technician based out of the Tyler district office, Heidi split time between assisting with management activities in Old Sabine Bottom, Keechi Creek Wildlife Management area, and regulatory duties as well.
In 2001, she completed several masters level wildlife courses and was promoted to wildlife biologist for counties in the Mid Post Oaks Savannah District.
Since that time, she has assisted landowners and hunters with wildlife and habitat management on over 122,000 acres of private land focusing on prescribed burning, native prairie restoration and timber management.
Heidi has also been instrumental in facilitating the department’s acquisition of a future 400-acre district demonstration area in Henderson County. She’s been actively involved with wild turkey restoration efforts in east Texas for many years.
Heidi has a soft spot for adult onset hunters and considers developing and implementing the annual Purtis Creek waterfowl workshop and mentor hunts, one of the highlights of her career.
Heidi has been personally responsible for introducing over 250 newcomers to the sport of waterfowl hunting.
Other passions within the job include assisting with becoming an outdoor women’s program and teaching wild game cooking classes, wildlife tracking, conducting prescribed burns‑‑ that’s a fun one‑‑ and native prairie restoration.
For 25 years of service, Heidi Bailey.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Nathan Kuhn began his career with the department in 1999 as a wetland biologist in the Resource Protection Division.
In early 2004, he was moved into Coastal Fisheries Division.
During his time researching protection and coastal fisheries, he took on the role of Ecosystem Resource Program Austin Team Leader.
Authored the Sabine Lake Freshwater Inflows Recommendation Report, coordinated and led a Texas seagrass symposium in 2009 resulting in ten‑year review and update of the Texas seagrass and conservation plan.
Founded and led several inner agency work groups for Keith Lake Fish Pass, statewide seagrass monitoring and Salt Lake Bayou marsh restoration, and also restarted and led a department interdivisional statistics and experimental design work group for agency staff for many years.
In 2017, he took a position in the wildlife division as their Research and Technical Programs Coordinator. In this role, he restructured the department’s wildlife research grants, programmed to more strategically identify needed wildlife research projects and continues, to oversee that program which funds $1 million to $2 million of competitive wildlife research grants each year.
With 25 years of service, Nathan Kuhn.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Next, we’d like to recognize Crisela Rodriguez, who began her career with the department in October 20, 2004, as Clerk Fee Collector and Coffee Bar Attendant at the Bentsen‑Rio Grande Valley State Park.
In this role, she supported the park store manager.
In March of 2005, her dedication to excellent customer service, creativity in displaying merchandise and commitment to maintaining a beautiful parks store led her to promotion of Clerk 1.
In 2010, Crisela earned a full-time position as Clerk 2 due to consistently demonstrating high productivity and exceptional service.
In 2014, she was reclassified as Customer Service Representative 1 for her customer service proactive approach to tasks such as assisting with purchase orders for park store merchandise and a willingness to assist others.
With 20 years of service, Crisela Rodriguez.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my presentation.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Well, it’s always the highlight of the meeting to see the Service Awards, the Retirement Awards, the Canine Awards.
Simply, I’d like to say from I know all the Commissioners here, thank you. For –
As an employee, you don’t hear that very often, I don’t think.
But from the bottom of our hearts, thank you.
You guys are committed, engaged, and it is an honor to be a part of an organization that’s got so many high‑quality people that seem so engaged and enthused with zeal.
Thank you very much.
One more hand for them.
[ APPLAUSE ]
And of particular note, Brenda, $100,000 of sales out of a 12 x12 storage facility.
When you retire, come see me, I’ll hire you.
[ LAUGHTER ]
Wow, that’s fantastic.
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Wait a minute, Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: I said when she retires.
All right.
Thank you all for coming.
Great day.
Very much appreciate it.
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 again.
Okay.
All right.
Let’s get started.
We’ve got a lot to do.
So, Action Item #1: Request To Exceed Capital Budget Transfer Limitations.
Mr. Reggie Pegues.
Please make your presentation.
MR. REGGIE PEGUES: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Commissioners.
For the record my name is Reggie Pegues, Chief Financial Officer for TPWD.
This morning I’ll be presenting a request to extend transfer budget limitations.
To recap my presentation yesterday, this is a request to exceed capital budget transfer limitations of 25 percent to allow TPWD to purchase additional body armor vests for game wardens and state police.
The General Appropriation Act requires the following steps: commission approval and then approval from the legislative budget board and the Governor’s Office.
The justification for this request is the ballistic body armor in both divisions has expired and the pricing has increased significantly over the last five years.
This specific type of armor is known as multi hit rifle protection and will provide the best protection during hybrid situations for law enforcement such as active shooter and border operations.
Following is a breakout as shown in your Exhibit A.
The split would be $831,000 out of fund 9 game fish, water, safety for game wardens to purchase 365 vests and $319,000 sporting goods sales tax for state parks police department to purchase 140 vests for a total cost of $1.1 million.
As of last night, there was one public comment in disagreement.
The disagreement related to capital land acquisition and was not relative to this particular item.
Staff recommends, that the Commission adopt the following motion.
The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission approves capital budget items as reflected in Exhibit A and requests approval from the Legislative Budget Board and the Office of the Governor to exceed the 25 percent transfer limitation on capital budget expenditures.
This concludes my presentation and I’ll be happy to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any questions for Mr. Pegues?
I’ve got a question.
You probably won’t be able to answer it.
Is the body armor, is it the steel plates or is it the Kevlar style?
I’m just curious.
Any of the game wardens?
No?
David, do you know?
DR. DAVID YOSKOWITZ: NO.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay.
All right.
Well, we’ll figure that out and answer later.
Okay.
Is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER ANNA GALO: Galo, so moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER DICK SCOTT: Second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say, "aye."
[CHORUS OF AYES]
Any opposed?
Hearing none.
Motion carries.
Thank you.
Action Item #2: Local Park Grants Funding Request Approval of Proposed Funding Recommendations.
Mr. Dan Reece, please make your presentation.
MR. DAN REECE: Thank you.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Vice‑Chairman and Commissioners, my name is Dan Reece and I’m the Local Park Grants Manager in the state parks division.
I’m here to present funding recommendations for 50 new local park grants. Funding from a portion of the state’s sporting goods sales tax combines with federal offshore oil and gas royalties to provide matching grants to eligible local units of government for the acquisition, renovation and new development of public park land.
For available funding this year, we have just under $11 million available from the Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund.
Within the Texas Large County and Municipality and Recreation and Parks Account we have just over $9.2 million available.
And within the Texas Recreation and Parks Account we have just over $10.7 million in total available grant funding.
Additionally, staff anticipates that we may receive additional funding so it could be applied to local park grants this fiscal year.
For the current grant cycle, we offered all five of our grant programs eligibility for these programs is based on project scope and population of the applying entity.
For all jurisdictions with a population of 500,000 or more, we offer both the Urban Outdoor and Urban Indoor Recreation Program.
For communities with a population of less than 500,000 we offer non-urban Indoor and non-urban outdoor programs. And for all jurisdictions with a population under 20,000, we offer the Small Community Program.
As of August 1, of 2024 we received a total of 103 applications from eligible entities requesting just under $59 million in matching fund assistance.
Of the 25 total comments received on the website 23, or 92 percent, agreed completely with this morning’s funding recommendations.
Exhibits A through E rank the projects in descending order based on each grant program’s scoring criteria.
This criteria was adopted by The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission on August 22, 2019.
We have two motions before you this morning.
Motion 1: Funding for projects listed in Exhibits A through E in the amount of $30,929,771 as approved.
Motion 2: Funding for projects listed in Exhibits A through E as approved in the amount of additional funding that is made available in the current fiscal year.
This concludes my presentation, and I’d be happy to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right.
Okay.
We’ve got any questions for the Commissioners?
We’ve got multiple folks signed up.
So, with that, thank you very much for your presentation.
Appreciate it.
So, you’ll have three minutes to speak.
And so, I would ask if you guys could line up so we could move through this fairly quickly.
I’ll tell you the names and line up in that order.
James Flores, Christine Bryant, Mary Ross, Anna Weiss, David Garza, Joe Vega, Kathy Nelson.
We’ll stop there.
Okay.
Great.
Mr. Flores.
MR. JAMES FLORES: Good morning, Honorable Chairman, Commissioners.
My name is James Flores, I’m the Director for Economic Development for Webb County.I want to speak in favor of the application that we submitted that’s currently being recommended under this item.
It is a non-urban outdoor recreation project in which we’re proposing to construct three splash pads in different parts of rural Webb County. This project will benefit residents who are low income, actually very low income and minority and underprivileged.
So, this is a great project. And this is going to be another project, one of many projects over the last decades we’ve done with Parks and Wildlife that has had a significant impact in Webb County.
We thank you for the past projects and for this project before you today. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you very much.
Miss Bryant.
MS. CHRISTINE BRYANT: Good morning, Commissioners, Chair.
For the record, my name is Christine Bryant. I am the CEO of Vision Galveston, a community building nonprofit. CEO, also stands for Chief Executive Optimist. We are very optimistic that you will enjoy supporting our amazing park program called Jones Park.
The city of Galveston representative could not be here today.
They are actually doing what you’re doing right now, they’re sitting in a never-ending workshop listening to lots of public comment as well. Sorry they couldn’t be here but we are honored to be here to represent the city of Galveston.
A little bit about Vision Galveston. We’re a community building nonprofit designed to connect the wishes of Galvestonians to the resources that make things happen. And Jones Park is one of those wishes. This is a park that has been inundated with flooding and is absolutely not usable for any of the 2,000 kiddos that live around that park.
So, Vision Galveston has invested significant time and money in water engineering to create a nature‑based solution park using bio swells and bioretention.
It’s the first time in Galveston this technology is being used, but of course it’s not the first time it’s being used in the state of Texas. I’ve told city leadership this isn’t innovative, it’s just new to the island.
We appreciate you standing in favor of our proposal.
I also want to thank the TPWD team, led by Dan, who have been very supportive and encouraging in this process.
So, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great.
Thank you.
Ms. Ross.
MS. MARY ROSS: Good morning, Chairman and Commissioners.
I’m here in support of the project, Vision Galveston, Christine has just mentioned. I’m the president of The Better Parks For Galveston. We work in collaboration with Vision Galveston and the city of Galveston to make sure that we can make things like Jones Park a park again and make it happen.
Within a one‑mile radius there’s 2,000 children that live there.
It’s two blocks away from Parker Elementary. Currently, I drive by there daily. I’m a resident of Galveston and have been a resident for the last 20 years. And it’s just sad to see a park just sitting there not filled with children.
So, we appreciate your support in this project in making it happen because this will help mitigate the flooding issues that are occurring right now in that park.
And once we can mitigate that, then we can make it a park again and fill it up with our residents and children. So, we appreciate your support.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Where is Jones Park in Galveston?
MS. ROSS: It’s on 71st and Jones Road, which is the road that goes to Moody Gardens.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay.
Sure.
It’s got all the baseball fields and soccer fields?
MS. ROSS: Yes.
It goes towards that direction.
It’s before you get there.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: By the airport?
MS. ROSS: Yes.
Before Moody Gardens as you turn off of 61st Street the road splits to Stewart Road and Jones Road.
It’s just like a couple blocks from that intersection.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Got it.
Understand.
I know exactly where it is.
Thank you very much.
Anna Weiss.
Dr. ANNA WEISS: Good morning, Mr. Chair, Vice‑Chairman and Commissioners.
My name is Dr. Anna Weiss and I’m the Director of Green Galveston Initiatives with Vision Galveston. I’d like to speak in favor of our project, Jones Park. We work closely with the city, as has been mentioned, on the parks.
And I actually helped the city put together this grant.
So I do also want to thank Kara Escajeda, Dan Reece, and Kelly Norrid for being so helpful in putting this together.
Jones Park is really important.
This is something that the city has wanted to see for many, many years, that our residents want to see. Jones Park becomes Jones swimming pool any time it rains. In addition to the environmental impacts of the stormwater you can’t actually go out and play until it dries up which can be days or weeks. And this destroys equipment. It’s not good for the park, it’s not good for the community that wants to use the place so badly.
And by funding the stormwater mitigation and our nature‑based solutions with these funds we can build a friendly park, a park that’s friendly to the environment and that maximally serves the community, and provide the benefit as well because we can teach our community about the benefits of green infrastructure.
As Christine mentioned, this is one of the first times it’s being used on the island, so this is an excellent chance for us to show just how much this can work for our island.
We’re so grateful to hopefully be able to bring this much -needed funding to our island community and rehabilitate this important community asset. And we look forward to working with TPWD through this process.
On behalf of the city of Galveston and our residents, I’d like to thank you very much for this opportunity.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you.
David Garza.
DAVID GARZA: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners.
How are you all doing today?
Good to see you all.
David A. Garza, Cameron County Commissioner of Precinct 3.
It’s a pleasure to be here, a little bit different than the circumstances were in March of last year when I visited you the last time.
But it’s great to be here, and today to thank you and your staff for having us on the list to be recommended that hopefully you’ll be acting on shortly. And, would like to briefly mention two projects to you that are on that list. One is the Laguna Madre Nature Center. It is a project between colonia the cities of Laguna Vista and Port Isabel. It is being recommended for funding as a Non-urban Indoor Recreational grant.
What we’re attempting to do there is create a center that will showcase the ecological importance of the Lower Laguna Madre to our area that would foster conservation practices and also, safeguard the long‑term health of that ecosystem of our region, which is critically important economically and environmentally to us.
The design of this nature center will include classrooms, exhibit areas and, of course, breathtaking views of the Lower Laguna Madre.It will be fully accessible, welcome to all visitors of all ages and abilities.
We’re going to make sure that we create sustainable features for that particular project that align with the region’s commitment to the conservation and water quality that is undergoing there now.
Also, we would like to use as a complement to the south Texas Ecotourism Center which is down the road and create a corridor between both of them so that one visit to each place would give you totally different perspectives of what exists down there in our area.
So, thank you for that one.
We also are here today on a second project that is on your list, which is La Rillos a regional park which is being recommended for funding in the Non-urban Outdoor Recreation Program.
This particular area is between the cities of San Benito and Los Fresnos. It’s one large colonia area that exists there.
It’s a 24‑acre park that was built with your help in 2010, and now will be enhanced with this particular grant with more amenities and more opportunities for outdoor recreation for the kids in this area.
Since its development, it’s become a hub for children and for adults and for families. We want to make sure now to include a nature trail with native vegetation. We want to also be more inclusive with a playground that will accept all abilities to use, and rain catching systems so we can use rainwater, which is very scarce in our area.
Also, the addition of a fitness exercise court, family picnic area, and do a lot of new directional downward lighting for the parks and the baseball fields.
So, we thank you in advance.
A special thanks to all of you, especially your staff, that have always been great to us in understanding what our needs are.
Of course, I want to thank Commissioners court for always stepping up to the plate and coming up with the matches for these projects.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: You bet.
MR. GARZA: Thank you so much.
We look forward to many more projects. We look forward for that connectivity between ecotourism center and this park because we want to create a corridor there that would be unlike any in the state of Texas.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great.
Thank you very much.
MR. GARZA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER DICK SCOTT: All right, Commissioner, excuse me just a second.
Good to see you again.
You’ve been coming here a long time because I’ve been here a long time.
MR. GARZA: Yes, sir.
24 years.
COMMISSIONER DICK SCOTT: I’ve been here 14.
I just wanted to tell you, y’all doing an awfully good job down in y’all’s neck of the woods. Just keep it up because we enjoy helping y’all.
MR. GARZA: Well, thank you so much.
I know you came down and had a meeting down there one time a number of years ago.
And that invitation is always open.
You can have the meeting at the ecotourism center that you partly, funded. There’s no charge for utilizing that room.
We’d be more than happy to have you there, and we’d do anything to accommodate you.
Okay?
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: We appreciate the complimentary rooms.
So, thank you.
MR. GARZA: We could probably arrange something.
The number of folks from Cameron County in my precinct today in this room that are recipients of your efforts you’ll hear from shortly are numerous. We all want everyone to succeed and do well.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you very much.
MR. GARZA: Tell your husband hello.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right.
Kathy Nelson.
Sorry, Norma Sepulveda?
No.
All right.
DR. DAVID YOSKOWITZ: We’ve got Joe Vega up next, Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Oh, I’m sorry.
I apologize.
Joe Vega.
My apologies.
That was David Garza.
I’m sorry, David.
JOE VEGA: Good morning, Honorable Chairman, Members of the Commission, Dr. Yoskowitz and staff.
My name is Joe Vega, I’m the Parks Director from Cameron County.
And on behalf of our County Judge Eddie Trevino commissioners court and county administrator Pete Sepulveda, we’re here to thank you for the support on two grant applications that are getting recommended for funding today.
As Commissioner Garza just said, one of the projects is the Laguna Madre Nature Center and the other one is the improvements to the La Rillos Regional Park.
We also want to thank you for the wonderful partnership that we have with Texas Parks and Wildlife. In the last several years over $28 million in quality of life improvements have been done in Cameron County, and that’s with the partnership of Texas Parks and Wildlife.
Just to name a few, The South Texas Ecotourism Center, The Alnito Nature Park, the new improvements we’re facing to do at Bahia McFarland another park, the new groundbreaking that we’re fixing to do at Santa Maria, the new recreation park at Santa Maria, improvements to the Adolph Thomae boat ramp, the new bike trail at the Pedro Pete Benavides park.
I could stand here and continue talking to you, but many park improvements and new parks have been constructed in Cameron County and that’s with the partnership of Texas Parks and Wildlife.
Without your partnership, it would be impossible to do these projects. We thank you on behalf of Cameron County.
God Bless Texas and God Bless America.
Before, I also want to thank Dan Reece and their staff.
Thank you, Dan, thank you, Dana.
You have a staff that is second to none.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you.
MR. VEGA: All I can say is God Bless Texas and God Bless America.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, Joe.
Kathy Nelson.
MS. KATHY NELSON: Good morning, Chairman and Commissioners.
Thank you so much for the opportunity to speak today.
I just wanted to express… excuse me, I’m with the city of Grapevine Parks and Recreation Department.
On behalf of the city of Grapevine, I just wanted to express our gratitude for the local parks grant funding program. Without the funding from this program, many of the wonderful parks that are before you today, as you know, would not be realized including Settlers Park that is also before you. More so, we appreciate the legitimacy that this program brings to the provision of public park land and outdoor recreation opportunities to these local communities.
Without your partnership and expertise, it really does add another level of importance to these types of projects for our communities. And without your support and without your expertise we just wouldn’t have as much support as we do. So, we do thank you for adding that extra level of legitimacy that you provide to all of the local communities here in the state.
Thank you so much.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you.
Mayor Norma Sepulveda.
MAYOR NORMA SEPULVEDA: That was perfect.
Good morning, Chairman Hildebrand and esteemed members of the Commission.
I am Mayor Sepulveda, I’m the Mayor of the great city of Harlingen.
I want to take this opportunity to sincerely thank you for considering the Non-urban Indoor grant funding for my community.
This is for a Harlingen recreational center.
This project represents a significant advancement for our community, addressing a long‑standing need for a dedicated indoor recreation space. If you’ve been to south Texas, you’ll know that we have some brutal summers.
It is impossible for our community to really fully experience the outdoors like they can in the rest of the state of Texas, and so this indoor space is something that is essential for our community.
This new facility will provide opportunities for people of all ages, backgrounds and abilities to participate in a variety of activities from basketball and pickleball, to fitness classes, cooking workshops, nutrition classes and community events.
Moreover, it will provide families and individuals with a safe and comfortable place to enjoy recreational activities regardless of the time of the day or weather conditions. This center also has the potential to make a substantial impact on public health.
In the Rio Grande valley where 75 percent of the population is overweight and 40 percent is classified as clinically obese, this facility will promote healthier lifestyles and help reduce the risk of chronic illnesses such as diabetes. It will also provide a space that supports mental health by fostering connections, reducing stress, and promoting physical activity. Your decision today is not merely an investment in infrastructure, it’s an investment in the well‑being and future of my community.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration and for helping bring this vision to life for our city. We’re excited to see the very first ever community recreation center become a hub for recreation, wellness, and connection.I also want to take a moment.
I don’t know if she’s still here, but Representative Lopez from our district, we want to thank her for her unwavering support to our community and for supporting this project. Most importantly, I want to thank you all for your service. Thank you so much.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, Mayor.
All right.
Let’s line up several more and we’ll finish up. Stacie Miller, Judge John Paul Schuster, Travis Hughes, Justin Parker, Brandon Knapp, Megan Deen, Richard Zavala,Janie Lopez and Jared Hockema.
Ms. Miller.
STACIE MILLER: Good morning, Chairman and Commissioners.
Hello, my name is Stacie Miller, I’m the City Manager for Stinnett. If you’re not familiar with our location, we’re 45 minutes north of Amarillo.Our city’s population is around 1,500.
I was born and raised in this town and our city park has always been put on the back burner. The last time it was updated was 24 years ago.
With the help of the PRPC in guiding us in writing our first ever park grant, we would love for you to consider this opportunity for our small community.
Thank you all very much for your service.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great.
Thank you very much.
Judge John Paul Schuster.
JUDGE JOHN PAUL SCHUSTER: I have to do this, howdy.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Howdy.
JUDGE SCHUSTER: I am Judge John Paul Schuster, Kinney County, Brackettville.
As you know, we are a border county with 16 miles on the river.
I’m here today on behalf of the kiddos, and the youth and our community and county to say thank you for your opportunity to speak to you, but to say thank you for your support over the years. We have a splash pad last year with the help of a grant, which is a huge deal for our youth and our community. I can’t stress to you enough the importance… I’m a youth guy, former ag teacher, high school principal.I’m getting a little shook up.
Our baseball complex is not regulated, not regulation style built in 1957. All of our commissioners played on it when they were kiddos. I’m in the first term so I am saying kudos for the previous judge for starting this process and our grant writers.
This is going to be huge to our community.
It’s going to be beneficial not only for our youth going into high school, the school has facilities, obviously, but it will give a great resource and great opportunity for kiddos to not only learn and development but also grow and mature.
That’s something huge that we have to look into and continue to push and strive to help and protect as our youth are our leaders for tomorrow. Our facility — we’re looking to build two fields with the money and a concession stand and so forth like that.
Multipurpose concession stand where it can be used for fundraisers and benefits for the community and also a walking trail around the complete complex.
