TPW Commission Meeting Transcript
May 22, 2025
TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE COMMISSION
May 22, 2025
COMMISSION HEARING ROOM
4200 SMITH SCHOOL ROAD
AUSTIN, TEXAS 78744
COMMISSION MEETING
CHAIRMAN JEFFERY D. HILDEBRAND: Okay, good morning, good morning.
I guess I’ll do that.
[ GAVEL POUNDS ]
Before we begin, I’ll take roll.
Chairman Hildebrand, present.
Vice-Chair Bell?
VICE-CHAIRMAN OLIVER BELL: Present.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Commissioner Doggett?
COMMISSIONER LESLIE DOGGETT: Present.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Mr. Foster?
COMMISSIONER PAUL FOSTER: Present.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Mr. Patton?
COMMISSIONER ROBERT PATTON: Present.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Mr. Rowling?
COMMISSIONER TRAVIS ROWLING: Present.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Mr. Timmerman?
COMMISSIONER TIM TIMMERMAN: Present.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right..
The meeting is called to order May 22, 2025, at 9:16 a.m.
Before proceeding with any business, I believe Dr. Yoskowitz has a statement to make.
DR. DAVID YOSKOWITZ: A 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: Thank you, Dr. Yoskowitz.
First is the approval of minutes from the Commission meeting held March 27, 2025, which have already been distributed.
Is there a motion for approval?
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Commissioner Bell, so moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER PATTON: Patton, 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 also been distributed.
Is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER FOSTER: So moved, Foster.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right.
Is there a second?
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Commissioner Bell, second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say, “Aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed?
Thank you.
Hearing none, motion carries.
Next is the consideration of contracts, which has also been distributed.
Is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER PATTON: Patton, moved for approval.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER ROWLING: Rowling, second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say, “Aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed?
Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you.
Now, for the Special Recognitions, Retirements and Service Award presentations.
Dr. Yoskowitz, please make your presentations.
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Thank you, Chairman, Commissioners.
For the record, my name is David Yoskowitz, Executive Director of Texas Parks and Wildlife Department.
And we’ll be spending the next few minutes recognizing the great work and service that individuals in the department have done over many years of their careers with us.
However, first we want to recognize somebody that has served the state and the department in the role as Commissioner for the last six years.
We want to recognize Commissioner James Abell.
Commissioner Abell was appointed to the Commission by Governor Abbott in August of 2019 and served nearly six years in that role.
He served on the department’s Internal Audit Committee since 2023.
He is also an avid angler and hunter, being a member of the Coastal Conservation Association,
Flatsworthy, and Safari Club International.
He has a degree in energy management from the University of Oklahoma.
He’s also an Aggie, as well.
But there’s a couple of things that we want to take special note of for Commission Abell.
One of these has to do with a time that he spent out at Commissioner Rowling’s Dos Arroyos Ranch in Kerrville, where it took a dos Texas game wardens dos horas to locate him, as the was ranch fairly large and Commissioner Abell found himself not able to get back to headquarters.
[ LAUGHTER ]
But he was found, he continued to serve out his term as Commissioner, and we appreciate that.
[ LAUGHTER ]
I also believe that you are the only Commissioner that has the hair longer than when they started, and the beard– although you cut the beard back for today– and the beard longer, as well.
And I don’t think any other Commissioner has done that previously or probably will do in the future.
So, we appreciate that.
We just want to thank you for your time and talents, being a counselor, a resource to myself and to members of the department over the last six years.
With service to the state and to the department, that’s Commissioner James Abell.
[ APPLAUSE ]
DEE HALLIBURTON: Let’s get a group photo.
[ CAMERA CLICKS ]
Let’s do one more.
Perfect.
Okay, now let’s do the group photo.
I’m going to have you all gather just right there.
[ CAMERA CLICKS ]
DR. YOSKOWITZ: It’s nice to have this on wheels.
Congratulations.
COMMISSIONER ABELL: Thank you.
MS. LANHAM: Let’s adjust a little right over on that side.
All right.
One, two, three.
[ CAMERA CLICKS ]
And let’s do one more.
One, two, three.
[ CAMERA CLICKS ]
Perfect.
[ APPLAUSE ]
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Next we’d like to announce this year’s award winner of the James Randy Fugate Memorial Wildlife Division Professional of the Year.
And that individual is Daniel Kunz, Senior Wildlife Biologist for Wildlife District 10.
He has been selected as this year’s recipient.