Also, we’d like to consider and we’re looking into using artificial turf to help resource our water sources out there, help protect our springs and so forth like that. So, this is a huge opportunity for our county. I moved there in 1993. This is where my kids went to school and graduated and stuff, and they played on the field as well. I even coached and umpired some. We’ve been there and done that. Small county you get to do it all sometimes. But on behalf of our county and our residents and our Commissioners, thank you all so much for your support. Thank you for your time.
Mr. Reese, we’re ready to roll our sleeves up and get to work.
Chairman, Vice‑Chairman, Commissioners on behalf of Kinney County, thank you all.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, Judge.
How is the border these days?
JUDGE SCHUSTER: Can you turn this thing off?
[ LAUGHTER ]
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Has it gotten better since Monday?
JUDGE SCHUSTER: Yes.
Just the morale of everybody, law enforcement, Border Patrol.
We’ve been fairly quiet.
We had temporary checkpoints set up.
That helped with highway traffic tremendously. Our brush traffic starting to pick back up again and everything like that. I live 24 miles straight from the border and stuff. We see not at often as we used to, the bailouts and stuff. The sad thing is our community stays on lockdown, our schools are on lockdown, the courthouse on lockdown.
We’re still having to deal with it. We do see the light at the end of the tunnel. It took us time to get here. It’s going to take us time to get out of this.
We’re appreciative what — we have to look forward to.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Nice thing for Texas Parks and Wildlife is our game wardens no longer have to be deployed to the border and can actually stay home and do their jobs.
JUDGE SCHUSTER: Stay with their families.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Exactly.
Thank you, Judge, for what you do.
Appreciate it.
Travis Hughes.
TRAVIS HUGUES: Good morning, Commissioners.
My name is Travis Hughes.
I’m the Park and Recreation Director for the city of Lockhart. I’m here to speak in support of our new aquatics facility that is long overdue. The city of Lockhart has one swimming pool. It was built in 1973. During the summer every day I cross my fingers that it’s still operational when I walk in the door. This is a long-awaited project. It’s been in the making for three years. As you’re aware, small communities around the Austin area are growing rapidly. Some would say maybe a little too rapidly.
So, resources, financial resources are scarce to say the least as we’re trying to maintain infrastructures as we grow rapidly.
So, without your financial support this probably wouldn’t be happening.
So, I want to thank you very much for that.
I’ve been operating aquatics programs for over 25 years. Oftentimes — have to shoehorn a program into a pool that doesn’t really accommodate it properly.
We’re designing this pool to accommodate learn-to-swim programs, aquatics fitness programs, competitive swimming and diving, as well as leisure activities and events. This will serve the community at large, as well as the school district.
So, I want to thank you very much for your support.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great.
Thank you very much.
Justin Parker.
JUSTIN PARKER: Good morning, Commissioners.
I come here today to speak on behalf of our grant application for an inclusive playground and fully accessible Eska park in town of Spearman about 100 miles north of Amarillo in a county of about 5,000 people, which is county seat about 3,100.
So very small, very rural.
Our closest neighbors are about 15 minutes away. That’s as close as anybody gets. This park is incredibly important to us.
I was able to rally, I don’t know how many community members behind this when I just mentioned this idea. I think we ended up with 2 to 300 letters of support within the week.
That’s quite a feat for a small community like ours.
This inclusive playground is the first piece of a puzzle for this park to make it fully accessible for everyone. It’s a block from our hospital, physical therapy offices, nursing home and our elementary school. Very… I can’t even… sorry, I’m getting a little flustered on how important this is to our community.
When I had this idea, I’ve had it in an idea book I had for a long time. I went and spoke to a group of 4H kids doing a robotics project. They asked about an inclusive playground and how they would go about getting it before the city council, school board. I said, “When you’re ready you call me, and we’ll get it done. I’ll get you in front of them whenever you’re ready.” I took that back and discussed it with my mayor.
I said, “I’ve had this in my little book for a while.”
I said, “I think we have traction.” He agreed, and so we ran with it. I met with Dan and some staff and pitched this idea to them. They said that’s a great idea. When you have the kids that want it.
They cared that their friends that are in wheelchairs and things like that couldn’t get on the equipment to play with them. We’ve got the traction.
Now is the time.
I said the opportunity came to us. I said I’m going to go meet and find out how we can get this done.
Nothing in my entire life or career has topped the moment to be here to speak with you and speak on behalf of this project.
This means so much to our community and communities around us that nobody has an inclusive playground and a fully accessible park near us, our neighbors.
Everybody is 30 minutes from everybody up there.
This is going to benefit multiple counties.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Fantastic.
Great.
Thanks so much.
It’s great to hear those stories.
Brandon Knapp.
BRANDON KNAPP: Chairman and Commissioners, I’ve traveled more than 500 miles to come and see you guys today. We’re 110 miles north of Amarillo.
I’m Public Works Director for city of Perryton. I’ve come here because I wanted you guys to know how much this Small Community’s grant means to the people of Perryton. On June 16, 2023 we had a Category 3 tornado hit our town. It destroyed more than 400 buildings. A town of 8,000 to 9,000 people. It was a pretty significant event for us. We’re still repairing and cleaning up what happened during that event to this day.
The tornado went directly through one of our parks in town, Murphy Park, destroyed almost all the equipment that was in that park. It was a popular for kids to come and play baseball, soccer. There was play equipment. They were all destroyed.
There’s so much community investment in this project. 100 percent matching funds for this was from donations from the community. This grant funding is going to be crucial to rebuilding this park. This is only the first phase.
Continued funding from grants is going to be needed to put this destroyed park back together and have it be the gathering place for the community again. This step — we’re looking at rebuilding the baseball field and the soccer field.
So, we really greatly appreciate the support of the Commission on this.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great.
Thank you very much.
MR. KNAPP: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: You know what we ought to do in the future is have these folks submit pictures of the parks so the Commissioners can understand a little bit more about what we’re doing here.
This is my favorite part of serving on this board is helping communities like yours. But that would be great.
When the speaker comes, we show the picture and we get a full understanding of the park and what good we’re doing. So that would be great.
Thanks, Brandon.
Megan Deen.
MEGAN DEEN: Good morning.
My name is Megan Deen and I’m with the Ft. Worth Zoo. We are thrilled to be recommended for TPWD Urban Indoor Local Parks grant for the reformation of The Hall of Wonders as the next phase of our Texas wild renovation.
This grant not only will enable us to complete the much-needed work on this building, but it serves as validation for our conservation concept shared throughout all Texas wild.
Texas Parks and Wildlife Department was an integral partner in the development of the critical conservation messages that have been shared in The Hall of Wonders for almost 25 years. At the hub of conservation education at the zoo the building has been well explored and well loved by more than 20 million visitors.
And while the conservation philosophies have not changed, we know children’s learning behaviors and patterns have evolved in the digital age.This generous grant will enable us to update and elevate the guest experience, and we look forward to continuing our long‑standing partnership with TPWD to create an engaging and exciting educational space for all to enjoy at the Ft. Worth Zoo.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, Megan.
Richard Zavala.
RICHARD ZAVALA: Good morning, Mr. Chair.
Richard Zavala, city of Ft. Worth.
A special hello to Commissioner Patton.
I notice that he wrote down when he heard about the Kinney baseball field he was making sure a scout went out there and checked out what kind of development we have.
I also want to give a shout out to Commissioner Bell who is leading our Urban Outdoor Advisory Committee., and he’s a task master on that, and I’ve enjoyed serving on that.
The grant is for a 67-acre park. It’s sitting in reserve.
Policy enabled us to purchase this land because of our park dedication policy. We put bond funds too it, $3 million. With dedication fees and this grant of $1.5 million you’re leveraging against that $3.5 million locally. And I want to talk about that.
Because at the end of March, after 45 years in this field and 33 in the city of Ft. Worth, I’m going to unsaddle the horse. I will be done as Park And Recreation Director. What we do in Ft. Worth involves you.
It involves all these people that are before you today. In the last 15 years, we have achieved $15 million in local park fund grants. That has been leveraged with $50 million of local funding. So, you’ve invested $66 million in the city of Ft. Worth in the last 15 years. And what’s important to understand is we’re fulfilling our duty to those that preceded us.
I’ve seen different commissioners up here. I’ve seen different park directors, everything else. I have a duty to continue what they started and preserve it and grow it; and for the present.
It also sets an obligation to those that follow. People I’m not even going to know. They are not even going to know who I was.
But you know what?
They went to Oak Grove Park and they had a good time. They renewed their life, they recreated their life, which is really the basis of recreation, recreating lives. So it was a drive for me down here this morning, and it’s a reflection time for me.
I hope you can understand that.
But what we do and what these people do is so important to those local communities. And we are on the cusp, really, of that awareness after COVID and everything else, it’s important to have open space. It’s important to do wildlife classes. It’s important to get all cultures and all communities to utilize our parks and get involved. That’s our duty, that’s your duty to do that.
I will say this, finally the people of this country, the people of this state, realize that on the third day he created parks.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great, Richard.
Thanks for your service.
“Unsaddling the horse,” I like that.
State Rep Janie Lopez.
Ms. Lopez.
JANIE LOPEZ: Good morning, Commissioners, staff, directors, Dan Reece.
Thank you all so much for all the support you do for our parks and wildlife. I’m just here in gratitude today in support of all the financial commitments that you all made to our local communities in south Texas and, of course, we get to vote on it, right?
So, I’m here in support of the projects that we have in Cameron County, District 37, any projects for the Willacy County as well. The investment that y’all are making in our communities is to preserve and expand our beautiful green spaces that we have in south Texas.
And I’m excited for that because this provides that opportunity for our families to go out there and have fun in these outdoor recreational areas and improve their health. You heard that we have high diabetes rates. We have high heart disease rates. This means that our families will get healthier. They will get to go out there and enjoy family activities with the children and make memories with the children also and instill that love for nature as well.
So, I am just here, you know, to support our projects.
Thank you all for those opportunities that you’re bringing not only to our families well‑being, but also to bring more jobs to the area, to bring that lasting impact that will be there for generations to come.
So, I thank you all so much for your support. Special thanks to all the hard work that you all are doing once again. And special thanks to my community members that are here today. I’m so proud of them.I tell them if you don’t apply, you don’t get money, right?
There’s a saying in spanish…
Si no hablas, Dios no te escucha, Dios nos ha estado escuchando.
If you don’t speak up, God won’t hear you. God has been hearing us.
Thank you all so much.
God Bless you all for your service.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, State Rep.
All right.
Last Jared Hockema.
JARED HOCKEMA: Thank you, Chairman and Commissioners, I’m Jared Hockema.
I’m City Manager for Port Isabel.
Thank you to Representative Lopez.
She’s our State Rep. so I appreciate her advocacy. We appreciate the legislature and this Commission funding outdoor recreation grant. I think it’s the first time since 2018.
As you heard, it really is critical funding to our communities.
In our case, we’re going to be adding a new gymnasium, adding classrooms to our existing youth center. It’s the first time in 30 years that facility has been renovated. We’re going to be able to incorporate sustainability, accessibility to that facility.
Also to have the motif of bringing the outdoors in. As Commissioner Garza mentioned, he’s our County Commissioner, we are in a unique area, the Laguna Madre area. We have a beautiful ecosystem that’s really improved and expanded, especially thanks to the stewardship of Parks and Wildlife over the past few decades.
And we want to make sure that our youth are aware of that and understand the importance of that to our communities. In this case we’re going to be leveraging over $2 million of local funds into this project. Perhaps more. We just completed another project, or have another project underway where we took half of your dollars and added $4 million of local funds. We really appreciate the help that you’ve given us.
It’s going to be a great project for our youth. And it doesn’t serve just the city of Port Isabel, but also our surrounding communities, the kids participate in after school programs, summer programs and of course all the other benefits that accrue to the community.
Thank you again for consideration.
Thank you to the staff for the funding recommendation you gave us, and we look forward to working with you.
Thank you so much.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great.
Thank you very much.
All right.
Any questions by the Commissioners?
Thank you all for who spoke today.
Really heartwarming.
COMMISSIONER ANNA GALO: I do have a question, if I could just ask James to come up, James Flores from Webb County.
It’s just for my clarification because I see that we have a Webb County splash pad project and we also have a Laredo Lomas Ell Sud Phase I. But are those both being applied from Webb County?
MR. FLORES: No, ma’am.
COMMISSIONER GALO: So, they are separate.
MR. FLORES: Yes.
Webb County only applies for the rural areas, and the city of Laredo applies for the incorporated city of Laredo.
COMMISSIONER ANNA GALO: For the Lomas El Sud.
I wasn’t sure because I heard the Commissioner Gonzales talk about it.
Okay, thank you for clarifying that for me.
With that said, Chairman, I would like to recuse myself only from the Webb County Colonia splash pads project because my husband is a Webb County commissioner, a commissioner for Precinct 3 in Webb County.
But I would like to vote on the Laredo which I’m allowed to, the park.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great.
Thank you, Commissioner, duly noted.
Anywhere other questions?
VICE-CHAIRMAN OLIVER BELL: Just a comment.
I’ve had the opportunity to sit through a few of these now, and it just seems they get better each time. And the stories people tell on the help that’s offered via this are just wonderful. And I’ve decided that there are several folks that work in Parks and Wildlife. I think you probably have the opportunity to have some of the greatest jobs.
Dan, you and your team, you must get to feel really good whenever there’s something going on like this.
Just hats off and thank you for the work you do to coordinate with people.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right.
Any other questions?
I think we ought to organize a Commissioners field trip to the various local parks.
That would be great.
It really would be fantastic.
Dan, I’ve got a question for you. Of the $31 million of funding, do you have any idea how much comes from the Federal oil and gas royalty?
DAN REECE: About a third of that.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: About a third of it.
Okay.
So interesting.
When we terminate offshore leasing, the unintended consequences of all these things. This is essential money for all the great towns in the state of Texas.
I’d like to note that.
So, $10 million of it comes from federal oil and gas royalties, correct?
MR. REECE: Correct.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: How much over time do you think we’ve received from the feds on royalties?
MR. REECE: Hundreds of millions of dollars.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Hundreds of millions of dollars.
All going to this state park program or local park program?
MR. REECE: A portion for State Park Acquisition and Development Grants and a portion to local communities.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great, all right.
Thank you.
As noted, Commissioner Galo is going to recuse herself on those particular funding items. And then we’ve got Motion 1: Funding for projects listed in Exhibits A through E in the amount of $30,929,771 is approved.
Is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER DICK SCOTT: Scott, so moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER LESLIE DOGGETT: Doggett, second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say, "aye."
[CHORUS OF AYES]
Any opposed?
Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you all for coming.
What a great program.
Motion 2: Funding for projects listed in Exhibits A through E as approved in the amount of additional funding that is made available in the current fiscal year.
Is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER OLIVER BELL: Commissioner Bell so moved.
COMMISSIONER HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER JAMES ABELL: Abell, second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor say, "aye."
[CHORUS OF AYES]
Any opposed?
Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you very much.
Great, great program.
Action Item #3: Rule Review, Recommended Adoption of Proposed Changes Chapter 53 finance, chapter 69 resource protection.
Ms. Laura Carr, please make your presentation.
LAURA CARR: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice‑chairman, Commissioners. I am here to present on the recommended adoption of proposed changes to chapters 53 and 69 arising out of the rule review process.
I am an Assistant General Counsel in the Legal Division. As you have been hearing for a while now, we are coming to the conclusion of our rule review process. But as we’ve been undergoing that, we’ve been reviewing all of our rules to determine whether the reason for them continues to exist as is statutorily required for all state agencies. With this review, this was our second group of chapters in the Texas Administrative Code that we looked at. We looked at chapters 53, 59 and 69, and we are only proposing changes to chapters 53 and 69.
This is the opportunity to make minor housekeeping‑type changes to our rules. As you will see, this is really a cleanup process today.
The first proposed change relates to one of the rules that references Pronghorn Antelope. We’re proposing to change that to just Pronghorn because it’s not actually an antelope. We’ve been trying to make this change over the years as the opportunity arises. Our next proposed change is to correct a numbering error in a current rule. It refers to four paragraphs where there are actually three, so we will fix that.
Our third proposed change relates to updating the names of endangered and threatened plants, so we are just proposing to update those names to reflect the correct scientific names.
You’ll see those proposed changes in yellow. That is the correct terminology.
And then finally we have a proposed change to update the name of the accrediting entity that is referenced in two of our rules.
It’s currently listed as the American Zoo and Aquarium Association.
We will update that to the Association of Zoos and Aquariums.
As of last night, we had received 12 total comments on this, ten agreed, two disagreed specifically but did not provide any sort of commentary.
We recommend that you adopt the following motion: We are adopting amendments to Texas Administrative Code Section 53.10 concerning license, permit and boat and motor fees, Section 69.4 and Section 69.8 concerning endangered, threatened and protected native plants. And Section 69.304 and 69.305 concerning scientific educational and zoological permits as listed in Exhibits A through B with changes as necessary to the proposed text that was published in the December 20, 2024 issue of the "Texas Register".
With that, I will take any questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great.
Thank you.
Any discussion about the commission?
If not, is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER ANNA GALO: Galo, so moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER BOBBY PATTON: Patton, second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say, "aye."
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed?
Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you very much.
Action Item #4: Oyster Certificate Of Location rules recommended adoption of proposed changes. Dr. Zach Olsen, please make your presentation.
DR. ZACH OLSEN: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners.
For the record my name is Zach Olsen. I’m the Ecosystems Resources Program Director for the Coastal Fisheries Division.
Today I will be presenting proposed changes to the Oyster Certificate Of Location program with the request to adopt the motion as published in the “Texas Register.”
I’ll start with a brief background of the Oyster Certificate Of Location Program as it currently exists, then we’ll move into a discussion of changes that were made to Parks and Wildlife Code by the 88th Texas Legislature, and then talk about the proposed changes Texas Administrative Code with regard to the Certificate Of Location Program. I will start with this quick program background.
In essence, as they currently exist, Oyster Certificates Of Location are areas for private on bottom oyster harvest. This has historically been associated with what’s termed “oyster transplants.” That’s when oysters are moved from health department restricted waters into approved or conditionally approved waters and allowed to depurate– that’s a term we are going to come back to later in the presentation.
Depurate is essentially the process of reducing pathogenic organisms that may be present in that shell stock for human consumption. That’s historically been the use of COLs, however modern COLs primarily rely on the placement of hard, clean, cultch material, and then natural oyster settlement and growth. Holders then have sole rights to those oysters in those COLS. Currently COLs only exist in Galveston Bay. There is 43 existing COLs. I’ll show you that in the next slide.
This takes up approximately 2300 acres total. These range in size from 11 to 100 acres each. Annual Texas harvest from these COLs is about 9 percent to 36 percent of the total Texas harvest.
What you’re seeing here is a map of the central Galveston Bay region. These white polygons are the existing COLs. Again, these are all Certificates Of Location for harvest. Some other programs specifics related to the current program, there’s 100 acre maximum per COL, a 15-year rental term and various siting requirements such as avoiding Natural oyster beds, shoreline buffers, other site specific stipulations such as buffering between existing Certificates Of Location. I’ll also mention that there are multiple state and federal agencies which have authorities over various aspects of Certificates of Location, whether that’s placement of materials into the water, or actually placement of the materials into the water such as the Texas General Land Office Army Corps of Engineers. I believe we have Mr. Tony Williams from the General Land Office today. We work closely with his staff in conversations as we’ve been thinking about these Certificates Of Location for restoration.
And I want to recognize that and thank, for that dialogue, and we will continue that moving forward.
Now I’ll move into a quick overview of the changes made to Parks and Wildlife Code of the 88 Texas Legislature. That was the legislature in 2023. And then talk about the proposed changes to Texas Administrative Code. So, in essence the 88th Texas Legislate modified Parks and Wildlife Code to allow for the use of Certificates Of Location program for restoration. The proposed changes and the Texas Administrative Code can be categorized into three buckets: Number one is mirroring Parks and Wildlife changes into Texas Administrative Code where that’s relevant.
Number two, changes needed for the administration of some of these new authorities relating to COLs for restoration. And lastly, just some general modernization to the Texas Administrative Code with regard to Certificates Of Location and we’ll go into more detail of those in a second.
So, a brief overview of the Parks and Wildlife Code, Chapter 76.
I’ll move into more detail on each of these bullet points.
But an overview. There was a change in the natural oyster bed definition in the Parks and Wildlife Code, a change for the allowance of siting Certificates Of Location on degree, removal of that term “depuration” from the COL renewal process, and a section of Parks and Wildlife Code added that yields broad authority to the Commission for establishing a program of Certificates Of Location for restoration purposes.
We’ll start with that change to Parks and Wildlife Code, that the natural oyster definition. You can see both definitions on the screen there, but, in essence, the main change is the previous definition relied solely on the presence of live oysters on a certain amount of area. While the current definition now opens that up to taking to account live oysters and oyster shell and the predominance of those substrates.
We’ll talk more about the importance of this on the next slide, but, in essence, it is more of an ecologically accurate definition for an oyster bed.
This next change is the allowance for siting COLs on degraded reef. Previous, a Certificate of Location could not be cited on a natural oyster bed. But now you can see that the department may subject natural oyster bed to a Certificate Of Location if it’s deemed to be degraded, and then the Parks and Wildlife Code lays out several considerations, including the relative abundance of oysters, the availability of cultch material, sediment overburden, amount of time of area has been exhausted.
Any other criteria indicative of a degraded oyster bed.
So, this combined with that change to the natural oyster bed definition in thinking that it will open up areas that would be of interest to restoration practitioners. Typically, when we’re talking about restoring oyster beds we’re looking at historical oyster beds that are not degraded. And so, the thinking is that it will open up more areas for Certificated Of Locations for that purpose.
The next change to the Parks and Wildlife Code is the removal of the consideration of depuration from the COL renewal. So again, that’s that process of reducing pathogenic organisms that may be present in shell stock. That was an historical use of Certificates Of Location. That’s not a common use of Certificate Of Location today, and It certainly wouldn’t be a consideration for Certificate Of Location restoration. So that consideration for depuration has been removed from that language.
And lastly, this is a section of Parks and Wildlife Code added that yields broad authority to the Commission to establish a program of COLs for restoration purposes. And the Commission can establish fees, lease terms renewal requirements, total acreage, siting marking requirements and any other requirements necessary.