Daniel earned a master’s degree from Texas A&M University Kingsville, Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute, and began his career with the Wildlife Division in October of 2002, as a natural resource specialist and district biologist serving Aransas, Duval, Jim Wells, Nueces, and San Patricio Counties.
It was in this role that Daniel first formed a lasting friendship with Randy Fugate, the award’s namesake.
In 2010, Daniel was promoted to Technical Guidance Biologist, following in the footsteps of one of his mentors, Jimmy Rutledge.
Since then, he has become a cornerstone of the division’s training efforts, mentoring both new and seasoned biologists, and field techniques and resource management.
He has developed numerous publications for staff and landowners, and led new biologist training program, and actively serves on multiple Wildlife Division technical committees.
Daniel represents TPWD on the Ocelot Translocation Committee, supports critical research efforts in South Texas, and has been instrumental in securing turkey trap sites for restoration projects in Texas and Utah.
His commitment to building strong relationships with staff, landowners and conservation partners truly embodies the spirit of this award.
Much like Randy Fugate, Daniel is known for his warm demeanor and deep appreciation for the work we do.
His colleagues and partners often speak of his integrity, humility, expertise and tireless work ethic.
Jimmy Rutledge, former TPWD Technical Guidance Biologist, and now Wildlife Biologist with Bass Ranches, describes Daniel as a person of work ethic, integrity and good character.
Neal Wilkins, president and CEO of the East Foundation, regards Daniel as a model wildlife professional.
Over the past 22 years, Daniel has exemplified the highest standards of professionalism, leadership and service.
His contributions have not only advanced wildlife conservation in South Texas, and beyond, but also shaped the next generation of biologists through his mentorship.
Daniel’s excellence in his service continues to inspire all of us.
And we are grateful for his enduring commitment to our mission.
Please join me in congratulating Daniel Kunz.
[ APPLAUSE ]
MS. LANHAM: Ready, one, two, three.
[ CAMERA CLICKS ]
And one more.
One, two, three.
Perfect.
[ APPLAUSE ]
DR. YOSKOWITZ: We have one retirement we’d like to note this Commission meeting.
Tony Lucio began his career with Texas Parks and Wildlife Department as a seasonal employee during the summers of ‘94 and ’95, while in high school.
He first began in Administrative Resources Division, which is now the Financial Resources Division.
And in 1997, while pursuing an applied biology degree at Southwest Texas State University, Tony accepted an administrative job in the business development section of State Parks Division.
In June 2001, Tony began the Revenue Resources Manager in State Parks’ Business Management Section, supervising staff and concessions, data management, fulfillment, and group management programs.
During his tenure, and while also assisting in the development and maintenance of financial operating systems, Tony oversaw the annual state park’s fee processes, and managed concession budgets, staffed retail training, and product development.
Retiring with 30 years of service to the state and the department, Tony Lucio.
[ APPLAUSE ]
MS. LANHAM: All right, one, two, three.
[ CAMERA CLICKS ]
One more.
One, two, three.
[ CAMERA CLICKS ]
Perfect.
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Next we have our Service Awards.
Lori Kreitner began her career with the department on March 2, of 1995.
Initially hired as a call center agent making camping reservations for State Parks Division, she transitioned within the year to providing technical support and training for the very first reservation system in the parks.
During her tenure as a Parks Support System Analyst, she worked jointly with other divisions providing technical support and guidance, testing use cases, and providing support after hours for the park office system, and subsequent system.
Lori remained in this role for about 20 years before transitioning to her new role as the IT Help Desk Manager.
Now, she oversees the operations of the IT Help Desk and park support teams, providing technical support to the agency staff.
With 30 years of service, Lori Kreitner.
[ APPLAUSE ]
MS. LANHAM: Okay, one, two, three.
[ CAMERA CLICKS ]
One more.
One, two, three.
[ CAMERA CLICKS ]
Perfect.
[ APPLAUSE ]
DR. YOSKOWITZ: And next we’d like to recognize Meredith Longoria, who began her career with the department on March 7, 2005, serving nearly a decade as the Wildlife Biologist for Bastrop and Caldwell Counties, providing technical guidance to landowners on deer management and wildlife tax valuation guidance.
In 2014, she transitioned to the department’s headquarters as the first Conservation Initiative
Specialist in the nongame and rare species program, where she designed voluntary conservation agreements for landowners designed to benefit rare, threatened and endangered species.
In 2017, she was promoted to Nongame and Rare Species Program Leader, responsible for leading a team of statewide subject matter experts we affectionately refer to as “Ologists”; facilitated the implementation of a Texas Conservation Action Plan.