It’s notable for Certificates Of Location for harvest, many of those considerations are actually given in Parks and Wildlife Code, but here the Parks and Wildlife Code gives the authority to the Commission to set these things specifically for Certificate Of Location for restoration. So now moving into the proposed revisions to the Texas Administrative Code.
These first three bullets just are areas that we would propose to mirror Parks and Wildlife Code into Texas Administrative Code that includes mapping that restoration definition, adding general degraded reef language for siting and removal of language relating to depuration of the COL renewal requirement.
These next bucket of proposed changes are just areas that are needed for the administration of these new authorities, specifically for COLs for restoration. First, we proposed to add language to differentiate two types of COLs, both for harvest and for restoration. Namely done in two places. Number one, designating the purpose of a Certificate Of Location for that application process as for a restoration or for harvest. And secondly, specifying no harvest would be allowed for Certificates Of Location for restoration.
What you’re seeing here is proposals for a restoration of programs for COLs with regard to application fees, rental fees.
I’ll note all of these mirror the existing program for COL harvest with the exception of that rental fee.
We are proposing that COL for restoration have their rental fee waived. And the thinking here is that long-term restoration of oysters allowed in the water will provide long term ecosystem services such as water filtration, structural habitat, erosion protection, and also revenues will not be generated from the harvest of those oysters.
The application renewal fee of $200 — again, that rental fee waived– location term of 15 years, maximum acreage per COL for restoration 100 acres. And we do envision a similar siting and application process for both.
We are proposing a cultch placement plan and a minimum use criteria for COLs. So, the cultch placement plan which would essentially ask applicants to lay out their plans for placing cultch materials, the types of materials, the frequency of placement, understanding that it can be difficult to produce those things across a long-time horizon, but trying to get an understanding of proposed activity. That would be helpful for the siting process.
And then secondly, we propose to add a minimum use criteria specifically for the restoration COLs. That’s laid out in Texas Administrative Code, but essentially that would be a certain percentage of cultch placement plan to be completed within a certain time internals throughout the rental phase. And the purpose here is if we give a Certificate Of Location for restoration we want to be sure that recipient is in fact restoring that degraded bed and not allowing it to remain degraded.
We also proposed to modify language associated with the public hearings associated for Certificates Of Locations. So, there is a public hearing requirement required for all Certificates Of Location to get public input on user conflicts for a particular area of a Certificates Of Location. As it’s currently written, Texas Administrative Code primarily is instructing us to look at when that area was recently harvested or the most recent time that area was harvested for oysters.
We want to open it up to include a broader array of public comments and concerns in the stated purpose of that Certicates Of Location hearing.
And then lastly, these are the proposed modernizations with regard to the Certificate Of Location program as a whole. And these are fairly independent of the changes to Parks and Wildlife Code. Three main changes: first, modernizing mapping requirements to allow for the use of modern hand-held GPS in the application process of siting and identifying the location of proposed COLs, modifying marking requirements. There still would be a marking requirement for all COLs, but we’re simply proposing to remove marking requirements that are currently on the books that was necessary during that application period.
So, we’re moving that and just requiring marking in the final Certificate of Location. And then adding some new authorizations for non-harvest activity on Certifcates Of Location, including moving oysters from one location to another, emergency sampling to monitor conditions of mortality and emergency maintenance activities on those areas.
We did conduct public hearings for these proposed rule changes. We conducted a virtual public hearing on January 6, a public hearing on January 7 in Rockport, and a Texas City public hearing on January 8. As of last night we had 31 total public comments both online and also at our in person public hearings. 65 percent agree, 16 percent neutral, 19 percent disagree.
Those in support were primarily supporting it because it’s offering a new opportunity for oyster restoration, and specifically an opportunity for long-term protection of restored sites, which can provide a lot of ecosystem services, such as habitat water filtration. Those in disagreement were primarily concerned with wanting more clarity on funding sources to be used on Certificates Of Location for restoration.
Multiple commenters were concerned over taking public reef, productive reef, out of the public refishery. One commenter disagreed specifically with removing the requirement to publish a notice in a local newspaper for Certificates Of Location. And we had several commenters that were concerned that Certificate Of Location for harvest and for restoration would not be offered at the same time.
Also, a commenter wanting to see different rental fees for existing Certificates Of Location for harvest to match those of restoration.
We did receive letters from The Coastal Conservation Association, The Nature Conservancy and The Galveston Bay Foundation all in support of these rule changes. And we presented these rule changes to the Oyster Advisory Committee and the Coastal Resource Advisory Committee, both of which were in support.
So, I’ll go ahead and state the formal recommendation.
Staff recommends that The Commission adopt the following motion: The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission adopts amendments to 31 Texas Administrative Code 58.11 and 58.30 concerning the Statewide Oyster Fishery Proclamation with changes as necessary to the proposed text as published in the December 20, 2024, issue of the “Texas Register.”
And with that, I’ll take any questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great.
Thank you, Dr. Olsen,
Any questions for Dr. Olsen?
I’ve got one.
If you go back to your slide, I believe, three, four, five, number of permits over the acreage and how much harvest. Keep going back.
There you go.
You‘ve got 2,318 acres of COLs.
That basically 43 existing. And you’re telling me that that represents 9 percent of the 36 percent of the annual harvest?
DR. OLSEN: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: So, if we multiplied that by 5x, or 4x, we’ll say 25 percent — I’ll take the midpoint of your two. Could we actually provide the full supply required for the Texas harvest?
DR. OLSON: By the numbers, yes, sir, that is correct.
But, I will say there’s a relatively small organization involved in Certificate Of Location for harvest, mainly because there’s a lot of capital associated with that, in terms of putting those cultch materials out on their reefs and then waiting for the oysters to grow. So, there’s a lot of capital moving that material onto the reef.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: I understand, but there’s a revenue associated with that as well, so it’s a real business, correct.?
DR. OLSON: Correct, yes.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: So, Dr. Yoskowitz, I would really press you hard on getting with staff and understanding how we can expand the COL system. This seems like an absolute, straightforward answer what we’re degrading are naturally occurring oyster reefs, and we’ve got the ability to create more COLs on a harvested, sustainable basis. Doesn’t that make the most sense in the world?
DR. OLSON: Yes, sir.
I’ll also note that there’s currently nothing that keeps individuals with Certificates Of Location who are also harvesting on the public reefs.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: I understand.
But if we could incent people to farm more, clearly that would be beneficial to the ecosystem in the coastal bays, correct?
DR. OLSON: Yes, Sir.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Let’s push that hard, Dr. Yoskowitz, okay?
All right.
Thank you.
All right, we’ve got now several speakers.
Let’s see.
Item four.
Give me a second.
Okay.
Justin Woody, Johnny Jurisich, Grahame Jones, Jim Meyn, Shane Bonnot and Marie Camino.
If you guys would step up.
Thank you.
Okay Jusin Woody.
JUSTIN WOODY: Good morning, Chairman, Commissioners.
Thank you for asking to expand the COL program, by the way.
My name is Justin Woody, I’m a fourth generation oyster fisherman and processor. My family’s company, Jerry’s Seafood, was founded 1970 in Smith Point, Texas. We currently hold 13 of the COLs totaling 848 acres out of the 2,318 you just saw there. So, we know the benefit of the COLs.
The first one, my grandfather acquired in 1962 after returning from the Navy. Texas has 2,300 acres of COLs, far behind states like Louisiana which has 400,000 acres, Virginia which as 114,000 acres and Maryland which has 8,000 acres. Looking at the Chesapeake Bay region in 2004 Virginia and Maryland saw a record low oyster production falling below 50,000 bushels that year.
But rebounded through private leasing and extensive restoration efforts producing over 700,000 bushels in 2023. Public reefs in that region thrived with 300,000 bushels of the total harvest. In contrast, Texas produced just 219,000 sacks combined from public and private leases that year. And I would also like to add that we try to differentiate between restoration and harvestable. But harvestable COLs are restoration.
We use private funding to rebuild reefs that most likely will not recover on their own. The key difference is that we are not relying on public taxpayer money, grants or philanthropic funding to restore these reefs. Instead, the profits as you mentioned from harvesting these COLs are reinvesting directly into maintaining and improving the reefs located on them.
So, I do support the rules as proposed, and I support the expansion of both restoration and harvestable COLs, but I urge the Commission to allow both to be open for lease simultaneously.
If restoration COLs get priority, harvestable COLs could be disadvantaged because there are prime locations within bays that are good for oyster production and growth. And since we’re discussing COLs, I would like to bring the Commissioner’s attention to issues with the regulations and space for the current COL holders. Currently, from May 1 through October 31 which is our “it’s closed” season in Texas, COL holders have no sack limit, no size limit– we work seven days a week, sunrise to sunset. When public season opens, we’re restricted to weekdays, limited to 30 sacks and subject to exact same rules as public harvest on our private leases.
Under Chapter 76, COL holders own the oysters, not the department. We invest heavy in planting and cultivating yet we are restricted during peak sale season. This is like being told you could sell your stocks freely when prices are low, but are limited to when and how many you can sell when they peak. That’s not a sound investment strategy and certainly not a fair way to regulate COL holders.
The Texas sustainable oyster industry requires more COLs for commercial harvest and restoration, strong restoration efforts, a commitment from the Commission, the department industry, to making Texas number one in the country for oyster production restoration.
Finally, I urge the Commission and the department to work diligently to gather with the GLO to make these COLs a reality.
Thank you for your time, I’m happy to answer questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any questions.?
Good, we’re going to fix this, okay?
And here’s a question for you.
Dr. Olsen just said there’s quite a bit of capital required to create these leased oyster bottoms. Is it an economically viable business for you to have these COLs and actually farm on a sustainable basis?
MR. WOODY: Yes, Sir. The question comes down to the degraded reef. If we’re allowed to build on a good bottom, it costs a lot less money than if you try to build a reef on a mud hole. So we take the reefs that aren’t productive right now and Invest private funding and go rebuild them. And yes… I’m not saying we’re not going to start big at first, but you’re going to grow into that if you start investing. I think it can work.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: And from a sustainability standpoint, how long can you farm these reefs because you are taking care of them?
Could you do it over many years?
MR. WOODY: Yes, Sir. I told you how many acres I have.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: How many acres do you have?
MR. WOODY: 868 of the 2,300.
And I worked my vessels year-round in these leases.
The only time that I didn’t was this year in the Spring when we had flooding. It killed 90 percent of oysters on our leases. So, you also need diversity to go to other bay systems and lease.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Sure.
MR. WOODY: But, yes these guys can attest, my boats harvest over 95 percent of our production from my private leases.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Yeah, it’s a no brainer, it really is.
Look, thank you for your comments. Help is on the way.
MR. WOODY: Thank you for listening.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right.
Thank you.
Johnny Jurisich.
JOHNNY JURISICH: Good morning, everyone.
Commissioners, Texas Parks and Wildlife, Mr. Chairman.
My name is Johnny Jurisich. I’m also a 4th generation oyster fisherman farmer with oyster leases in Texas and Louisiana.
I wanted to share my thoughts on something that could benefit our oyster management process. Issuing COLs for restoration and commercial purposes at the same time. Doing this would help ensure that neither side would have an unfair advantage in keeping things running smoothly without controversy. Right now, the regulations allow for both types of COLs, but we need some clear language that makes it a requirement to process them together. Both times of COLs are crucial for creating healthy habitats. I would argue that commercial COLs are especially beneficial because they motivate private businesses to manage their farms properly.
Plus, now is a perfect time to make these changes. Looking at our neighbors to the east, their oyster lease program is thriving because they don’t burden lease holders the privately owned leases. They don’t burden lease holder with the same heavy regulations as their public grounds. Allowing both existing and new COLs for harvest to be managed more flexibly would be a game changer.
Thanks for considering this idea. I truly believe that simultaneously issuing both types of COLs could lead to a better outcome for the state of Texas.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, Johnny.
Grahame Jones.
GRAHAME JONES: Grahame Jones.
Good morning, Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Commissioners, Dr. Yoskowitz and staff.
My name is Graham Jones. I am the Oyster Advisory Committee Chair appointed by the department, as well as representing The Texas Conservation Alliance. This piece of it, number one, I support it fully. It’s part of the puzzle along with restoration, buy back, licenses, and monitoring of existing public reefs and where they are ecologically and, of course, maricultures are all parts of this puzzle.
And the main reason I wanted to be up here is I wanted to thank my staff both from coastal fisheries and from law enforcement who work together tirelessly to find answers and solutions along with the oyster industry.
We’re going down on Monday to meet with some law enforcement folks and some industry folks on Monday morning. But anyway, I just wanted to recognize the staff’s hard work and their dedication, most of all thank you, Chairman, for prioritizing this issue and for making our reefs a priority.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: You bet.
Thanks for your service on the Oyster Advisory Committee.
Jim Meyn.
JIM MEYN: Good morning, Commissioners.
My name is Jim Meyn. I’m the CEO of Palacios Marine Agriculture Research, or PMAR. As you know, we run an oyster hatchery here in Texas.
What you may not know, and I’ve only recently learned, is that we actually are the largest oyster hatchery in the Gulf of Mexico.
AUDIENCE: America!
MR. MEYN: Excuse me, America.
Thank you.
And we’re right here in Texas. We’re in the midcoast community of Palacious. And Mr. Chairman, I agree completely. This COL application is a true nobrainer. And I think it’s a vital tool that can increase oyster stocks across our bays, can reduce harvest pressure on our public reefs and can save our commercial oyster fishery. As my colleagues have mentioned, there are other states that adopt this program now, and they are the highest producing oyster states in America. Where Texas has historically been number two, most recently in 2023 we dropped to number 5. The last time Texas was number 5 on the production list was 1990, 35 years ago. What they haven’t mentioned that I would like to point out is Louisiana and Virginia and Maryland all use hatcheries to help seed these private bottom leases. They use both tolls in tandem to increase the density of oysters on their property, and to ensure that when there are freshwater events or other activities that damage the existing harvest, they have the ability to quickly recover rather than relying on the timing of what nature may provide on its own.
I think we should use these tools, I’m glad to hear that The Commission believes so as well.
And, I thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great. Thank you, Jim.
VICE-CHAIR BELL: I have one question.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Commissioner.
VICE-CHAIR BELL: Thanks for being here today. I know that you’ve been to several of our meetings and also, you’ve had the opportunity to provide some additional information. I’m going through the information that you have provided, and I think that the idea of having the seed stock, or feed stock, for oysters is also good. I think along with the Chairman’s comments on how we can ease up and enhance opportunities for Certificates Of Location if we can have a measure of where we can also provide that valid stock so we can get there even faster.
It’s another opportunity. So maybe there’s more. Stay tuned here.
MR. MEYN: I am very encouraged to hear that.
Let me tell you that we will be able to produce them this year.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Good, thank you very much.
MR. MEYN: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Shane Bonnot.
SHANE BONNOT: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Commissioners. My name is Shane Bonnot and I’m here representing the Coastal Conservation Association. We did submit a letter in support for these regulations, and appreciate the Commission consider approval as their written. And I would just like to recognize the fact that we have the oyster industry and coastal conservation and other nonprofit groups all agreeing on something related to oysters. So, let’s not let that slip out without recognizing that, and let’s capitalize on that momentum moving forward, and thank you so much for your recommendation, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: You bet. Thank you.
Marie Camino.
MARIE CAMINO. Hello. Good morning Chairman and Commission. I am part of one of those nonprofits groups. My name is Marie Camino, I’m with The Nature Conservancy in Texas. And thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback today. The Nature Conservancy in Texas is a leader in oyster reef restoration nationwide, with multiple large scale oyster reef restoration projects completed along the Texas coast led by TNC’s Texas chapter.
TNC Texas holds over ten years of experience leading oyster reef restoration projects. And we spearheaded the first part harvestable and part non-harvestable oyster reef restoration and design in Texas at Lab Reef in Compano Bay that benefits local fisheries while providing a protected area for oysters to grow. The proposed changes to the rules will allow for non-harvestable oyster reefs to be restored in areas that may better support an ecosystem approach to restoration and create opportunities for more efficient larvae transports to nearby harvestable areas. Under current conditions non-harvestable reefs are limited to areas close to harvest or must implement specific design standards to prevent harvest. For example, the use of larger rocks. The proposed changes could allow for the best design to be implemented in the most suitable areas for larval transport, complex habitat space, or other area desired benefits provided by a non-harvested oyster reef. TNC Texas supports the proposed changes to the Certificate Of Location rules.
We applaud TPWD ’s efforts to encourage a large-scale ecosystem approach to oyster reef restoration that is inclusive to the many benefits provided by oysters balancing both economic prosperity and ecological health of Texas bays. Thanks.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great, thank you very much.
So, okay. That’s it for speakers.
Any additional comments by Commission staff?
All right. If not, is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER LESLIE DOGGETT: Doggett, Approved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER BOBBY PATTON: Patton, Second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor please say, "aye."
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed?
Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you.
Action Item #5: Permit to Posses or Sell Nongame Fish Taken from Public Fresh Water, Changes to List of Affected Species and other changes recommended adoption of proposed changes.
Mr. Michael Tenant, please make your presentation.
MICHAEL TENNANT: Good morning Chairman, Commissioners. For the record my name is Michael Tennant and I’m the Regulations Policy Coordinator in the Inland Fisheries Division. Today I’m presenting proposed changes to the rules governing permits to posses or sell fish taken from public fresh waters. To give a quick overview of the proposed changes I’ll discuss today, these include adding Silver Carp and Suckermouth Armored Catfishes to the list of species for which a permit may be issued for commercial harvest and the removal of freshwater Drum, Minnows and Rio Grande Cichlid to disallow commercial harvest. The proposed changes include eliminating an unnecessary annual harvest and sales reporting requirement since the commercial harvest report is already captured through the Trip Ticket Program and non-substantive housekeeping changes to standardized terminology. Silver Carp is native to eastern Asia and were introduced to private fish farms and wastewater treatment facilities in the United States during the 1970s and 1980s as a biological control agent to reduce algae growth and improve water quality condition in ponds. By 1980 they had escaped into the Mississippi River system during flood events, and subsequently spread rapidly throughout the Mississippi River drainage and beyond.
They have become established and potentially problematic in more than ten states, including Texas, where they compete with native species and pose hazards to boaters because they weigh up to 60 pounds and could leap out of water when startled such as by boat noise, sometimes striking boaters.
Silver Carp populations occur in the Red River and tributaries downstream of the Lake Texoma Dam, but are not yet highly abundant. There are U.S. and international markets for wild caught Silver Carp and regional efforts are under way to incentivize harvest. The proposed rule change would add Silver Carp to the list of fish for which the department may issue permits authorizing take from public freshwaters for commercial purposes to encourage removal.
Suckermouth Armored catfishes are native to Central and South America and multiple species are imported to the U.S. via the aquarium trade to control algae.
Aquarists have been known to dump the contents of fish tanks for various reasons, which is believed to have resulted in introduction of several species to Texas waters where high abundance has been documented in some locations.
Suckermouth Armored Catfishes compete with native fishes and consume the eggs of other fishes through their feeding behavior and may cause serious disruptions in food webs in native ecosystems. They are especially problematic in spring-influenced river systems such as those found in central Texas, but are also widespread in the Houston and South Texas regions where warmer waters allow for over winter survival.
Additionally, their burrowing behavior causes destabilization and erosion in river banks and earthen dams. There has been commercial interest in this species from pet food producers.
The proposed rule change would add Suckermouth Armored Catfishes to the list of fish for which the department may issue permits authorizing take from public freshwaters for commercial purposes to encourage removal. Freshwater Drum is native to Texas and is recreational and ecologically important.
The species serves as a reproductive host for numerous species of freshwater mussels, many of which are threatened, endangered or recognized as species in need of conservation intervention.
The Department has determined that the continued commercial harvest of freshwater Drum is inconsistent with conservation and recovery goals for imperiled freshwater mussels. The proposed rule change would remove freshwater Drum from the list of commercially harvested species and disallow commercial harvest.
Ten permittees reported harvest of freshwater Drum between 2014 and 2023 with total sales of $5,911.
The permittee reporting the highest sales over the ten-year period reported total sales of $1,800. 13 persons were permitted to commercially harvest freshwater Drums in 2024.
The Department has determined that seven of the 11 minnow are currently authorized for commercial harvest that included species that are threatened and endangered or species of a greatest conservation need. 37 imperiled species in total.
Currently, the department by special permit conditions restricts minnow harvest where imperiled minnow concerns have been identified. Minnows serve critical roles in healthy aquatic ecosystem forming a base in the food bed, for example.
Today, Bait minnows are supplied by the aquaculture industry rather than from wild harvest. The Department believes it’s prudent to remove minnows from the list of commercially harvestable fish to align with conservation goals, ensure the ability of all minnow species to perpetuate themselves, as well as to prevent additional state or federal listings as threatened or endangered species. One permittee reported harvest of minnows between 2014 and 2023 with total sales of $100. No commercial harvest has been reported since 2017. Nine persons were permitted to commercially harvest minnows in 2024.
The Rio Grande Cichlid is native to the lower reaches of the Rio Grande and is the only indigenous cichlid native to the United States.
Populations have been established outside of the native range in river drainages of Central Texas’ Edward’s Plateau, including the San Marcos Guadalupe, San Antonio, and Colorado Rivers. It has become increasingly popular as a sports fish, particularly among fly fishers.
The Department believes that removing Rio Grande Cichlid from the list of commercially harvesting fish aligns with recreational fisheries management goals especially for Central Texas creeks and rivers where sport fishing guides offer trips targeting the species.
Two permittees reported harvest of the Rio Grand Cichlids between 2014 and 2023 with total sales of $423. No commercial harvest has been reported since 2020. 11 persons were permitted to commercially harvest Rio Grande Cichlids in 2024.
A total of five public comments were received with five agreeing and zero disagreeing with the proposed rules.
The proposed rules are supported by the Freshwater Fisheries Advisory Committee.
To summarize the proposed changes staff recommend adding Silver Carp and Suckermouth Armored catfishes to the list of species for which a permit may be issued for commercial harvest and removal of freshwater Drum, minnows, and Rio Grande Cichlid to disallow commercial harvest, and eliminating an unnecessary annual harvest and sales reporting requirement since a commercial harvest report is already captured through the Trip Ticket Program.
Staff recommends that the Commission adopt the following motion:
The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission adopts amendments to 31 Texas Administrative Code Sections 57.377 to .379, 57.381, 57.382 and 57.384 concerning permits to posses or sell Nongame Fish Taken from Public Fresh Water as listed in exhibit A, with changes as necessary to the proposed text as published in the December 20, 2024, issue of the “Texas Register.”
That concludes my presentation, and I’ll be happy to take any questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, Mr. Tenant.
Any questions by the Commissioners?
We do not have anybody signed up to speak.
We do?
All right.
One person, excuse me.
Chris Johnson.
CHRIS JOHNSON: Good morning, Chair and Commissioners and all Texas Parks and Wildlife staff.
Thank you for having this today. I noticed that the Rio Grande Cichlid actually made the list. And that’s one of my favorite fish in the entire state. And I am in full agreeance with the action put forward.
But I wanted to mention one of the things that even though commercial harvest is negligible according to the slides and the fact we have here, one of the values of the fish being that it is the only native cichlid species in the U.S.
We have folks that come from all over the nation to fish for this fish in Texas. And that is something really spectacular. I personally own Living Waters Fly Fishing, a fly shop and guide service based in Round Rock, Texas.
And we see so many folks that come… I think my last long-distance traveler was from New Hampshire to come down and catch this fish. So, to see it actually outlawed from commercial harvest, even while negligible, just sends a message of our preservation of the species and the other species as well and their conservation importance.
The minnow species, obviously many of the habitats that they actually live in, support our state fish, the Guadalupe Bass as well.
And so, would love to see this pushed forward. And I’m sure it will be, but I wanted to mention that as it is very popular among fly anglers. And that is not only my livelihood but also my recreation as well.
So, thank you so much for your time. I appreciate all that you do for this state and for the recreators in Texas.
Appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great.
Sounds like real common-sense regulation to me. $100 and $400 of commercial take versus the economic benefit of recreational as the man just said.
All right, with that is there a motion for approval?
VICE-CHAIR OLIVER BELL: Commissioner Bell, so moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second.
COMMISSIONER ANNA GALO: Galo, second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say, “aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed?
Hearing none, motion carries.
All right. Action Item #6: Chronic Wasting Disease, Detection and Response Rules Recommended Adoption of Proposed Changes.
Mr. Alan Cain.
ALAN CAIN: Good morning Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Commissioners. For the record, I’m Alan Cain Wildlife Division Director.
This morning I’ll be seeking adoption to the proposed amendments to the rules governing Chronic Wasting Disease response and management, deer breeder facility standards and changes to CWD management efforts.
As I noted yesterday, the department has continued to adopt the CWD management approach incorporating new tools and strategies informed by research and state input to enhance our ability to detect the disease early and limit spread to new areas., And to effectively mitigate disease risks while eliminating zones, the department proposes a set of rules that I’ve divided here into six categories. And I’ll kind of go through each one of those.
And I just want to restate what I talked about yesterday, is that this proposal to eliminate zones will remove burdens on hunters and landowners that have been impacted by the zones to the tune of about 12 million acres, and will provide expanded business opportunities for deer breeders while still ensuring practical and effective science-based measures in place to minimize the risk of spreading CWD to new areas whether that’s in a captive facility or on a free ranging landscape out there.
So, after evaluating feedback from a full year of hunting season, staff are proposing changes to current carcass disposal rules that include the following: nets to align with the out of state carcass movement restriction rules to match instate carcass disposal rules allowing deboning of carcasses at locations beyond the property of harvest, including locations commonly used for processing provided proper disposal practices are followed. Also, proposal to clarify that any unused parts retained must be properly contained until they are disposed of so as they do not scatter them across the landscape. Clarify that the burial of unused parts must occur immediately if that’s the chosen method of disposal. You can’t leave them in an open pit until the end of season. They need to cover them up quickly. Lastly, rendering of carcass parts will no longer be allowed as a legal means of disposal.
The next bucket proposed rules pertains to deer breeder facilities and release site standards. So, to further mitigate the risk of CWD transmission during the transfer of animals to and from breeder facilities the department proposes requiring a double fence around all new deer breeding facilities or facilities that are required to have a double fence under other certain criteria which I will discuss later in the proposal.
Just as a reminder, the double fence is an additional perimeter fence around the permanent deer breeding facility. It’s a practical and effective measure to eliminate the nose-to-nose contact between breeder deer and deer outside of that facility. And the example that we went over yesterday and back in November is illustrated on the slide.
The proposed standards for the double fence include the following requirements: seven-foot high net wire fence that completely surrounds the breeder pens and associated facility including the working barn with some caveats for the working barn that I’ll address shortly. And that the breeder facility permitted fence, the double fence, must be five feet from any pen or structure within that permitted facility that can hold deer that would prevent the nose-to-nose contact. Additionally, the proposal would include no food or water. It can be in that open buffer area around the outside of the working barn in the pen– that grey area is what we’re talking about.
That buffer area may be used to move deer between pens provided somebody is actively present in moving those deer; they can’t be in there for two to three days. Again, no animals can be held in there of any kind, can be held or kept in the buffer area unless they are actively engaged in movement.
Non-susceptible species may be handled in working barns. They cannot be commingled with breeder deer. For existing facilities non-susceptible species may be moved down an alleyway, or through that buffer area, directly to the working barn to temporarily handle those different non-susceptible species. Language clarifying that these non-susceptible species may be — access the working barn in the alleyways was inadvertently left out of the proposal that was published in the ”Register,” therefore the department recommends adding that clarifying language at the time of adoption if it’s adopted today.
Also, all know breeder facilities that want to work non-susceptible species in a working barn will be required to have a way for those non-susceptible species to access that working barn externally to the pens and not through that alleyway. Lastly, there’s no maximum distance between the perimeter fence to the pens or other facilities– so that double fence to the pens in that working barn– to allow for future expansion of existing facilities or to provide for various distance scenarios of existed breeder facilities that are already double fenced. And just a quick reminder: everything within that permanent deer breeder facility, the only activities that can occur there are things that are already allowed under the current deer breeder permit rules. So, no hunting essentially in the permitted facility which preventing somebody essentially from using their entire perimeter boundary fence of the ranch as that double fence. So, again, after the November Commission meeting staff received additional feedback regarding the double fence requirements in relation to the working barns. Some of the deer breeder facility owners suggested that the working barns can serve as part of the perimeter of that double fence, rather than being fully closed within that, which we proposed in November.
And to address this, the proposal is modified to allow working barns to serve as part of that double fence provided the double fence abuts the working barn and the working barn is secured when not in use to prevent any animals from the outside entering that working barn. And the adjustment just ensures the working barn can function effectively while still meeting the intent of the rule to prevent nose-to-nose contact. And again, the photo on the slide illustrates current facilities out there where they have the double fence that abuts the working barn and would serve in that manner.
And again, the department… just a clarification, not explicitly stated in the proposal of the “Texas Register,” therefore we recommend minor modification to rule language at the time of adoption to reflect this adjustment. Due to the risk of exposure for facilities using a shared working barn, the department proposes amendments to the deer breeder facility standards requiring all working barns and other facilities be exclusive to a single permitted deer breeder facility, explicitly prohibiting shared working barns that shared use between these separated permitted facilities. And that measure is intended to prevent disease transmission and minimize the occurrence of the potential epi link facilities when both of those will be caught up. So, on the diagram on the screen with the green check box is, that’s what we’re proposing the rules to require.
Under the current rules, two different deer breeder facilities may be fence line adjacent, as illustrated on the diagram on the slide where the red X is. And the department proposes to require distinct permanent breeding facilities on the same property to be separated by a minimum of ten feet to prevent nose-to-nose contact between these facilities, and to reduce disease transmission opportunities between the facilities or to prevent them from becoming epidemiologically linked in lock-down because of CWD positive in one facility or another. The department is also proposing rules that would stipulate the enforcement of the visible identification requirements as currently outlined in statute for all breeder deer. Those tag requirements, including form of electronic identification which must be a microchip or an RFID button tag. They must also have a tattoo for any deer that’s transferred from the facility when it was born in and an ear tag with a unique ID displayed on that tag.
Again, these illustrations are provided on that slide.
The potential benefits of maining the Visible ID on release breeder deer include the expedited clearing of trace facilities if animals can be found and tested. And this would also provide neighboring landowners greater assurances that escaped animals could be more easily identified on their ranch should it get out from a release site. Next the department’s proposing a requirement for new breeder facilities and newly registered breeder release sites to have a fenced inspection completed by facility or pen inspector to verify that the breeder facility meets double fence standards if required, and that all new release sites meet fencing standards and requirements. Those standards include a seven-foot high fence of welded or mesh wire or chain link fence capable of retaining deer or released deer.
The next category pertains to the proximity rules for live animal movements near a free-ranging detection. And again, these proposed amendments will allow deer breeders to move deer within or beyond a distance of five miles for free range detection in a White-tail deer or a susceptible species or beyond that twenty-five mile distance for a free range detection in Mule deer. The proximity rules I’ll discuss will be considered and discussed in these specific distances from a free-range detection as illustrated on the map. For a deer breeder facility that’s within five or twenty-five miles of that free range detection of a white tail Mule deer, they will be able to release deer to an adjacent release site, or any release site within that proximity distance– again, that five or twenty-five mile– with no additional requirements outside of the current rules governing movement qualified status. And that’s what would be necessary. The diagram illustrates where they could release the deer, either on the adjacent release site or Ranch B which is also within that proximity distance.
In the next scenario, assuming a deer breeder is located within the specified proximity distance of the free-range detection is movement qualified at time of the detection and the facility will be able to transfer deer to other deer breeder facilities or release sites if the following criteria are met. So, we’re talking about statewide movement beyond this particular area.
The requirements would include the transferring breeder facility has been double fenced for at least one year prior to the free-range detection according to those double fence standards I just mentioned. And the facility’s completed one whole herd ante-mortem test which may be initiated immediately upon detection because that double fence has been up for a year or more. And so, in the next example for breeder facilities that have been double fenced for less than one year prior to detection, to be able to move outside of that proximity statewide that facility must wait one year following the date of completion of the double fence to conduct a whole herd ante-mortem test, wait another year after completing that whole herd test to be able to move deer, and then be movement qualified at the time to be able to be able to start move the deer.
And just to remind everybody, each individual deer to be transferred will still have to be ante-mortem tested after they met that time requirement. And that’s required in current rule.
Noting there may be some special circumstances for very few deer breeders in currently in containment zones that are already double fenced are movement qualified, the department is proposing to allow these breeders facilities in containment zones at the time this rule becomes affected, if adopted, to transfer deer statewide, provided… and again, that would be applicable to very few deer breeders, we’re talking about three, they are currently in containment zones and only one of those… two of them have deer in the facility and only one of them may move deer beyond that distance. Currently, the department is required to issue deer breeder permits per statute, but the current CWD zone rules would permit those facilities to hold zero deer. The department is proposing to issue new breeder permits to applicants within that five or twenty-five mile proximity distance required by statute, and allow those facilities to hold and move deer provided certain requirements are met. In order to possess and move these deer the applicant will need a site assessment completed to determine the possible exposure CWD prions at the site where the pens are to be built using a department-approved methodology.
And that might be something like an amplification procedure, or we consider other things like testing on that release site, things like that. So, but methods that will be approved by the department.
The applicant would also need to submit a facility diagram prior to the creation of the new pens, and the facility would also need to be double fenced, obviously. So, for new facilities that only intend to release within that five or twenty-five mile proximity distance, they would only need to meet the standard movement requirements currently in rule. So really, no changes for them. However, for those breeder facilities who would like to move deer statewide beyond that five or twenty-five mile proximity distance from a free range detection the following standards would need to be met.
First, all deer must have a 20 month residential requirement for a period of three years beginning after the first introduction of new deer into the new facility. And after that three-year period, the residential requirement may be waived or the department may prescribe additional surveillance to assess disease risk prior to removing the 20 month residency requirement.
Deer to be moved during that residential requirement must have an ante-mortem test after not detected test and after the residential requirement is met — So, after that 20 months and prior to movement. As a reminder, all new deer entering the facility will have a not-detected ante-mortem test prior to entering the new facility. So when that herd is established, all of those deer will be tested. We’re also proposing to prohibit the expansion of existing deer breeder facilities within the proximity distance we’re talking about to prevent the potential exposure of deer currently in those facilities to possibly contaminated by the environment.
The proposal will also allow formerly closed facilities that are reopened to meet the same standards for the new facilities that I just mentioned and lastly propose that facilities on positive properties will be permitted for zero deer unless the department determines that CWD is no longer present on that property. The department also proposes to allow for issuance of deer management permits on proximities within the proximity distance provided the landowner submits a not-detected CWD test for 100 percent of the hunter-harvested deer up to a maximum of 15 deer during the season for which the DMP permit is issued. Again, if no harvest occurs in that season, the permit team must submit 15 not-detected tests prior to the assurance of the new DMP permit.
Additionally, if they miss a test during the season– for example, if I kill ten and only test five before issuing a new permit, they have to make up the balance of those tests before a new permit will be issued. And lastly, the landowner is required to submit an annual harvest log to the department again to make sure that harvesting and tattooing requirements align. And we would propose to prohibit the issuance of DMP epi link or trace release sites. And I just want to clarify something. We’ve been hearing comments from folks that think this applies for all DMP permits statewide. It doesn’t. These requirements for the test requirements are within the proximity distance, so that five or twenty-five miles.
The next category pertains to proposals regarding CWD positive breeder facilities. And so I’ll review a few additional changes to mitigate risk associated with these positive facilities. The first is a requirement to euthanize and postmortem test all trace-in deer within a facility within seven days of confirmation. This will be a tremendous help in freeing up trace-in breeder facilities that are otherwise become not movement qualified because trace deer they sent to the positive facility have not been removed and tested. In some instances, these trace-in breeder deer are held for months and tie up that facility for quite some that time. It’s not until those deer are euthanized and test those tracing deer that we could potentially return that trace-in facility to move at qualified status. Second, in order to expedite an epidemiological review of a positive facility, the department proposes the facility must submit a pen-by-pen inventory within 14 days of confirmation including the location of the positive deer in that facility otherwise authorized by the department. Again, this is to prevent unnecessary exposure or potential spread of the disease to other deer in that facility and provide additional options for those positive facilities. Lastly, the department proposes that positive facilities must sign a herd plan within six months of detection or agree to depopulation. The intent behind this proposal is to expedite CWD mitigation measures through a herd plan and ultimately provide greater flexibility and options that positive facilities should they choose not to depopulate. We don’t want that disease to blossom, so they need to work with us to come to the table to get a herd plan in place to try to mitigate that risk.
Those facilities that chose options that do not include depopulation would also be required a double fence their facility by the time they satisfactorily complete the herd plan and remove them from quarantine.
And the last category, the proposal pertains to epi link breeder facilities. Again, these are trace-in or trace-out breeder facilities we are talking about here.
So, this proposal would include several changes for trace-out breeder facilities in which some or all of our trace deer are not available for testing.
These trace-out facilities are currently called Category B facilities when all trace deer are not available for testing.
The proposal will return trace-out breeder facilities back to movement qualified status if the following standards are met. At least one traced deer has to be unavailable for testing.
An available trace deer have to be post-mortem tested and return a not-detected test result. The trace deer must have been received in that facility three to five years prior to the detection in the positive facility. And the trace deer had at least one ante-mortem test within the last five years.
And the trace-out facility must be double fenced and compliant with all deer breeder rules for two years prior to becoming a trace.
These proposed amendments will allow for trace-out breeder facilities in that zero to three year trace period to be returned to movement-qualified status and have that trace designation removed if the following standards are met. And they include the trace-out breeder facility must be double fenced prior to designation as a trace.
The trace facility must achieve 25 percent annual CWD testing for at least two years prior to designation as a trace using a combination of ante-mortem and post mortem test. The breeder facility must be in compliance with the deer breeder permit requirements regulation for two years prior to the designations of trace. And the trace deer in that facility must have 20 months residency in the trace-out facility and have an ante-mortem rectal test that occurs after the requirements are met.
That concludes, the presentation of the proposals that we’re talking about. Again, just as a reminder, some folks have asked about penalties. For clarification, penalties are set by the statute and the vast majority of TPWD regulations, violation of those regulations will be a Class C misdemeanor.
Some of the more common ones you might expect related to this rule package are failure to follow carcass disposal rules, violation of Visible ID requirements, or violations of fence inspection, fenced standard requirements.
Moving on, the department has presented a proposal to various advisory committees and received feedback from each of these groups. The CWD task force was supportive of the supposed changes for the removal of CWD zones. The proposal pertaining to carcass disposal rules, double fencing of new breeder facilities, separation of distinct permitted breeder facilities, no shared working barns and requirements for CWD positive facilities. There are varying perspectives in support and opposition for certain proximity rule requirements, including whole herd requirements for facilities that have been double fenced greater than one year to be able to move deer, or, having a whole herd test for large herds with hundreds of deer. And some suggested a percentage of testing for those herds and some members also suggested a one year waiting period after the initial herd test, even those that had been fenced greater one year.
Also, disagreement on the visible ID.
Some supported it for the reasons that I mentioned earlier. Others suggested that Visible ID should be addressed at the legislature or it should be a choice of the release site owner. And some noting that breeder deer that had been tested prior to release may have already released deer. And Visible ID is a standard practice for a number of folks right now.
Some had concerns also about curtailing the Category B trace status for these trace-out facilities. Similar to the task force the White-tail Deer Advisory Committee supported the removal of CWD zones also rules pertaining to carcass disposal, double fencing, breeder facilities separation of distinct permitted breeder facilities, no shared working barns and requirements for the CWD positive facilities. And again, as I noted yesterday, the White-tail Deer Advisory Committee had some recommendations on the pen size suggestion that it be shrunk down less than 100 acres to eight, and finding mortalities in those pens and getting them tested and accounting for inventories. But that would require statutory requirement. Or statutory change, I’m sorry.
There’s also mixed support in opposition for several of the proposed changes again for visible IDs, and similar reasons I mentioned for the CWD task force and there were also some discussions regarding the retention rate of ear tags and some suggestions made to allow for an RFID button tag, requirements to have tattoos in the ears by March 31 following the birth year. And all good suggestions, but require a legislation change downtown. There is also disagreement on proposed release site fence inspection requirements. Several noted the concern for additional cost burdens on release site landowners, and concerns about the number of department approved facility inspectors.
And some noted that the TWIMS system that we used to register release site already requires acknowledgement that the fence is intact and is capable of retaining deer when the site owner registers that. Others noted the need for these fence inspections to address fraudulent scenarios where landowners may create fictitious release sites.
There is also some opposition to the proximity rule requirements for breeder facilities that have been fenced greater than one year, again having a whole-herd test. Some suggested an option for custom facilities or reduced amount for the facility’s large number of deer in that facility.
Lastly, there were some recommendations from the committee to remove the requirements prohibiting DMP within the proximity distance which we addressed in the proposal. And also, some suggested that the trace-out release site be able to have a DMP pen. The department has also met with the Private Lands Advisory Committee in October and again in November to discuss this proposal. Although not unanimous, a consensus was reached among the majority of the members of the Private Lands Advisory Committee in the committee and a letter was provided to the Commission and the department noting that the Advisory Committee’s support for the elimination of CWD zones and the development rules minimizing the impacts of CWD detections on neighboring landowners in mitigating the risk of disease spread. Key elements of that letter include support for visible identification and support for release site fence inspections with the suggestions to require fence inspections prior to any release. And a suggestion to require mandatory sampling, or testing on any release sites.
Those siding on the letter had additional concerns regarding the movement of deer in proximity to CWD detections in the curtailment of Category B trace facilities. Several other members of The Private Lands Advisory Committee did not sign the letter and either abstained from comment or had concerns with portions of the proposal, including the cost associated with the fence inspection release sites and other impacts on deer breeder facilities or release sites. To date, the department has received– well, this slide has been updated, so that’s great– received 2,206 comments since yesterday evening with about 14 percent agreeing with the proposal, 86 percent disagreeing completely with specific parts of the proposal. The comments supporting the proposal referenced the need for Visible ID and support for the removal of the zones reducing impacts on landowners and hunters. Reasons for disagreement include visible ID, noting that the release site owners should have a choice or it should be addressed to the legislature, some were concerned about fence inspection being burdensome or double fence requirements. Again, there were some concerns over the proximity rule that targets deer breeders, essentially their zone.
And I’m just going to remind everybody in the Commission and the audience that the proposed proximity rules enable expanded business opportunities for breeders that otherwise would not be able to move statewide under the current zone rules, and we would be allowed to establish new breeder facilities permitted to hold and move deer which hadn’t been allowed under current zone rules. And it will incentivize a sound management practice for many facilities, such as double fencing. There were other concerns about prohibiting DMPs on trace release sites, again the whole-herd testing and the proximity distance, concerns over the reliability of ante-mortem testing. And/or that the ante-mortem tests on individual deer should be considered a hard barrier. There were also a number of other comments which really are not germane to the proposal, such as the rules are creating more burdens on deer breeders, the perception trying to end deer breeders, and that the rules will impact the hunting economy and deer breeding.
I will note the department received comments from a number of organizations and legislatures.
And I will go over those. The department received comments from The Nature Conservatory supporting the proposal and the need to move away from a zone-based strategy to more of an adoptive strategy that focuses on risk-based management specific to where that disease has been detected or where it occurs, and eliminate the need for rulemaking each time a new detection occurs in a new area. So now I’ll have to come back to you guys all the time.
The department has also received letters from multiple members of the Texas Legislature, including a single sign-on letter from Senator Bob Hall, Representative Pat Curry, Representative Wes Virdell, Representative Richard Raymond, Ag Commissioner Sid Miller, Representative Stan Gerdes and Representative Carrie Isaac.
And in that letter, they requested the department refrain from adopting these rules for at least 90 days nothing concerns with several parts of the rule package pertaining to CWD positive breeding facilities, the proximity rules and the appearance with the idea that we’re really not moving zones, Visible ID requirements, double fence rules and fence inspection impacts on breeders or release site owners. They also requested the department to establish a working group that allows for any deer breeder who chooses to participate and at least one animal health expert from Texas A&M.
The department has also received a letter of support from Representative Darby commending the department on its proactive approach to CWD management in producing a balanced proposal that protects a public resource while supporting key stakeholders including deer breeders, landowners and hunters.
Organizations that also submitted letters include the Texas Chapter of the Wildlife Society who is generally supportive of the proposal, but offers cautious concern regarding the proposed rules that would allow movements. So, breeder deer from facilities within that proximity distance of a free-range detection.
We’ve also received letters of support from the Texas Conservation Alliance, the Texas Foundation for Conservation also provided a letter supporting the proposal. They also noted that the proposal was important to provide important steps to slow the spread of CWD. And they wanted us to note that there is an opinion, an email campaign that’s been started to oppose the rules package which may influence the public comment as you see there.
Also, the Texas and Southwest Cattle Raisers Association provided letters specifically supporting the repeal of zones. And they believe that’s a step in the right direction as it ensures a more targeted science-based approach to CWD management. They were also supportive of the carcass disposal rules and Visible ID requirements.
Also, the Texas Wildlife Association and Texas Deer Association provided a joint letter supporting the proposal noting that the support from both organizations was offered with the recognition and understanding that the Texas Legislature may choose to provide further guidance, or potentially amend statutes as it is related to CWD or other deer breeder matters. Both organizations care deeply about the health and sustainable of the state’s deer herd or hunting traditions and the recreational economy drive from deer hunting. And I’ll just note that the department is greatly appreciative of both of those organizations’ contributions, time and efforts they spent to help us, and you guys, chart a reasonable approach to CWD management and response in Texas.
And lastly, we received a letter of support from Bonnet Crockett Club.
So, with that, staff recommends the Commission adopt the following motion:
The adoption of the proposed amendments to the Texas Parks and Wildlife, Chapter 31 The Texas Administrative Code, section 65.81 through 65.85 and new 65.81 and amendments to Section 65.8, 65.88, 65.9, 65.92, 65.94, 65.99 concerning the Disease Detection and Response and amendments to Section 65.602 through .605, 65.610, 65.611, concerning Deer Breeder Permits as listed in Exhibit A with changes as necessary as proposed text as published in the December 20, issue of the “Texas Register.”
With that, I’ll take any questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any questions for Mr. Cain?
And you can have some comments after we have our public speakers.
All right, thank you, Alan.
And with that, we have 34 speakers.
So, we have lots of folks here. I’ll let Senator Hall and Commissioner Miller and Jonathan Letz and Jody Phillips, you guys can generally take as much time as you want, but within reason.
The rest of you are going to be limited to three minutes.
So, after the four of those speaks.
And we’ll get you guys lined up.
So, first up, Senator Bob Hall.
Good afternoon.
SENATOR BOB HALL. Good afternoon,
And thank you for the concession. I’ll try not to abuse that.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you.
SENATOR HALL: But I was wondering how in the world I was going to get out all I had to say squeezed into what I thought was going to be two minutes.
I think that you all got a handout.
I’m not going to go back through the letter that was written with the concern about it. What I will say is that, once again, for the second time, you have almost 90 percent of the population out there that responded that they didn’t agree with this. And unfortunately, we got a leak that there were a number of people within the parks that were panicking on the phone and calling people urging people to call in and support it so that it wouldn’t look so bad. Not surprised about that, though.
But what I want to do, if you go to the handout that I gave you, which is shots from the video that was taken, there’s a long video coming out covering this. It doesn’t appear that Parks really believes the swill they’ve been putting out with regards to CWD. And I hope that you stop buying into it. I call it “rules for thee, but not for me.” If you look at the first page you see at the top how they dress when the public is watching. Hazmat suits, rubber boots, hats, masks, gloves, as though they were in a radioactive area. You move down and the concern about the spreading of prions, the picture in the lower left is a trailer that was loaded with deer from Robert Williams, driven, a non-sealed unit with dead deer in it, air blowing through it, driving 150 miles down the highway, blowing prions all over the freeway and leaking deer fluid onto the ground of the highway as it went. And here it is sitting in the parking lot next to Buc-ee’s a few miles from Robert Williams leaking oil, and a Parks truck next to it in the lower right-hand corner.
If you go to the second page, you’ll see it was very muddy out there up at Robert Williams place. And on the top right corner there’s just one of the four wheelers covered in mud from Robert Williams. And where did they go?
To a public car wash, to wash that mud CWD-infected mud off of the vehicles for other cars to pick up and track down the road. And on the right is another shot of that same, that trailer that had the deer in it sitting in front of the Buc-ee’s.
But on the third page is the real kicker. The folks the night before that they were dressed in Hazmat suits from head to toe are now in the parking lot at Buc-ee’s with a makeshift lab as they shift harvested parts from bags to the other, and pouring out the fluids of those bags onto the parking lot next to a field that is known to have had deer grazing in it. Does that look like the action of someone that actually believes that the CWD is the threat to humanity that Parks would like for you to believe? And then if you look(Inaudible) here’s just one panel that is behind the pen where the deer were herded into, in a very small pen, and then lined up, and shooters with large calibers, small caliber rifles– handguns– firing hundreds of rounds. Some deer were shot so many times they couldn’t even harvest the parts they were wanting to get for the testing. And this happened after Robert Williams offered to allow our veterans– you know, the group of people that defended this country who are dying at a rate of 22 a day of suicide– “let them come out and hunt. It’s good for them. They get some meat for their family.”
It was told by the Parks, “We don’t give a dam about the veterans, we’re going to kill them ourselves.”
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: I doubt they said that, Senator. But, look, can you wrap up, we want a comment on the rules package, not on inflammatory business.
SENATOR HALL: Then let me finish with the last phase and I’ll wrap up with this. This is what I call the “Parks Success Chart.” This is where it shows the deer breeders going out of business. It peaked in about 2014. It’s about the time that Parks realized that CWD wasn’t going to pass fast enough to put them out of business. So, they had veterinarians going from ranch to ranch and deer to deer doing live testing without sterilizing the tools. And all of a sudden, we had CWD all over the country.
Folks, this “rules for thee but not for me.” And we’re in a new era. We are supposed to be serving the people of Texas, not their lord and masters. And we’re supposed to have common sense in what we’re doing to the people. It’s not our job. We’ve got our new leadership up there that’s emphasizing that. And I hope that you can turn the page and get back to a reasonable program. And I would also love to see the list of people that signed on and agreed to it because I haven’t found one of them yet.
Excuse me, I did find one.
And I understand why he would agree with it.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Yes Sir, thank you, very much, Senator.
We very much appreciate your comments.
Commissioner Miller.
COMMISSIONER SID MILLER. It’s good to be with you today. Thanks for having a little bit of time here to talk to you.
First off, I commend you for helping our oyster industry. It is a big part of our agriculture economy.
People don’t usually think about cattle and cotton, but the shrimping industry and the oyster industry is a vital part of that. I’m not here as an agency head to tell another agency how to run your business. I would never do that. I would be offended if someone tried to tell me how to run my business. But I do want to give you historical background. I was a lawmaker for 12 years. I’d been a commissioner of a $7 billion agency for 10 years. About 12 years ago, the Texas Racing Commission wanted to implement historical racing, gambling on historical races. They came to the legislature, the legislature said, “No, I don’t think so.” They adjourned, they went back, they did it anyway against the will of the legislature. One senator, Jane Nelson, the next legislature session gutted their entire budget. Their budget went away. I’m not saying cut it, I mean gone. And they barely got if back. The last day of appropriations they got back just enough to keep them open. And they’ve never really fully recovered financially by not listening to the legislative request. There was an agency called ORCA, Office of Rules and Community Affairs. Their job was to do economic development, infrastructure grants, job creation across rural Texas.
They did a similar thing. They did not do what was requested by them by the legislature. They went away.
That is now housed — transferred to my department, the Texas Agriculture Department.
There was an agency called the Structural Pest Control Commission, it was for the exterminators. Same thing. A Senator asked them to do something, they didn’t do, next session they didn’t exist anymore. Now they are part of the Ag Department. There was another agency called the Office of Rural Health, and they were deemed to take care of healthcare in 191 rural counties. They thought they knew how to better deliver that than what a senator did. Came back the next day, they don’t exist anymore either. They are now rolled into the Texas Department of Agriculture.
Keep that in mind. You’ve got one Senator here that’s upset, I don’t think it’s an reasonable request, delay it 90 days. You’ve got six house members, most of those… some of them I know are deer breeders, and others I think their families are in the deer breeding business. It’s just a cautionary word to the wise: you might want to grant the 90 days, That, would be my request.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, Commissioner, very much.
Appreciate it.
Look, we’re doing our best here, and we are focused on common-sense regulation.
Mr. Jonathan Letz.
The floor is yours.
JONATHAN LETZ: Good afternoon, Chairman Hildebrand, Commissioners, Dr. Yoskowitz.
For the record, my name is Jonathan Letz and I’m the President of the Texas Wildlife Association.
Believe me, I’m not going to use an unlimited amount of time. It will be pretty short this morning.
I wanted to do a little bit of history as to why I’m so involved in this right now, and really it was after the August Commission meeting Chairman Hildebrand contacted myself as President of Texas Wildlife Association and Jody Phillips as President of Texas Deer Association and pretty much called me and said you two organizations need to work collaboratively to come up with rules that are reasonable for breeders and from our standpoint also to protect the wild deer of Texas.
And we did that, and in one of the meetings, Chairman Hildebrand asked me, “Do you trust Jody?” And I said, “Yes, I do.” I think having both of us talking in good faith and having a collaborative effort in those meetings and in those countless meetings, and there were countless meetings, countless hours on the phone, Commissioner Galo, Vice-Chairman Bell, they participated in some of them, Dr. Yoskowitz, he and I talked about once a week it seemed for a while. And the senior staff, Alan Cain, Hunter Reed, and others in the staff. They have all been incredibly supportive of working with us and trying to come up with a plan that the two organizations can go along with. In addition to that, as was mentioned on the slides, three stakeholder groups also went through and reviewed these. And overall, and I’ll just make a few comments that the discussions were definitely contentious at times, there was certainly no agreement at all times, and there were certain points right now that TWA does not particularly like. However, that being said, the whole package as a whole is a step in the right direction. We got here today because of a commitment by two organizations and the department and the Commission to work on this and to come up with a solution.
And in our conversations, we also visited with several members of legislature, and at least two Senators who are very much aware of where we are and understand the whole situation with the CWD, and members of the House we have talked to as well. We tried to involve as many parties as possible along the way. And I think the rule package as a whole is something that we certainly support at TWA. A couple of things, you know, our position’s always been that any solution must protect the wild deer of Texas, keep the public informed and be scientifically based. We do have some concerns about the scientific basis of some of the items. However, again, in its entirety we think that it’s definitely a step in the right direction. One thing that I do want to emphasize, it’s not part of the package but the department is working on, is with the elimination of zones we really think it is important that the department continue and expedite as quickly as possible to have the dashboard up and running for the public to look at where CWD cases are. It is critical that the residents of the state have the ability to do that. Eliminating the zones will make this even more critical. And with that, that’s really the end of my comments. I think I urge you to support the package in its entirety. I would definitely recommend that you not pick and choose items out of it. It’s a complete package. And I think it does a good job for the deer of Texas.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right.
Jonathan, thank you so much.
All right, Jody Phillips.
And while she’s coming up, Dee the next speakers, is it two minutes?
MS. DEE HALLIBURTON: Three minutes.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Three. And that’s state’s requirement?
JAMES MURPHY: Chairman, James Murphy, General Counsel. That is what is in our public notice of the meeting. So therefore, we are bound by that.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay, I just thought it was historically two minutes.
MR. MURPHY: It is in fact two minutes during our annual and regional public hearings, where it’s an open session for any topic. But for Action Items we do allow three minutes given that there’s a concrete action being proposed.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Understood.
Okay, great.
Jody.
JODY PHILLIPS: With that being said, I’m not going to take a lot of time.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay.
MS. PHILLIPS: Good morning, Chairman, Commissioners, Dr. Yoskowitz and staff. I had a different start but I’m going to mimic what Jonathan said. I mean, I want to commend you guys for kind of putting us in a room together, and saying, “Hey, guys, hash it out.” It’s been beneficial to sit across the table and understand why people feel the way that they do. And It’s been crucial to kind of come up with solutions that we can actually move forward and under forward thinking. But, you know, the opportunity to address and share our concerns regarding the complexities and challenges of navigating through the regulations, I can’t thank you guys enough for the countless meetings and phone calls. It’s just been an open-ended thing where, you could call anytime, and that sort of thing.
And I can’t tell how much I appreciate that. And, Jonathan, same thing. I can tell you that we’ve had a lot of arguments, but we could still shake hands. So, that’s really good.
We recognize that the current rule proposal is not perfect. It does require further refinement regarding the Visible ID requirement.
However, the TDA is in support of the proposal.
Additionally, there’s ongoing work to be done as we continue to evolve and refine our approach to CWD, utilizing tools and technology to enhance our industry. It’s imperative that deer breeders operate under less stringent CWD regs while concurrently, mitigating the risk, and ensuring responsible stewardship of our natural resource.
I feel like this balanced approach is crucial for environmental stewardship and for the accurate recognition of our conservation efforts. And to touch on the accurate recognition, for those who have been breeding deer for a really long time no one will disagree with that comment of accurate recognition of it being a conservation effort. So,
I feel like we’re on the path to that.
And to me, that’s one of the most important things that we could do is to make awareness of what it is that we do because a lot of people don’t understand it.
I feel like it’s important to acknowledge that several of the proposed rules prevent new opportunities for breeders that are not currently feasible under the current existing regulations. We remain optimistic that the potential to further refine these rules and simplify them is in our future. And I’ve discussed several ways and envisioned a future for an industry that has significantly suffered due to various errors on many parts. So, my optimism is rooted in our capability to continuously improve and progress, seeking solutions and aid for those currently in need of relief.
So, with that, I know there’s a lot of animosity surrounding the ID component, it is certainly understandable being a deer breeder myself.
But I do hope that common sense will prevail as we move forward.
Appreciate your time.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Jody, thank you very much, Appreciate it.
And I’ll thank you guys again, but Jody and Jonathan have been fantastic and you guys have represented your associations incredibly well.
Your membership should be very proud of you.
So, thank you.
MS. PHILLIPS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: So, we’ve got 30 people, plus or minus.
We’ve got three minutes a piece, that’s 90 minutes.
That’s one and a half hours.
So, brevity would be great on the speaker’s part.
So, if you guys will start lining up.
Walter Martin, Hank Saylors, Kristen Saylors, Wendy Schmidt, Billy Oehmig, Matt Wagner, Alice Oehmig, Roy Leslie.
All right, Walter Martin.
WALTER MARTIN: Good afternoon, Chairman Hildebrand, Vice-Chairman Bell and Commissioners.
For the record, my name is Walter Martin and I am a U.S. Marine Corps veteran and I’m here today representing four generations of my family’s ranch and interest as landowners known as the Westwind Ranches Zavala County.
Our ranch is in proximity of two Zavala County breeder facilities that have positive CWD tests. I want to thank the Commissioners and the agency’s Wildlife Division field staff for their tremendous amount of time and efforts on behalf of arguably our state’s largest and greatest asset, the native White-Tail deer population, and on behalf of the landowners who are the stewards of these natural resources. We appreciate the field staff’s hard work, dedication, and tireless efforts fighting to prevent a CWD outbreak. We also respect the complex decisions this Commission has to make regarding CWD, even those we disagree with. CWD has been a difficult and at times contentious subject.
However, the Commissioners have listened to and been advised by all stakeholders regarding CWD. The proposed rule changes use science, common sense and were proposed in good faith. Other states, like Wisconsin, have taken a passive approach, in some instances losing control of the disease as it spreads.
Per Wisconsin’s DNR website, Richland County, Wisconsin, last year had a 33 percent positive CWD test rate in 1,330 samples of their native deer population. Their hunting economy is being evastated. In contrast, Texas Parks and Wildlife field staff and this Commission have been proactive in preventing the spread of the disease into the state’s native deer population from breeder’s herds. These are the reasons why my family and I support and agree with all the proposed CWD rule changes as published.
Concerning one of the proposed rule changes, I would like to highlight the importance of permanent, visual ID tags and the benefits to all stakeholders. Last year, Brown County’s CWD positive case emphasizes the requirement for permanent visual ear tags. In this case, a breeder facility had a positive test.
Using the current tracing regulations, a deer was located in a release site in Brown County. The release site owner did not remove the visual ear tag. This allowed for the timing of proper identification so that the landowner could ethically and lethally remove the correct deer from the population. The post-mortem test showed CWD positive results in the lymph nodes and brain stem. For the current regulations, the deer tested negative ante-mortem prior to release. In addition, this release site had other breeder’s deer from multiple facilities. Visual tags allow these breeders to continue to move deer, preventing a disruption in their businesses. Neighbors notified could identify the deer had it escaped on their property and could assist other stakeholders in this solution. A lesson Brown County occurrence taught us is that TPWD current rules with the proposed rule change regarding permanent visual ID tags…
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Walter, if you’ll wrap up, please.
MR. MARTIN: Yes, Sir.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thanks.
MR. MARTIN: — prevented the spread of CWD in the native White-tail deer population reduced the possibility of a CWD disaster for all stakeholders.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you very much.
Okay, Hank Saylors.
HANK SAYLORS: How y’all doing. I’m Hank Saylors and I have a small breeding operation in east Texas.
And I do not agree with the proposed rule changes. I think it is an overreach of the authority of the committee, and in my opinion will overall hurt property values and the industry in a whole. I do, however, agree we should terminate quarantine zones. On the topic of identification and pasture that has already been ruled by the Legislature and should not be overturned unless it’s by them. This speaks to property owner rights and should not be decided by an appointed committee. In conclusion, I disagree with the proposed new rules and hope that your decision is one of common sense and has the people and property owners of Texas at heart.
Your decision directly affects my family.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, Hank.
Kristen Saylors.
KIRSTEN SAYLORS: I’m Kristen Saylors from Chandler, Texas. Back in 2023, you may recall a 15-year-old blond haired, blue-eyed teenager beyond her years spoke to you on behalf of deer breeders across Texas. While she’s at school doing teenager things, like preparing for Cheer competition, you guys get to hear from both of her parents today who are not nearly as eloquent as speakers as she.
On Monday we as a family watched the inauguration of President Trump and openly discussed policies he was enacting immediately, and how those would directly and indirectly affect our various businesses which, in turn, directly affect our family. The main topic we discussed is about how the people in the U.S. came together to vote because they knew he was capable of overthrowing the corruption that we’ve been dealing with for quite some time in the U.S. We also talked about how some actions always speak more than words. I think it’s obvious to you, as the board, that we the people do not agree with the proposed changes by the sheer amount of people here speaking against it today, as well as 86 percent of the public commenting received against the rules.
If you choose to approve these changes it will continue to be obvious that you are not acting on behalf of the majority of the people who are fully invested in the positive future of the White-tail population of Texas.
We are parents, we are avid hunters, we are responsible deer breeders, and we were born and raised Texans and we are here to take a stand for the future of hunting in Texas, the future of our business and the future of our children.
Listen to the real science. Leave the political agendas aside and stand up for what’s right.
Thank You.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you. Wendy Schmidt.
WENDY SCHMIDT: Good morning, or afternoon. I don’t know where we’re at.
I’m Wendy Schmidt. I’d like to ask if any of you recognize me from the last couple of meetings?
I just want it on record that I don’t feel like some of us deer breeders have been fairly represented by our own representatives.
[ CHORUS OF “AMEN” ]
With that being said, I can name several breeders that’s been here and been vocal and offering to help. Billy and Alice Oehmig spend a small fortune to try and help all deer breeders, not a select few. My father in law, Bobby Schmidt, Jason Chancey, I can name more but my point being, we stood up here multiple times for the good of all, and not a select few. No one has reached out from our representation to talk to us about how we feel and our ideas. Our so-called representatives all have ignored calls and refused to acknowledge us.
These proposed rules are so cumbersome that the average cannot read them, much less understand them. I’m sure you have looked at them yourself.
Evelyn Wood couldn’t read this stuff. The proposed rules are nothing but discriminatory against deer breeders only, and have absolutely no bearing on controlling CWD. Requiring deer breeders to double fence as a rule to keep the CWD out, I mean, because we test what’s in. It makes no sense because your proposed rule says if a deer tests positive outside of a breeder fence within a five-mile radius, the breeder property is the only property affected and will be shut down for no less than one year. Discriminatory. What will an ear tag do to prevent CWD from spreading? You already track the deer breeder and where they are released. And I bet some of you have some of those deer on your property. What has happened to the common sense standing up for what’s right. Parks is looking for a grand solution for what? CWD is still less than 1 percent in 20 years of searching for it. And better yet, deer breeders are less than 1 percent of the deer population. That’s from your own records. Deer breeders are less than 1 percent of a deer population. What happened to justify all of this nonsense? Where are all the dead deer from CWD? Where are all the positives? Better yet, where’s all the common sense? Why are we spending all of our tax dollars on a possibility? This is the third Commissioner’s meeting that I’ve been to in a row, and the people have voted to disagree completely with the proposed rules. At what point will you hear, "we the people?"
Commissioners —
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great. Wrap up, please, Wendy.
MS. SCHMIDT: …managers do things right, leaders do the right thing, I’m asking you to be a leader today.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great. Thank you very much.
Billy Oehmig.
BILLY OEHMIG: Frustration is a mere euphemism for what I feel today.
We were even told by TDA that this is already a done deal. You’ve already made up your minds, you’ve already voted, so this is perfunctory. But I want you to at least hear me out because this is probably the last time I will be before you. I’ve been in many meetings before you. The lies, the misleading statements and the factually incorrect science information that has been presented to you by your staff have gotten the best of my best demeanor, and I apologize for that. Looking at these proposals today, it is clear that any leadership from the deer breeders is either completely inept and incompetent, or they have self-served themselves at the expense of our entire industry. All the directors and members of the TDA were not consulted about this process or informed as we have gone along or asked for our input or our opinions for what has come before you.
Example: How can anyone be asked to sign a herd plan that is completely open ended, that has no recourse for any of us, and that, by all means, shuts our business down.
Have you read one? If you haven’t, you owe it to yourselves. We have ask the staff in formal meetings with legislators to simply provide a financial model that can show that anybody who signs a herd plan has a financial viability or future. They cannot, they have not, and they will not provide you with that. Because signing a herd plan is an instant death for anybody in our business, and they know it. They want us out of business. I don’t understand why Texas Parks and Wildlife wants to be in the deer management business. Disease management of any species is not your mandate, nor are you very good at it. Ask any of your staff what are the top 50 things that kill deer in Texas. A, they won’t answer you, because CWD doesn’t make the list. So, you’re really not concerned about the health of deer, you’re concerned about the covid of deer. They get a financial benefit from tracking it….
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Wrap up, please.
MR. OEHMIG: … just from us and not from you, not from anybody that is an MLD, and not from anybody that’s low fence. This is completely discriminatory, and any of you that are in the business need to recuse yourselves from voting on this because it is absolutely a conflict of interest. I’ve got lots more to say. Two minutes is not worthy…
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Three.
Three.
MR. OEHMIG: — of the horrible situation that we’re in.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Understand.
All right, thank you.
Matt Wagner.
[ LIGHT APPLAUSE IN AUDIENCE ]
MATT WAGNER: Greeting Chairman Hildebrand, Commission members. I’m Matt Wagner, Executive Director of the Texas Chapter of the Wildlife Society. At almost 1,000 members with our largest chapter in the nation of the Wildlife Society, which is an international organization formed in 1937. The Texas chapter supports this proposal package knowing that it has additional risk associated with it. But we especially appreciate the inclusion of Visible ID for all released deer and the double fencing requirement for breeding facilities. These are positive steps that we have supported for years, and we thank the Commission for taking them. At Chairman Hildebrand’s direction, the department is trying to embark on a new phase in CWD management. For ten years you tried to work with deer breeders to develop rules to stop the spread of this disease while allowing the movement of deer to all corners of the state. During these years the department has used a zone approach to manage CWD and the disease has continued to spread. In the last five years, 29 deer breeding facilities where CWD has been confirmed transferred a total of 8,109 deer to 235 additional breeding facilities and 460 release sites located in a total of 139 counties in Texas.
Just since August, there have been three new positives detected in breeding facilities or release site and one positive in free-ranging deer. These proposed rules are the department’s answer to living with CWD. We highly advocate for a way to inform the public on current and future positive CWD occurrences in the state. Hunters and landowners have a right to know where the disease has been detected on the landscape. And In closing, I would like to quote a Texas court in a 1995 deer case, State vs. Bartee: “the power of a state agency is to be exercised like all other powers of government, as a trust, for the benefit of the people and not as a prerogative for the advantage of the government or for the benefit of private individuals.”
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you for, Matt.
Alice Oehmig.
ALICE OEHMIG: Sorry, it’s not two minutes, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: It’s three.
You get three minutes.
MS. OEHMIG: Well, I’ve been here several times, I don’t have anything written down because it’s just reality.
We were not represented. And I can have your board members, several TDA board members, that will be willing to say that if they know they are protected. They’re willing to take that call for you. Let that sink in for a minute.
I love the one agreement on both sides, the zones need to go away. But I also am an advocate because I understand that you need to monitor things and you have scientists. And I get that the public should understand where the CWD exists. But instead of pitting neighbors against neighbors, which is what the outcome is of the zoning and holding public forums and the zombie deer that are going to eat your face off happened. What I think matters more is that you have a list, like you said getting this up and going where you can monitor this, you can get your funding when you turn in test results. I also encourage that testing is done more often throughout the wild, because I do believe that CWD exists. We keep running with numbers, but you look at the year that people were forced– and we did, we all said this year this was a good idea– when the breeders started testing 100 percent, that’s not that long ago, we’re starting to see CWD occur. And we’re learning. And I talked to you guys. You got Dr. James Kroll and Dr. Seabury over all of this.
Actually, the deer in Wisconsin, they’re actually going to let antlered deer hunting in Wisconsin. If you wanted to go over Wisconsin as an example. They have too many deer. So, there’s always this and that. There’s got to be a path. I’m begging you, and I just… And it comes down for the representation. I was stunned when I came to Corpus. When I saw this Hail Mary come together, I actually recognized some of the language. It’s the right path, but if you want to do this there needs to be a better definition. You’re looking at a bunch of breeders that see all this and they don’t understand the wording, and you’re saying, “Well, we’re going to do all this.” I think concise language is more important right now. It has to get down and get mortified. This is a herd plan by the United States USDA. It’s four pages long. Four pages.
This is a herd plan from your department. This is not easy for somebody that doesn’t have a law degree for me to deal with, okay? It’s extreme. And I think you’re asking us to sign something that’s not even defined yet of what it should be, and that’s for you to vote and say, “Well, whatever it is, we’re going to can slit it down.” I actually think if you have a positive, I’m the one that steps up and handles the disease, kill that deer, test, everything else. This and this,
I mean, I recognize the efforts that you guys put into this. I can see it. I know it, I just feel that...
And John True, you should have never been closed down to begin with.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right, Ms. Oehmig…
MS. OEHMIG: He used to represent us beautifully.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Understand.
MS. OEHMIG: As soon as he got tied up, that boy weakened. We need to all be heard and for people to come and present it. The board was not presented with everything. And I have people that will come to you and say that.
CHAIRMAN OEHMIG: Understand, but your association is not our issue. That is a governance issue amongst your members. So, thank you.
All right.
MS. OEHMIG: I just wanted you to understand that when you are saying somebody is they’re representing there is two sides to that.
Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Understand.
Thank you very much.
All right, Roy Leslie.
ROY LESLIE: My name is Roy Leslie. I think all of you know where I stand in front here and on the side and on the back. And I don’t need three minutes.
I’m a low fence, no-lease landowner in far northwest Kendall County. I’m part of a 139 year old Texas heritage ranch, winner of the 2014 Parks and Wildlife Foundation Lone Star Land Steward Award and 2013 Texas Wildlife Society Land Steward Award. And I support the proposed rule changes. I won’t nitpick over the parts of which I have concerns since the general results cover most of the items that I campaigned for since 2015. With Visible ID, double policed fencing, neighbor protection and notification, and enhanced testing, I could say I support the changes.
I also applaud the shifting of some of the direct costs combatting the decease away from Parks and Wildlife to those responsible for its spread. But I do agree with staff’s assessment under Item Number 3, Public Health Benefits/costs, that the proposed rules present. And I quote “the minimally, acceptable probability that CWD will not be spread from locations and facilities where it might exist.”
To my eyes, and apparently those of your staff, these rules represent the bare minimum of efforts to contain CWD, the bare minimum. I’m reluctant to guess which direction this here will take. But these proposed changes have given me hope, hope that you’ll recognize that you represent the only real chance that we have to stop the spread of Chronic Wasting Disease, hope that you’ll consider your legacy as Parks and Wildlife Commissioners, the hope that you’ll be remembered as alarmed conservationists who tried to contain a deadly wildlife disease, not as protectors and promoters of a niche business that so often has ignored the existential threat to our iconic free-range White-tail deer. We’re doing our part, and now it’s up to you. And I’ll offer my thanks in anticipation of your positive vote.
I would also hope that you could disregard the budgetary and financial threats that were thrown this way a few speakers ago.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, Roy.
All right.
So, let’s line up ten more.
Jerome Linyear, Monty Irwin, John True, Riley Price, Hal Rose, Chris Timmons, George Courtney, Mary Meuth.
Okay, Jerome.
JEROME LINYEAR: Yes, Sir.
Good afternoon, Chairman and Commissioners.
I would like to preface by saying thank you so much for giving us this opportunity to speak our minds.
My name is Jerome Linyear. I’m a resident of Brasoz County., and I’m a student as Texas A&M University, a PHD student in animal science at Texas A&M University. And I’m just somebody who loves to hunt and somebody who has worked on a deer breeding operation for a summer.
The Chronic Wasting Disease is a very serious concern that requires thoughtful action. But I would like to first consider the scale of the issue. Deer and breeder pens do only account for 1 percent of the total deer population in Texas. These are meticulously cared for animals that are subjected to rigorous health monitoring. Every deer is tested for CWD before being released into high-fenced pastures, a level of oversight far exceeding that applied to free-ranging deer. To demand additional testing, in my opinion, which is both costly and, in my opinion, redundant unfairly burdens these breeders and serves only to stifle a thriving industry that contributes significantly to the Texas economy. Moreover, the requirement for ear tags in addition to microchips and tattoos is a classic example of regulatory overreach. These identification methods already provide robust tracking and monitoring capabilities.
Mandating another layer of identification does not enhance disease control, but instead adds unnecessary expense and logistical challenges for the deer breeders. Such measures only serve to make an already demanding process even more cumbersome without tangible benefits, in my humble opinion. The current reliance on rectal biopsy for CWD testing is yet another issue that demands scrutiny. In my opinion this mess to me is invasive, harmful, and quite frankly, does not serve to be in the best interest of the animals.
We must push for the development and implementation of a less intrusive and more humane testing methods. Science and innovation do offer great alternatives, and we owe it to these animals and to the people who care for them to adopt and to adapt to better practices.
High fence hunting facilitated by deer breeders provides a unique opportunity for young and novice hunters to experience the outdoors in a controlled and safe environment, me included.
In conclusion, the regulations imposed on these Texas deer breeders– who I am very, very good friends with Texas deer breeders– but these regulations imposed on them in the name of CWD control are, in my opinion, disproportionate and imputative. They ignore the negligible role of a deer breeder in disease spread, and impose unnecessary costs and harm to a vibrant industry that benefits our communities. I urge you all and policymakers throughout the state to reconsider these measures and adopt a more balanced approach that protects both public interest and the livelihoods of the Texas deer breeders.
Thank you all so much.
[ APPLAUSE ]
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you. Thank you.
Marty Irvin.
MONTY IRVIN: Chairman, Commissioners. I’m Marty Irvin from Godley, Texas. I’m here to represent Performance Feeds from Godley Deer Farm and Circle Eye Deer Farm. I’ve spent a lifetime managing White-tail deer on low fence and high fence operations. I’m an avid conservationist. And I’ve spent lots of hours out in the field. And the current deer breeders are dropped to such a low number of less than 1 percent of the total deer population. And we’re spending a tremendous amount of time regulating, regulating, regulating, regulating, It seems like we keep coming here and adding more and more and more. It looks like we’re doing a pretty good job. It looks like we have removed a lot of deer that could have potentially been a problem. And so, we keep adding this, adding this. The only thing that I see happening is that it’s going to exterminate all of us. We have a very important part in conservation, habitat, everything, the recruitment of hunters. They have opportunities on a lot of these extra places that they would not have otherwise. They would not get access to some places, and they might… if you just get two or three or ten children out to hunt on one of our places, that’s a positive. We need to look at that. Do we really need a lot more? Nutrition and genetics is the answer to disease resistance. Please allow us time to accomplish these goals and maybe table some of these additional regulations until we see how it’s all developing. We just went through a big series of other regulations, now we’re facing more. I don’t know when it’s going to end. I guess when we do?
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you.
All right. John True.
JOHN TRUE: Good afternoon, Chairman Hildebrand, Vice-Chairman Bell, members of The Commission.
Thanks for the opportunity to be here today and speak. For the record, John True, I’m a deer breeder in Hunt County. While others may disagree with this package in it’s entirety, I promise you they don’t know what it’s like to be in a containment zone. Unable to operate a business while still paying your employees and feeding your animals. I’m truly grateful and appreciative to you and staff for coming up with a pathway forward that this package provides. For every other innocent, law-abiding breeder that has the misfortune of finding themselves in the same situation. I will say, for what it’s worth, if pasture wasn’t part of this package, I don’t think you would see the noticeable engagement that you do today from industry. Thanks a lot.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, John.
Riley Price.
RILEY PRICE: Hello, My name is Riley Ann Price, I come from west Texas. I am a proud agriculturalist. I like to say that I’m rooted in agriculture and committed to conservation. I’m so grateful for the opportunity to be here today. There is something to be said for being from America, and especially the great state of Texas. And I’m thankful for the opportunity to stand here and use my three minutes.
The proposed rule package is less than perfect. I’ll agree completely with John, as he just spoke, but if we didn’t have this Visible ID portion, I think that the entire atmosphere in this room could be different today.
[ AUDIENCE REACTS ]
I’ll get to that.
These rules allow a way forward for our industry. They lend a hand to the Texas deer breeders, and that is vital. It is vital that we have breeder cooperation, and It is important that we maintain that cooperation. Just like Mr. Cain said, it allows expansion for business opportunities, and for that I am grateful. From the very first time that I stood behind this podium I asked for us to step away from the zones. I was concerned with what it did with the property values as a landowner in Texas. And that I am grateful for, and so very thankful for the consideration on that. Visible ID will not mitigate CWD in Texas. Having a tag in a deer’s ear will not mitigate that. And I have two more pages of notes right here that I’ve written down and thought on while I drove five hours to come here today. But the truth is that I can’t stand here in good faith and read what’s on this paper and overlook what’s on my heart. The atmosphere in this room today is absolutely horrendous. I am saddened that we have this opportunity and so many have squandered it. I am saddened by the mocking and the behavior that is taking place in this room because we are adults, we are Texas citizens, and If, we would work as hard to promote hunting and the wildlife industry in Texas as we are fighting amongst each other in this room today, we might truly could accomplish something. And I don’t know how any individual in this room expects any of you to set forth a rule package that pleases all of us when all we have done is come to this podium and argue amongst each other. We are aware of what is happening. We have been well represented. And we all need to learn to mind our manners. Because that’s what our mothers would want from us.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, Mrs. Price.
Mr. Hal Rose.
HAL ROSE: That’s kind of hard to follow.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Yes, it is.
[ LAUGHTER ]
Mind your manners.
HAL ROSE: Good afternoon, Commissioners.
I do have many, many notes as I drove from little old Junction, Texas, Kimble County.
I’m the County Judge for Kimble County. I am the proud great grandson of a rancher and a hunting operation in Kimble County since the 1880s. And last, but maybe the least, I’m also a lawyer.
I’m here today to basically say there’s good and there’s bad, there’s trash and there’s treasure. No rule regulation, legislative package is ever going to be perfect. But this one can be better. On behalf of the citizens of Kimble County, on behalf of somebody that has dealt with CWD– I happen to have a house in one of the CWD zones in Kimble County and an operating ranch and a hunting lease operation in another one of the CWD zones.
Love the fact that we’re doing away with zones. The problem is that my county, the residents, some of them, whether they know it or not, they rely almost exclusively from an economic perspective on hunting. And CWD scares the shit out of a lot of the people that hunt in Kimble County. And until we have, and until y’all have a better idea of the science, a better idea how to manage this disease, I would implore you all to press pause and get the treasure out of the proposed regulations and do away with some of the things that still, in my opinion, are trash.
And I thank you on behalf of the citizens of Kimble County.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you very much.
Chris Timmons.
CHRIS TIMMONS: Commission, Chairman Hildebrand.
For the record, my name is Chris Timmons and I’ve been breeding deer since 2001. I’m a member of the White-tail Advisory Committee and also the CWD Taskforce. I’ve been there since its conception in 2015.
There are several rules, or proposals to these rules, that I agree with, several I don’t agree with. But there’s one that I don’t agree with and It’s really hard for me to swallow. One of the proposals to do away with the surveillance zones, I’m all for that. I’m a low fence landowner, I don’t want to get caught up in that, I need my property to be worth as much as possible. I don’t have much of it. But they are proposing to do away with the zones, but at the same time they’re making a special zone for deer breeders. They’re calling it a “proximity rule,” but it’s still a zone. If you’re within five — if they find a free-range positive within five miles of my facility that is double fenced, and has been for years, all of a sudden, I’ve got to do a whole herd test. I know the department did an impact study, and for the size of our herd we’re looking at $200,000 just to do that test, not to mention the deer I’m going to lose trying to do the test. Then going on top of that going without revenue for a year. Now looking at a $1 million hickey. And it’s all based on an “if.”
We’re basing all of that on that one deer out there five miles away got into my facility or gave it to my facility, or I gave it to them. But we’re still testing 20percent to 25 percent of our herd every year. Those deer are leaving we’re testing 20 percent to 25 percent the next year. So, four years in a row you’re getting basically a whole herd test. So, all I’m asking is if you decide to get rid of zones, get rid of zones for everybody. It’s not going to change or alter the amount of testing we’re already doing, but it will remove that $1 million dollar heel “if,” because that hurts.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, Chris.
MR. TIMMONS: And one other thing, I don’t know if you have the power to do this, but if you’re offering preemptive pardons, I would like one.
[ LAUGHTER ]
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: We don’t have that authority, unfortunately.
George Courtney.
GEORGE COURTNEY: Chairman, thank you.
He’s hard to follow. I’ve been following him for 15 years.
My name is George Courtney. I’ve served on many committees, I’ve been on boards, nonprofit, I’m very much heavily involved in the deer breeding business and ranch business. I keep hearing people say, and I’ve never really set up here, I’ve spoken with you behind doors with some of you in the past, and some other congressmen, but what I’m confused about is people saying, the movement, they’re for these rules. The problem is we don’t know how deer get CWD, plain and simple. It’s a long process, we’ve had scientists, we’ve had people, they still can’t do it. It’s spontaneous, is it not?
Here’s what I’m asking.
I do oppose the rules as written right now. I would like for you guys to put that on pause, I don’t understand out of common sense we have CWD in New Mexico, we have CWD in Colorado, we have CWD in Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana and Texas. We test for CWD, we’re going to find it were we test for it. Some common sense has got to come into play and stop. And being an epidemiologist and having the Epi Link which leads, Mr. Chairman, to what you stated earlier when the Senator was speaking “we’re here to talk about the rules and regulations today.” You guys are getting these rules and regulations from your Link people, giving you and briefing you on this information.
I had a long speech written out, but everybody has covered everything. I’m just asking you all to use some common sense. There are a couple of things good in this package. It needs to be worked on, absolutely. And there are some things in here that don’t even need to pass. So, I appreciate you guy’s time.
Thank you so much for listening, everybody.
Have a good afternoon.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you very much.
All right.
Oh, okay.
Mary, please.
MARY PEARL MEUTH: Thank you, Chairman.
Good afternoon, Commissioner Hildebrand, members of the Commission, Dr. Yoskowitz.
My name is Mary Pearl Meuth, and I serve as the President of the Texas Chapter of the Wildlife Society representing over a thousand wildlife professionals and wildlife students across the state.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak today again on our continued concerned on the spread of CWD. The Texas Chapter as you heard earlier supports the direction of the proposed rule package, specifically the inclusion and retention of Visible Identification requirements for all breeder deer. Visible ID is a crucial step towards improving traceability and compliance which are essential to protecting Texas’ deer populations. While this solution alone, as you heard many times today, will not mitigate the spread of CWD, it is one of the many tools in the toolbox that is needed for landowners and resource managers in protecting their native herds and habitats.
In addition to expressing our support, I would like to again highlight two key points for your consideration.
First, maintaining public awareness and stakeholder engagement must remain a priority. Successfully combating CWD requires a collective effort. It is critical that landowners, hunters, and all resource stewards not only understand the regulations, but also feel empowered to take an active role in addressing this disease.
Continued transparency in disease occurrence, public education and neighboring property outreach efforts by the department are essential to fostering this understanding and support. Second, the department’s staff must have the capacity and support necessary from this body and leadership to effectively implement and enforce these regulations. Insuring, compliance with the complex rules with varying degrees of residency terms– fencing, testing, proximity detections– will require resources, staff training and additional personnel, potentially. Without adequate support these well-intentioned regulations may fall short of their potential. The Texas Chapter remains committed to working with the Department, other conservationists, and stakeholders to ensure the successful implementation of measures to control CWD.
Thank you so much.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you.
All right.
Sara Knox. John Cappadona, Steven Wieser, Jason Chancey, Bobby Schmidt, Marie Camino, Brian Wilson.
We’ll stop there.
Ms. Knox.
SARAH KNOX: Good afternoon, Chairman, Commissioners and staff.
My name is Sara Lemoy Knox, I’m from Coleman, Texas.
I am an attorney, but that’s not why I’m here today.
My family owns about 30,000 acres in Coleman County which is all within the CWD zone.
First and foremost, before I even go forward, I really want to thank the staff and Alan and Ben for all that they did for Coleman County. I don’t know if you all know this, but they really helped ease in the transition of what was going on in Coleman, and they listened to our outcries and talked to us when there was a bunch of us there. And I think a lot of those things that we talked about in Coleman were brought to the table in part of the process about what’s happened today. Along with, I wanted to thank TWA and TDA for all working together. What’s happened today is an amazing feat. It’s not perfect, it’s not, but it’s something. And I will say for Coleman County– and I would like to mention, too, you know, for the past meetings that I’ve been here, there’s a gentleman that comes with me. He sits back there, and he just listens, and he doesn’t talk, and he’s a breeder. And that is my neighbor. And he’s an amazing person and I am blessed to have an amazing, amazing neighbor that takes care of business, crosses his T’s and dots his I’s. So, obviously I’m here today in support of the proposed rule.
Now, as a lawyer. We all know that compromise isn’t easy. Actually, in true compromise no one walks away happy. And I think that’s what we have here today. Now, selfishly, if that compromise doesn’t happen, please, Lord, let us out of this zone. Let the zones go away. Just like the judge in Kimble County said, “keep the treasure.” And I think that is one thing that everyone here does agree on is to get rid of zones.
So, I appreciate each and every one of you. Thank you for everyone who has worked very hard to get here today. And I will give my time to someone else.
Have a great day.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, Sarah.
John Cappadona.
JOHN CAPPADONA: How are you doing? I’m John Cappadona, Galveston County. I’m a breeder and also a roofer. We had a hurricane back in July, and that’s what I should be doing today. But it seems every year I have to come here. They keep moving the goalpost on being a deer breeder. I’m trying to earn money and trying to do better for my family, but I have to come plead my case and beg to loosen some of the regulations and quit putting more on us. I’m opposed to the rules package as written. There are some good things. I’m glad that it can free up some people in the containment zones. But now for some reason now if I’m responsible for a deer five miles away I don’t think anybody could go back and cite these proposals word for word or even have any idea of the way they’re written.
I shouldn’t be responsible for deer that’s found five miles away from me. None of this does anything to stop CWD. We could breed all of the good breeding values and SSs and double ear tags and double fences. I’ll do all if that’s going to stop CWD, but it’s not.
You say do it, I’ll do it,
And I should be held not liable if CWD should show up one day. I did everything that you asked me to do. You keep on pouring it on us, And It’s gotten old. No one, not the TWA, not the TDA, I had to come to represent myself, because no one has my interest like I have my own best interests at heart. You know, CWD is not detrimental to wildlife. If Brown County… I have a friend up there, drive there 10:00 at night driving 70 miles an hour and see how bad CWD is taken care of. You’re going to get hit by a deer up there. We’re not smarter than mother nature. We keep putting in all of these rules and going to vet school and biology and all that. But we’re not smarter than mother nature. If it takes five to seven years like I’ve read for CWD to kill a White-tail deer, if that were a doe, that’s five to seven years of her having babies and those babies having babies and those babies having babies. Through her own progeny– that’s offspring for the Longhorns in here– but through her own progeny she’s already made her own replacement tenfold, whether she gets ate by a coyote, whether she gets run over by a Buick, or should CWD finally take her, she’s already made her replacement.
Mother nature is smarter than we are.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, Mr. Cappadona.
Steven Wieser.
STEVEN WIESER: Thank you, Commissioner.
Thank you to all of my fellow breeders that are her representing our industry. I want to start by strongly disagreeing to all the proposed rules. We currently test every deer that we move and we follow the epidemiology trace and the tests should end… that epidemiology tests should end all the epidemiology. We’re told that the tests aren’t accurate. They aren’t good, but they’re expense… we’re small businesses. My friends and I, to do a whole herd test costs $40,000, $50,000 that’s a hit to a small family business. And we’re doing these things and every time we turn around somebody else is spending our money. I heard people on the pro new rules, they don’t have any skin in the game. I’ll listen to people that have skin in the game. Every time it costs something, it costs the deer breeders. These guys can voluntarily harvest all of their deer and test all of their deer. You know why they won’t? Because you’ll give them the consequences if they come up with a positive. It ruins the value of their land. They’re not going to do it. So, they’re going to spend our money. It’s getting old. I’m with the 86 percent of the people that said they disagree completely with this, and also agree 100 percent with our senators and representatives.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great. Thank you very much.
Jason Chancey.
JASON CHANCEY: Thank you, Commissioners. My name is Jason Chancy. I’m a deer breeder in central Texas. Thank you all for hearing our testimony today. And I’m here today to ask you to table this proposal, to table these rules, let the legislators look at it, let us have some more time to digest it, get some more voices to the table, to get some more input into it. Because there are a lot of stakeholder involved that I don’t know that were actually asked to put their input into this. It’s an albatross of a rules package, this thing is huge. We as small business owners, we can’t afford to hire a team of lawyers to find out if we’re in compliance or not. As big as this rule package is, that is what some of us are looking at. I’m not a lawyer. I dated a lawyer once, but that didn’t rub off on me. So it’s too open ended. There’s, too many items in it that were supposed to have been settled, like the ear tags. Let’s punt it back, go back to the drawing board, get a lot more concessions to this where other stakeholders that are involved. The cost of the double fence is substantial for a small business owner. I don’t make a whole lot of money a year doing this as a business. I make enough money so I can take my kids to see Yosemite in California. I can take my kids to go see The Grand Canyon. That is what I’m a deer breeder for, is for my family. I’m not making a million dollars doing this.
I’m not one of these big guys that can afford to put up another fence around my place. That’s insane. And to ask me to be responsible for what’s going on five miles away from my property? There’s nothing in this rule package that would say, Mr. Chancey, you have McGregor airport just north of you. It’s 1,000 acres, it’s high fenced. That is a barrier to get that deer just five miles north of you that might have somehow exposed itself to my deer.
How does that… that needs to be defined in here. We’re not asking to completely wipe the whole thing out, we’re asking for a consideration to go back and make it more defined so that it’s something we can all live with.
The ear tags, look, this has been kicked around and kicked around and kicked around. We keep coming back to this.
It seems like every year we keep coming back to the ear tags. Can we settle it once and for all, take that completely out of the package, get it out of here. But please consider punting this whole package down the road for just a short time later, for the 90 days that Senator Hall asked, for the 90 days Mr. Miller asked for. Let’s look at it in 90 days, 100 days, whatever it takes to try to get something that all stakeholders can digest and be okay with, especially us small business owners that we can’t afford to take these hits that you‘re asking us to with this rule package.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Understand, thank you.
All right, Bobby Schmidt.
BOBBY SCHMIDT: Commissioners, staff.
Here we are again. I don’t believe there’s much that hasn’t been said today.
I don’t know even where to start, just that these 53 pages here the new rules of Chronic Wasting Disease. It would have been a lot simpler if it was in English where we could have understood it. That’s the first problem. But I hope that you see where we totally disagree with it as deer breeders. There have been so many things said here today about CWD. One thing that hasn’t come up, is that CWD when it first showed up in Texas, it came from west Texas in the mountains of El Paso and in the Panhandle. It was several years before it was ever found in deer breeders pens. But it was found there. He had 26 or 28 that he had tested positive over there. And we were told, “Well, that must have come in from New Mexico, that must have come in from Oklahoma.”
Well, it’s out there in the wild, we know it’s out there in the wild. It was first found in Kimble County and all over here.
And first time it all showed up. And we don’t test. MLD permits have come up. Why not test that and see?
But there are a whole lot of people in this room that ain’t going to go with that. I promise you.
They don’t want to find it at their place. I had a good friend the other day, he’s a big member of TWA, a deer friend of mine, he said, “Ain’t no way I’m testing deer over at my place.” But what would be wrong with that if you don’t really find out the facts? I think I saw the other day, 47 percent of the deer breeder have been tested right now. Less than 1 percent is positive, but what has been tested in the wild is nearly to that same number. So, you know, it doesn’t make sense because all of those deer breeders tell you, “Well, that’s what I think.” It’s hard to do business when the rules change every six months, you don’t know which way to turn, what to do next and what’s going to hit you in the ass tomorrow. That’s the problem that we have here. And I just wish you would do something about it. I got one more question to ask and I will get out of here.
How many people in this room have ever seen or known of a deer that has died of CWD?
Anybody? I’d like to talk to you.
Anybody?
Hunter Reed, have you ever seen one?
A deer die from CWD.
MR. REED: Yes.
MR. SCHMIDT: You have.
Alan?
Yeah, we’ve got videos of some of them.
MR. SCHMIDT: Videos of some of them dying.
They may have CWD, but they’re not going to die from CWD for five, seven years down the road.
And everybody knows that.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, Mr. Schmidt.
Thank you.
MS. CAMINO: Hello, Chairman Hildebrand, Commission.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comment again today.
My name is Marie Camino. I’m with the Nature Conservancy in Texas.
I’ll keep this short. TNC has worked in the Lone Star State for six decades. We are dedicated to conserving the lands and waters on which all life depends. Across our 37 nature preserves and more than 160 conservation easements, we provide habitat for nearly 900 species, including native Texas deer. Zone-based strategies such as containment zones and surveillance zones have led to administration burden on the department. Risk-based management focusing on confirmed CWD cases and free ranging native and exotic species is an adaptive strategy that limits burden on the Department by eliminating the need for rule making each time a detection occurs. Additionally, the live testing and fencing requirements outlined, such as enhanced post-mortem testing, testing before a live animal movement and increased record keeping, perimeter fencing requirements and fencing for release sites will promote early detection and limit the possibility of disease transmission. TNC supports the regulations proposed and thanks you for your work on this.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great.
Thank you, Ms. Camino.
Brian Wilson.
BRIAN WILSON: Commissioners.
These regulations and the consistent push to kill deer breeding and essentially the high fencing industry in the state of Texas will soon be your trophy to hang on your wall. Our industry has been cut in half in just a few short years because of overreach power and regulations. There’s got to be around 2,500 people who have lost their jobs over the people that have gotten out of business. And that’s got to affect tens of thousands of people monetarily. Commissioner Bell, I believe you made the comment in a Commission hearing not long ago that something about you couldn’t believe that the northern states were leading Texas in the deer breeding industry. And here we are, and this is why. The testing implemented upon us is the demise of several deer farmers. I handed out a study when I come in to be passed out to you all. And the tests we’re doing is — The testing we are forced to do is the root cause to more positives.
I brought you all a copy. The Cliff Note version of the copy is if you damage the oral mucosal tissue prior to exposure to CWD that damage significantly increases susceptibility which is summarized in Table 1 of the attached paper.
This is relevant to the annual ante-mortem testing procedures related to the rectal mucosa associated with the lymph node tissue and the tonsil lymph node tissue. The low-level environment, contamination and the contamination of ag products, which can be entered through the broken tissue.
I’m not sure our hunting operation or several others can continue with these ridiculous regulations. We’ve just about been bled out. I’m sure you are aware of the multiple Texas deer breeders and hunt ranches that are selling out and steadily crossing our northern border, starting over in Oklahoma. This needs to stop before TPWD and their special interest groups completely hand over our industry and our livelihoods to the state of Oklahoma on a silver platter.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great.
Thank you.
All right.
We’ve got our last group here.
Lavonne Berdoll, Jenny Sanders, Rick Young, Trent Barley and Rodney Parrish.
Ms. Berdoll.
LAVONNE BERDOLL: Hello, I’m Lavonne Berdoll from LB White-tails since 1997 over in Bastrop County.
So, we meet again.
I’m here along with many of my fellow deer breeders to represent our industry just as we have many times before. As with any industry, there are many different perspectives within, so it’s best to speak up for yourself as many chances as you can. As you can see today, many members of our industry choose to come to Austin every time new rules are proposed, taking that opportunity to stand before you and dispute the proposal and offer better options.
Unfortunately, the proposed rules usually seem to pass and we wait for that next meeting to try again. It’s become a cycle, an ineffective cycle. I grew up in Texas, been part of agriculture my whole life, farming and ranching, and deer breeding is considered part of agriculture in this great state. And It’s an important part. It takes a lot of faith to be a part of agricultural industry. Faith in God, and the guidance through the struggles on our paths as well as the blessings. That faith gets tested a lot, especially in our industry.
Before you can even get into this business, you build a facility that must be approved with a permit issued by Parks and Wildlife, then you pay your fees annually, you follow the established guidelines, and you’re in business. The infrastructure is in place and you go about the daily work to maintain your business, trusting the process.
But the process has been changing frequently and drastically. My disagreement today is mostly with the proposed double fencing and the five-mile radius positive rule. That’s a huge design in financial burden, and that burden is just on the deer breeder who also has the risk of at any time of getting shut down for reasons outside of your own control. The burden continues to grow with no assurance of it having any affect. I’m not going to try to discuss the deep science behind all of this, but it does exist. CWD by its name is a disease. It’s basically the same as scrapie’s in sheep, which our Animal Health Commission here in Texas successfully eradicated the threat of it years ago through selective breeding.
The science exists to selectively breed in deer. Please quit trying to eradicate a solution to CWD in deer. Many deer breeders, including ourselves, follow the science available to use selective breeding in our herds. We have worked with Animal Health Commission for many years in our herd back when it was voluntary to test every death. And we trust that they will be able to guide us in this industry as we deal with this disease. As they have the knowledge and ability to do so effectively. We need to put our trust in them. They take care of the animals in the state.
I have faith that eventually we can quit throwing more useless rules in this industry, and instead have some faith in the science. So, until we meet again, and by that I am thinking of that family song that says, “By His council guide uphold you with his sheep securely fold you. God be with you till we meet again.”
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great.
Thank you, Ms. Berdoll.
Jenny Sanders.
JENNY SANDERS: Good afternoon, I see it is now.
Chairman Hildebrand, Vice-Chair Bell, Commissioners, Dr. Yoskowitz, thank you for giving us this opportunity. I know it’s been a long day already.
My name is Jenny Sanders, and I represent myself and my family, small acreage landowners from east Texas and lease hunters. We lease hands for hunting in the panhandle are members of our hunting club in Trinity County, just down the road from one of the most recent positive deer breeding facilities. Testing of harvest and responsible carcass disposal has always been a part of our life. Hadn’t been a big deal and we’ve done it because we know it’s the right thing to do. I’m in support of the CWD package as written. For well over a decade, I, along with almost all of the noted hunting conservation, private lands and environmental groups in Texas and beyond, have supported permanent Visible ID on all released breeder deer as prescribed by statute. Identification allows for swift and efficient location and removal of exposed animals and provides needed exposure to hunters and neighboring landowners of the origins of captive raised deer. It’s simply the truth in advertising and disease management 101. As a resident of Trinity County, I’m particularly happy with the provisions that compel prompt execution of herd plans and/or depopulation of positive facilities. At last count, the Trinity County positive facility was one of about a dozen others that are refusing to depopulate and allowing the disease to fester, putting neighbors at risk of spread. Two of those facilities have had escapes during that time.
I also fully support the removal of zones, which are clearly a burden to some landowners and hunters. The proximity rules in this package seem to be a reasonable compromise. There are definitely provisions within this package that give me pause and are not fully supported by science, specifically curtailing of the five-year trace window for Category B facilities. That being said, in the spirit of compromise and assuming all other provisions remain in place, I can support the entire package. One last thing I want to mention is that CWD is a reportable disease. And the Department has a duty to inform the public about detections. Landowners, prospective buyers, lessees and hunters have a right to know where CWD exists on the landscape so they can make informed decisions. Mr. Chairman, you aggressively promoted the idea of increased technology adoption with the My Hunt Harvest app. That’s been really successful. I have used it. I can have my kids tags on there. It makes things so much simpler. I would highly encourage you to use that same aggressive approach to incentivize the department’s staff to quickly deploy a public facing, real-time dashboard and potentially on the app as well for informing the public. Thank you so much for your leadership.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, Ms. Sanders.
Rick young.
MR. RICK YOUNG: Thank you, Commission. I appreciate that you really looked into trying to resolve this CWD issue. And my guess is that all of you up there men and women would probably wish this whole thing would go away and get out of your hair. Yeah, right. As we would, too. It’s obviously by now that there are different opinions in this group. A lot of the breeders are not going along with what’s been proposed.
I happen to be one of them. My personal opinion is these rules are crafted to get rid of deer breeders. We will all get an opinion, and that’s mine. And I don’t believe that our deer breeders were accurately represented of their views. And I remember Chairman Hildebrand said that it’s not the Commission’s position to governance the TDA. And I agree with that. But you chose to use the TDA as our representation. And there was no email blast to deer breeders across the state seeking input into these new rules and proposals. I just found out about them last week. And I assure you that most deer breeders don’t agree with this, it’s obviously from 86 percent.
I understand that you guys are really working hard on this, but one of the specific things that I would really object to– I don’t know if I’m allowed to ask this–- have any of the Commissioners read a herd plan in full? Am I allowed to ask that question? Show of hands? Has anybody read one? Oh, thank you. I appreciate that. Commissioner Scott, I don’t think you would sign that herd plan. I would just give you heavy odds. I’m not a betting man but I bet you wouldn’t sign that thing. And now it’s part of these rules that if you don’t sign a herd plan, they’re going to come kill your deer? Well, guess what, if you sign the herd plan they’re going to come kill your deer. And there’s no indemnity money, so why would someone sign a herd plan that endures on over to their grandkids and their sons, their heirs and everything? You get nothing for it, so... I’ve been offered one herd plan in two and a half years.
Now, Hunter Reed told me that I’ve been offered more than that. But it’s been one. If it’s been more than one he’d probably have a record. We could look at it. But Mr. Scott, I know your reputation. You’re a good businessman. You wouldn’t sign this herd plan, not the way it’s written right now, And I’m not going to sign one. So, if we could get reasonable herd plans, if that’s an avenue out, I get a lot of deer breeders would go for that.
Anyhow, thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, Mr. Young.
Trent Barley.
TRENT BARLEY: How are you doing, Commissioners?
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: We’re well.
MR. BARLEY: Mr. Hildebrand, Mr. Bell, Dr. Yoskowitz and the rest of this distinguished board.
Thank you for having all of us here today. I’m a deer breeder, and I’m firmly against a good majority of these rules.
In particular, I’ll give you a hypothetical, my low-fence neighbor is two miles down the road and he’s an electrician. He commits tax fraud. I’m a business down the road and now I’ve been put on house arrest and at the end of that I have to pay a large fine in the form of testing. That does not seem like a viable business opportunity to continue most businesses. And that’s kind of my thought process in this scenario. I’m firmly against these. Thank you for having me today.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you.
And our final speaker, Mr. Rodney Parrish.
Come on up Mr. Parrish.
RODNEY PARRISH: Good evening.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Good evening.
MR. PARRISH: I have got a question for Mr. Alan Cain.
Would he answer it?
Chairman…
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Rodney, this is not a Q&A.
MR. PARRISH: Okay, I’m going to ask the question. He don’t have to answer it.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: If you want that part of your public testimony, go ahead.
MR. PARRISH: The question is what is the deer herd in the state of Texas?
Has it drastically changed one way or another since CWD in 2012?
Basically, it fluctuates. He said that to another guy. I’m sorry.
But now, you know, I’ve been in this business 25 years. I had the same thing happen to me with a suspect deer. It’s been two years, nothing’s happened. I’ve agreed to everything except the herd plan.
We had the indemnity funds. Everything settled out.
I wouldn’t sign the herd plan because it took my property rights. I’ll never sign it. I met with Reed, George, Silvosky, all of them, to try and work it out.
My herd plan came out more restrictive.
You know, we had an election the other day in November, there’s a new president in town. We had an election yesterday. Are y’all going to be the new president or are you going to be the old one getting on the plane going home and feeling sorry for yourselves? You know, hindsight’s 20/20.
An old man told me one time you could bend over every morning and see what you’ve done wrong yesterday.
I’m the old man today.
Don’t bend over and regret what you done today.
Please.
It’s very important to a lot of people. This disease… if you’re going to test every deer breeder, then let’s test every deer that’s killed. See what the open country does.
We have no clue how many deer are positive out there.
There’s deer die for no reason.
They ain’t tested. There are deer that die for no reason in my pens, I have to test them.
I’ve had one deer die in two years. Supposed to be a deadly disease.
There’s no sign. The deer that died, I darted her, tagged her, she was a nine-month-old fawn, and two days later she was dead, I sent her off and she was negative. There was no clinical diagnosis of the disease, And I would be the first one to pull the trigger if it was going to destroy all the deer like these people are saying. I would pull the trigger. Every one of them, I would kill them. We need to back off on this, go home and think about what you’re doing, study about what you’re doing, don’t bend over in the morning and say, “I wish I hadn’t of done this.”
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, Mr. Parrish.
MR. PARRISH. Thank you all.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Appreciate it very much.
Okay, that’s it for our public speakers, and so I’ll open up to any of the Commissioners if they’d like to add comments and/or questions of the staff.
Go ahead, Dick.
COMMISSIONER SCOTT. Commissioner Scott.
Okay, where to start on this... I’m by far the oldest-serving Commissioner in the history of Parks and Wildlife. I’ve been here 14 years. So, I have been here when the first three deer crossed over from New Mexico. Why somebody didn’t shoot them, I do not know. But that being neither here nor there, and I’m not making light of it, by the way, I’ve known many people on both sides of this discussion. Many. And I have talked to I cannot even tell you how many years — in this many years.
And one thing that I’ve heard over and over and over today is kick the can down the road. And let me tell you something, we’ve been doing that for well over 13 years. I do not think that’s an acceptable thing to continue to do. We’re not solving any problems. The problems… everybody on both sides, once again, y’all know what the problems are. And, yes, is this what we’re looking at? Is this a wonderful catchall that solves everything? Of course not, it’s not even close. But as a lot of my fellow Commissioners, one of my favorite sayings is “if we don’t start, we can’t ever finish.” Well, we’ve never started, we’ve kicked this can down the road. I can remember when the TDA and the TWA would not even be in the same room. I am thankful that at least we have a dialog going and they’re trying to work through this stuff. Whether you’re for it or against it, I’m sitting here, I have nothing to do with deer breeding, I own a ranch, I have deer on it, I’m low fenced. So, I mean, I know all of the arguments that everybody has said.
The only problem with not doing anything is we’re just continuing to do the same thing. If we don’t start somewhere, then we can’t work on the things that need changing. The gentleman that spoke about the herd plan, I do not disagree, that herd plan needs work. There’s no question in my mind that I don’t agree. And I did take the time to read the damn thing. And I am not arguing the fact that it needs work. That’s something the staff needs to work on. We need to get together. We need to keep the people that are finally in the room in the room because if we don’t do that, we’re going to end up having to do something on this Commission that nobody’s going to like. I always say, okay, if half on one side is mad and half on the other side is mad, maybe we’re somewhere near the middle. I don’t know. And I know that we’ve got work to do on what we’ve got in front of us.
But we’ve got to start at some point.
And our Chairman, Jeff, and Oliver… I would hate to even imagine how many man hours and lady hours this agency has invested in this issue in 14 years, I would hate to see that number because I would know as a business person how bad of an ROI that has been. So, having said all of the above, I just caution everybody to look at this as it truly is a new day. It’s the first time in all of these years that I’ve been involved that I have any hope of having a starting point for people to stay in the room and keep discussing and try to resolve what… and everybody knows where some of the things are wrong. I’m not disagreeing on either side, I’m not there. I just want to try to get something accomplished while Jeff is our Chairman, because he has put in a world of effort himself. And I can assure you I know how business he is. So, everybody kind of take a deep breath and think about all of this and don’t think that what we do today is the end. I mean, the way I look at it, whatever we do it’s only the beginning.
So, thank you all.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thanks, Dick.
Any other questions?
Vice-Chair.
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Commissioner Bell.
First, I would like to second what our senior Commissioner has said. There are a couple of things. And just for the short history on this piece. And for those asking about, so to speak, punting right now. If you recall, in August, we did kind of punt in August. But that’s when we got the instruction from the Chairman to really try to dig into this.
We did not pass a rule set in August that actually would not have been more onerous than the rule set today.
Matter of fact, just by eliminating zones we’re freeing up 12 million acres of land. Hopefully, it can be valued properly, not diminished, because there’s maybe a negative perception around CWD. Not all of this package is going to be perfect. There are a lot of people that have put a lot of time in. Contrary to popular belief, if there’s a popular believe that people have not been talking to each other, you can’t talk to everybody. But there have been a lot of people talking to each other. I’ve had the privilege to be part of those meetings. I don’t necessarily agree with every single thing in the proposal. But the only way you are going to agree with every single thing is if there’s one party doing it and you get to write it.
The minute you put another party in there and you have to start making concessions, you are automatically going to get some… you have to decide how much of that you want so you can move forward. This is a starting point for us, it’s not all going to be perfect. We will make some adjustments in the future. But what we don’t have to do if we can move forward on something like this, we don’t have to come to you in between meetings with you hearing there’s been another emergency regulation put in place that no one got to comment on. We had to do it just within, the staff here. And I do agree on the herd plan piece, and yes, I have looked at it. It can be amended, I’ll put it to you that way.
That’s the euphemism I’ll use. It can be modified.
Okay?
There’s a lot of work. But there are a lot of people trying to put in their best effort.
We are not trying to put deer breeders out of business. There are some costs associated with this. As we implement this, maybe those costs will be shifted and adjusted and we can look and see what happens. There may be … the proposal the way it reads talks about a certain amount of testing. That testing could very easily decrease going forward as we determine maybe we have a greater reliability. We still have other scientific people we can reach out to. But we still need to act and move forward so that we could say we have a firm basis point. Because — been 2012? There’s been a lot of activity. A lot of times we have probably been exercising the utmost of caution out of fear of the unknown. You know, sometimes the certainty of misery is better than the misery of uncertainty. When you don’t know, sometimes you get overly cautious.
We are trying to come up with a set of rules that perhaps let’s us, let’s say, live with it, move forward.
There are some opportunities in this proposal for deer breeders that do allow you to stay operational if something is detected, versus being shut down immediately. It may not be perfect in every single circumstance, but there are circumstances where there can be a positive around you that does not impact your operation immediately. You get to stay movement qualified. That’s a definite change from what was there before because if there was a positive around you before, you got shut down for being movement qualified immediately. And then that’s when those costs that people mention could really accelerate. So, there is a consideration in the background trying to help with that.
And I don’t know enough about all of the agriculture industry, but there may be some alignment we need to do with some other pieces of agriculture. I’m not a tag guy one way or the other, but, you know, cattle are tagged, right? And by the way, those tags sometimes fall off. It’s not perfect. But if cattle are tagged, could deer be tagged? I mean, we have to ask ourselves that question. I’m not saying it’s the right thing, but there are options of how to align this so that there’s a responsibility business owners have, there’s a responsibility some of the advocacy organizations have. Don’t be so hard on everybody all the time.
But let’s exercise in the sense of we’re trying to move forward to help commerce, but also, we have an obligation to protect from the spread of the disease. So, we’re trying to balance those two interests. And hopefully, just by the action with the surveillance zones, we’ve given people a chance to operate, a chance to breathe, a chance to say there’s new air. And I don’t want to belabor it anymore. It’s been tough for people to try get around this on each side. And I just want to say for everybody that’s been involved, and some of you have taken your licks throughout this process, thank you for being involved in the process, thank you to the staff at TWD for hanging in there, thank you for the deer breeders that participated, thank you for The Wildlife Association and other advocacy groups… you know who you are…
[ LAUGHTER ]
…and provided comments because they have constituency groups that are here to provide us feedback.
So, we are trying to balance a lot of interests. And the biggest thing that we’re trying to do is carry out our Chairman’s mandate which was try to get this problem resolved as best you can to this next level with the staff. So that’s our goal, we’re trying to fulfill that right now, and we’ll try to get better with each step and each phase as we go on throughout the year without having to do it every single meeting.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Good.
Thank you, Vice-Chairman Bell. Any other questions or comments from the Commissioners?
Yes, Commissioner GALO.
COMMISSIONER GALO: I think everything that I wanted to say was so eloquently said by our Senior Commissioner and our Vice-Chairman. But I do really feel the need to have to say this, which wasn’t going to be in my original comments. I sat in some of those meetings, and I can tell you that Jody and Jonathan they represented their representative organizations very well. And they were very outspoken and they took chances. I mean, they were very direct with me, with Vice-Chairman, which I think takes a lot of courage. And so, there’s been countless of other people who have talked with the Commissioners, to the Vice-Chairman, to the Chairman. The department has worked diligently on this. I agree it’s not perfect, but it is a starting point and I’m hopeful. And I would be proud. I would also like to say, Kevin Davis also advocated highly and so did Justin. I mean, there were people representing you all I can assure you because I was a witness. So, yes, I — today I’m hopeful. It’s not perfect, but it’s a step forward, we’re moving forward, and I’m hopeful.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, Commissioner Galo.
Any other comments?
Okay. I’ve got one additive point, and that is Dr. Yoskowitz, I would ask that we take a hard look at our herd plans. It has consistently been an issue. I mean, the young lady that showed a federal herd plan that’s four pages versus our 52 page. I mean, clearly we are looking to impose less regulation versus more. And so, I would ask you and the department to go through and determine what may be a commonsense oriented herd plan and just have a relook at that, because I think that’s an area of huge consternation for the folks that are caught in the trap. And so, I would like to find a way to get them out of that doesn’t assign away multigenerational rights to a piece of property.
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Yes, Chairman, we’ll take a look at that and come back to you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you very much.
And with that, I want to extend, once again it’s been said before, my sincere thanks to Jonathan Letz and the Texas Wildlife Association, Jody Phillips and the Texas Deer Association, for coming to gather in a collaborative way to get to this point that we’re at today. And as I reflect back on the multiple conversations that we’ve had, I think it was all possible due to one thing, and that was trust. And that is an integral part of any negotiation is do the counter parties trust each other? And what we try to do as a department is be the honest broker, the confident liaison. I believe ultimately they trusted the staff to give them accurate and clear information in what is a very challenging disease to try to mitigate. So, I can assure you both your sides represented their constituencies with passion and they made this rule better than what it was when we started. I also want to thank the dedicated staff at Parks for the hard work in developing this rules package as well.
As it’s been said many times, the rule is not perfect at all, but it is a significant, correct step in the right direction.
I am particularly pleased that if it passes we will remove millions of acres, 12 million acres from the burden of containment and surveillance zones. That’s the size of Rhode Island, the entire state, which has been hugely devaluing to property rights. So that is a critical element. I would like to thank everyone that took the time to comment
On this side. I know many of you drove many hours. Thank you for your willingness to advocate for your position. This rule helps achieve some of our shared goals of bringing more certainty to landowners and small businesses while also being protective of wildlife in Texas.
Thank you.
And with that, is there a motion for approval?
VICE-CHAIRMAN OLIVER BELL: This is Commissioner Bell so moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER ANNA GALO: Commissioner Galo second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor please say, “aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed?
Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you very much.
All right, Action Item #7, Grant of Utility Easement– Mitchell County– approximately 15 acres at Lake Colorado City State Park.
Ms. Lofye will you make your presentation.
ANDREA LOFYE: Yes, Sir.
Chairman, Commissioners, for the record my name is Andrea Lofye, Director of the Infrastructure Division.
This utility easement is at Lake Colorado City State Park. Here you see the location of the park on the map. Here’s the map showing the park within Mitchell County. Lake Colorado City State Park consists of approximately 500 acres…
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Excuse me, Andrea.
Let the crowd clear because we are having problems hearing you.
MS. LOFYE: Yes, Sir.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OL BELL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right, you can go ahead.
MS. LOFYE: Yes, Sir.
Lake Colorado City State Park consists of approximately 500 acres along the banks of Lake Colorado City, a 1,618 acre impoundment of Morgan Creek. Lake Colorado City was developed in 1949 to cook generators of an adjacent power station. TPWD leased the park for over 50 years and now owns the park.
As you recall, we purchased the park last year. Today the park offers swimming, fishing, boating, paddling, nature viewing, hiking and camping for the public. Between 2017 to 2019 the park averaged 27,000 visitors a year. Oncor a utility company, approached TPWD to discuss future upgrades to an existing 345 KV electric transmission line that crosses Lake Colorado City State Park and several neighboring properties. Upgrades will include Oncor replacing old wooden structures with monopole-type structures while upgrading capacity of the lines. Staff is requesting permission to work with Oncor to possibly amend the existing easement. On the map you see our existing easement in green. The red outline is the section that would be added for these upgrades. To date we’ve received two total comments, both are in support. Staff recommends that The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission adopt the following motion: The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission adopts the Resolution attached as Exhibit A.
And I’m happy to take any questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Questions?
Is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER BLAKE ROWLING: Rowling, So, moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Second?
COMMISSIONER DICK SCOTT: Scott, second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say, “aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any opposed.
Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you.
Action Item #8: Acceptance of Donation of Land, Brewster County approximately 640 acres at Black Gap Wildlife Management Area.
Mr. Zack Spector, please make your presentation.
ZACK SPECTOR: Chairman Hildebrand, Commission, my name is Zach Spector, Chief of Land and Conservation Initiatives. For the record I’m here to talk about the acceptance of a donation of 640 acres of land in Brewster County at Black Gap WMA. Brewster County is in the Trans-Pecos in west Texas. Here is the location map. Here is a closeup of the subject tract located within Brewster County. You can see where it is located next to Black Gap WMA.
The property consists of approximately 640 acres. It provides crucial habitat for native wildlife and home to several rare and endangered species. The property is currently for sale and under contract by The Texas Nature Conservancy who plans to purchase the tract and donate it to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department.
The property is also a valuable spot for public access and recreation, the wild scenic portion of the Rio Grande, The property serves as a boater takeout for floats down the Boquillas Canyon stretch and a put-in for the Lower Canyon stretch. These are very popular destinations. Here is the location map of the property. Black Gap WMA is located on the west in red, Big Bend National Park in the southwest in green. The GLO lands are in purple, which Parks and Wildlife helps manage and the subject property is located in yellow.
As of last night, we had 22 total comments, all in support. Staff recommends that the Commission adopt the following motion: The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission accepts the donation of approximately 640 acres in Brewster County and Black Gap WMA.
I’m happy to answer questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any questions for Mr. Spector?
Great, thank you. We have one.
Jeff Francell, would you like to speak?
JEFF FRANCELL: I know it’s been a long day, so I will be quick, Chairman, Commissioners, thank you for having this meeting and considering this donation of land from The Nature Conservancy. The Nature Conservancy has assisted Parks and Wildlife with the acquisition of a number of properties over the year, Palo Pinto Mountains, Powderhorn, Honey Creek being most recent. But this piece of property was brought to us by James King with King Land and Water. It was for sale. If you have ever floated the Rio Grande wild and scenic river you have either done the Boquillas Canyons trip or the Lower Canyon, you have been to this piece of property. So that’s a lot of Texans. That’s a lot of Texans who have had one of the greatest wilderness experiences that you can have in the state. And if the wrong person had gotten this property and shut that down, a lot of things would have been lost for a lot of people. So, we quickly put the property under contract. We found two significant donors that helped us pay for the property. One of them we can talk about later, but one we can talk about now, it’s The Horizon Foundation. They gave us half the money. And the other foundation is really insistent that we make sure in talking to you, and we have been, that the property remains open to the public. And we have met with folks at Black Gap and they are supportive of that. And so, thank you for considering this.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Yep, thank you, Jeff.
Appreciate it, yes.
The acreage will be left open to the public, most definitely.
Thank you very much.
And thanks for everything that Nature Conservancy does.
Very much appreciate it.
Okay, with that, is there a motion for approval?
Motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER BOBBY PATTON: Patton, so moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER ABELL: Abell, second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say, “aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed?
Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you.
Item #9, Acquisition of land– Lampasas and Burnet County– approximately 1,100 acres near Colorado State Park.
Ms. Lofye, make your presentation
ANDREA LOFYE: Yes, Sir.
For the record my name is Andrea Lofye with The Infrastructure Division and this is the acquisition of land in Lampasas and Burnett County, and this is another property that Mr. Francell and The Nature Conservancy has helped us with.
Here is a map showing the location of the subject tract. Here you see the subject tract within Lampasas County and Burnett County. The Proposed property consists of approximately 1,100, including 1.5 miles of Yancey Creek, limestone bluffs and several natural springs. The property is located across the river from Colorado Bend State Park, and is approximately ten miles upstream from Lake Buchanan. This acquisition will create additional recreational opportunities, habitat protection, and the conservation of natural springs. Staff prioritizes acquiring state park inholdings and new state parks from willing sellers to improve recreational opportunities, conserve fish and wildlife habitat, and to ensure the conservation of existing Texas State Parks and Wildlife Department public lands.
Acquisition of this tract will help to add additional acreage to a new state park and will provide greater outdoor experiences and opportunities for the citizens of Texas.
On this map you see Colorado Bend in red. You see the 2,000 acres in green that we acquired. We closed on last Friday. We brought that to you at the November Commission meeting. And this subject tract is in yellow. And this is the 1,100 acres that we are seeking approval to acquire. To date we have received 44 total comments. 41 are in support, and three disagree. And those three are primarily questions about the location of this property. Staff recommends that the Commission adopt the following motion: The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commissions authorizes the Executive Director to take all necessary steps to acquire approximately 1,100 acres in Lampasas County and Burnett County from the willing seller for future development and operation as a new state park.
I’m happy to take any questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any questions?
If not, is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER LESLIE DOGGETT: Doggett, approved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER BLAKE ROWLING: Rowling, approved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor please say, “aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed?
Hearing none, motion carries..
Rodney, we need to get the bridge and connect them all. If we do that collectively, how big would that tract be of all three of them?
What do you think?
RODNEY: Over eight..
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: 8,000?
Sounds like a worthy challenge, Rodney.
Okay.
[ LAUGHTER ]
The Rolling Bridge.
Yeah, I like that.
All right Action 10: Grant of Shoreline Restoration Easement Matagorda County. Approximately 1 acre at Matagorda Peninsula Coastal Management Area.
Ms. Lofye.
MS. LOFYE: Yes, Sir.
Thank you, Chairman.
Here we see the subject tract on the map. The CMA. Here is a closer of the peninsula. In 2017 TPWD established the Matagorda Peninsula CMA with the acquisition of approximately 5,100 acres of land on Matagorda Peninsula from the Texas General Land Office.
The Matagorda Peninsula CMA currently consists of more than 6,300 acres preserving approximately 14 miles of Peninsula from The Caney Creek Cut westward and from the Gulf of Mexico to East Matagorda Bay.
This is a remote and undeveloped barrier system that preserves habitat for a remarkable diversity of coastal wildlife, including nesting sea turtles and resident and migratory shore and wading birds, several of which are listed as species of greatest conservation need.
The GLO is seeking a longtime shoreline restoration easement on the Matagorda CMA to construct a jetty designed to arrest the accelerated erosion along the Gulf shoreline of Sargent beach. The shoreline restoration project would benefit the CMA as well as Sargent beach by slowing the beach erosion and stabilizing the shifting land in the immediate area.
Here you see a map of the location of the CMA. And the outline in yellow is the location of the easement. To date we have received six total comments. Five are in support and one disagrees. Staff recommends that the Commission adopt the following motion: The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission adopts the resolution attached as Exhibit A.
I’m happy to take any questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay. Any questions?
Is there a motion for approval?
VICE-CHAIRMAN OLIVER BELL: Commissioner Bell, so moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER DICK SCOTT: Scott, so moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say, “aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed?
Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you.
Okay. We now have a, I’m not sure what it’s called but you’ll see it.
Looks like a bomb detection.
All right, so someone quickly describe what we’ve got here.
MS. JESSICA BURKE: Hello, Commissioner. I’m Jessica Burke, the Accessibility Manager. And I am going to give you a full presentation, including info on this. But right here we have coming in an Eco Rover Chair. This is an all-terrain motorized chair. And this is a little mini tank and it can be used just about anywhere. You can take it up water, you can climb rocks. It’s quite the machine.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: How fast does it go?
MS. BURKE: Gosh, I think it tops out about maybe six miles an hour, eight miles an hour. It doesn’t go superfast. This is the second speed. We can demo the top speed.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Yeah, let’s see it. Fire it up.
All right, let’s go.
[ LAUGHTER ]
Wow.
MS. BURKE: Yeah, pretty zippy.
It has an incline feature on it. So if you are climbing you can lean forward or lean back. We are very excited about these.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: What do you mean?
Like, show us.
MS. BURKE: If I’m sitting in it
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Right. Go ahead and sit in it.
MS. BURKE: If I’m sitting in it, I can incline it.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay. We got it. We can hear her. Just keep talking.
MS. JESSICA BURKE: If I’m sitting in it going uphill, I can lean the seat forward towards the hill so that the weight is facing forward and safe for going downhill.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: How long does the battery charge?
MS. JESSICA BURKE: Gosh, you would ask me a bunch of questions about this, wouldn’t you? Four hours.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: It’s your machine.
MS. JESSICA BURKE: Two or three miles?
Yes, Sir.
[ LAUGHTER ]
(INAUDIBLE) [OFF MIC]
COMMISSIONER LESLIE DOGGETT: So, for handicap folks, they can grab. That’s the idea to be able to tour the parks?
How will that work?
Will they rent it, do they get online and get it ahead of time?
How many parks will have it?
What’s all that?
MS. JESSICA BURKE: Those are such good questions.
Could I give you my presentation with that information in it?
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: No. Can we just.. just answer that specific questions?
We don’t need a full presentation.
MS. JESSICA BURKE: We have three of these in a different model out in Parks right now. So we have one at Waco Tanks. We have one at Dinosaur Valley. Palo Pinto already has one, so as soon as they open it will be ready to go.
Those are action Trackchairs. So similar styles but a different brand. It has got a different type of tread.
We have six of these that have just arrived. State Parks purchased these along with the equipment out in the lobby that you will see. And we are building out trailers for them. They’ve got to charge so we are putting… we’re working on the logistics of this but solar panels on trailers so we can park them and change them. And we will have one per region. My job as The Accessibility Manager is that if someone makes a phone call and they have a disability and they need one of these in a Park I know about it in advance and I will get it out to them.
Otherwise they will be stationed at different parks. All that information will be online and then…
(INAUDIBLE)[OFF MIC]
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: Is it complementary?
MS. JESSICA BURKE: No, no, we would never charge anybody for these.
These are complimentary, along with any other adaptive equipment we have.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Fabulous.
MS. JESSICA BURKE: Great. Okay.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Do they make one with an internal combustion engine on it?
MS. JESSICA BURKE: I have not seen a track chair like that. Now, we are going tomorrow to pick it up. It’s called a Terrain Hopper. It looks like a little go cart and much lower to the ground. But I’m told it’s better for hunting because you can get down low...
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Put a gun rack on that thing, that would be awesome.
MS. JESSICA BURKE: Yes, Sir.
The one we are picking up tomorrow has a gun rack on it.
[ LAUGHTER ]
COMMISSIONER SCOTT: You read my mind.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: That thing is awesome.
Okay. Thanks very much.
MS. JESSICA BURKE: You’re welcome.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: What a great piece of technology.
MS. JESSICA BURKE: Great, thank you so much.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: And what did they cost?
How much?
MS. JESSICA BURKE: One of these runs about $15,000.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: 15?
MS. JESSICA BURKE: Yes, Sir
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: That’s good, wow.
That is really good looking. That’s nice.
Okay.
MS. JESSICA BURKE: Thank you so much.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right, great.
Is that all you wanted to update us on? You have a whole
Presentation?
MS. JESSICA BURKE: I can share some slides.
I’ll be fast.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay.
MS. JESSICA BURKE: You all are tired.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: No, we are just in a hurry.
[ LAUGHTER ]
MS. JESSICA BURKE: Let me skip through a few things.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: I have to go to my ranch and go hunt, so.
MS. JESSICA BURKE: I will be so fast and click through this.
You guys will see up there on the dais, you have some postcards. Those are our marketing materials. Share those please. We want people to know that we want people to know that we want disabilities here at Parks and Wildlife. So that’s got a QR code that will take you right to our website.
There’s four people doing full-time work here at Accessibilities, which as far as I can tell it is the most of any system in the nation. So, California’s got one full-time specialist, Washington has two, but here in Texas we have four full-time specialists that are three recreational therapists, and one who is a member of the blind and visually impaired community. And he is our trainer. And he is a hunter, too, so he is probably out right now.
This is our website here on the left. You guys saw those cards. These are Mobi mats. So, this is a mobility map. It rolls out down towards the water. You can get it almost all the way straight into the water. They are a lot of upkeep but they give a lot of good options for water access. So, this is at Lake Ray Roberts State Park. This is a few examples of how we are working with the disability community to train and plan. So, on the left we’ve got somebody who is a wheelchair user training staff for Inks Lake state park. And then another planning session on the right. New buildings. We are using our Accessibility Advisory Committee, a commission-appointed committee to help us plan new buildings and new sites. Down there on the bottom is ABK. And they helped us with some of the design for that. And then this is just some cool stuff you guys would like that I couldn’t bring in here. So, we’ve got these accessible kayak launches. This is one here is it, gosh, Lake Mineral Wells right there on the left hand side. We had nine of those go in as a donation from the foundation. In the middle we got some adaptive fishing gear which is at Sea Center. We use that for Special Olympics fishing tournaments. And then on the right-hand side, those are viewing scopes that people that are color blind can see a full array of colors through those. So, pretty cool.
We also, — out front you’ll see the Grit chairs. You saw Action Visible ID s. We’ve got these water access chairs at our coastal beach parks. And out front you’ll also see that Huckleberry Hiker. We’ve got it parked.
We got it in yesterday. And,that you will see the huckleberry hiker. We got it yesterday. And that allows maybe a larger kid, smaller adult to get on back and you can hike up wherever you need to get to with them. And I mentioned this little Terrain Hopper right here. That’s the little light blue. That is a donation that we are going to pick up tomorrow. And we’ve got a lot of great partner groups and programs. A couple of the partner groups: National Federation For the Blind, Epilepsy Foundation, Special Olympics Texas. Mostly I’m here because I want to invite y’all on April 12, that’s a Saturday, we’re having a fun for all event at Inks Lake State park. It’s an adaptive expo. We will have adaptive hiking, adaptive fishing, adaptive archery, and I would love for you all to come. So, we’ll get you guys an invitation and hopefully see you there.
Okay, I did it as fast as I could.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Awesome. I mean, thank you for what you are doing. This is fantastic. We have four and California’s got one?
MS. JESSICA BURKE: They have a Director of Accessibility in state parks. I have not connected with their DNR person, but as far as I can tell we are leading.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Well, thank you because we want our parks accessible to everyone.
So, thanks so much. Really appreciate it.
Any questions? With that is there a motion to approve?
Do we have a second?
Just a briefing.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: No motion required?
Just a briefing, Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Just a briefing. Okay, got it.
Okay, let’s see, with that, let me get this officially right.
All right.
Any other questions, comments?
Okay. Commissioners, thank you all very much for your time, and I really appreciate the collaboration that everyone has been engaged in. It makes for a better product. And I think the State of Texas is a better place today than it was around some of these things that we just did.
So, Dr. Yoskowitz, the Commission has completed its business and I declare us adjourned at 2:34 PM.
Thank you.
[ GAVEL SOUNDS ]
(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