Since February of 2021, Meredith has served as Deputy Director of the Wildlife Division, overseeing operations and strategic direction for the team of more than 300 professionals across five regions and five statewide programs, in coordination with the branch chief of administration and research.
And very important to me, last Fall she stepped in as acting DD of the Wildlife Division, which I greatly appreciate.
With 20 years of service, Meredith Longoria.
[ APPLAUSE ]
MS. LANHAM: One, two, three.
And one more.
[ CAMERA CLICKS ]
Perfect.
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Chairman, that concludes my presentation.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, Dr. Yoskowitz.
Vice-Chair Bell would like to make a comment.
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: This comment, in particular has to do with my… I call it my former seatmate, my right-hand man for the last several years, who actually I missed yesterday when he wasn’t sitting here– when I turned around to look at that little ponytail and that bushy beard.
[ LAUGHTER ]
But it has been… I just want to say to everyone, for me it was an absolute pleasure to be able to sit next to James, and to know also that he is truly an avid hunter, fisherman, sportsman all the way around.
And he always had very thoughtful questions, caused me to think… every now and then I’d go, “Oh, I was going down another path.”
And he’d ask a question, and that would cause me to kind of take a step back, relook, you know, offer a different perspective so I could have a better understanding.
And so, I appreciate that thoughtfulness and that input that you had.
And I call it common sense, because we do have a… I mean, I think this Commission, in particular, I hope that folks will one day say that that was one of our trademarks, is that we had a lot of common sense in terms of what we did.
But also had the privilege of meeting your mother and your children.
And I know, for sure, you have turned that one son into an avid sportsman.
So, he is all in and ready to go.
But, you know, the last kind of thing we did together, we had that little helicopter ride.
And we didn’t fall out, so it worked just fine.
We didn’t get lost, so that worked well.
And I’m sorry I missed your foray, because when you did get lost there is always one thing you can sometimes say about friends.
You know, they say when you get in trouble a good friend will come and bail you out.
And a true friend will be sitting right beside you in jail going, “Man, that was fun.”
[ LAUGHTER ]
So, I hope that maybe at some point in time you find me in that latter category.
But I just appreciate your time here, and having worked with you.
And I just wanted to make sure that that was said.
So, thank you, Sir.
COMMISSIONER ABELL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great, thank you.
[ APPLAUSE ] Any other comments by Commissioners?
Well, thank you all.
Congratulations on the Service Awards, the Retirement Awards.
And finally, James, I echo Vice-Chair Bell’s comments.
You’ve just been…
It’s been an honor to serve with you.
It’s been a joy to serve with you.
Your spirit is effusive.
And you’ve just got a great attitude on life.
You took the job seriously.
You ask great questions.
You were intellectually curious.
And you understand.
You are a very pragmatic thinking person, which is sometimes a limited resource in today’s age.
So, I really appreciate serving with you.
You’ve been a great counterpart to what we’ve done.
Supportive when we’ve needed you to be.
And you pushed back with your own perspective and opinions when you needed to, as well, which makes a great board member.
So, anyway, thank you.
Best of luck to you.
And Tyler, if you ever get to Houston, come see me.
And likewise, I don’t get to Tyler too often, but it’s a great place.
Anyway, so thank you very much.
And don’t be a stranger.
So, one more round of applause for him.
[ APPLAUSE ] All right.
At this time I would 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.
Okay.
Action Item No. 1: Commission Policy 022, New Park Development– Recommended Adoption of Proposed Policy.
Mr. Rodney Franklin.
RODNEY FRANKLIN: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, fellow Commissioners.
For the record, my name is Rodney Franklin, State Parks Director, and I’ll be presenting for adoption and Commission Policy 022.
The purpose of the policy is to require the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department to develop a plan for the development and timely opening of new Texas state parks.
The plan itself, which you all have a copy of on your dais there, outlines a phased approach that considers sound design and construction principles, as well as safeguarding the natural and cultural resources of the State of Texas.
The plan has several requirements, and it talks about a phased approach.
And first phase talks about facilitated day use, which in the first 12 months we’ll be providing guided tours, hunting opportunities, special events, fishing, paddling opportunities, as well as wildlife viewing and birding.
Phase 2, within the first 18 months after acquiring the property, is extended public day use.
We will add parking lots and some limited trail usage, some ADA trails perhaps, restrooms will be a part of that as well.
And then we’ll move into the construction part of Phase 3.
After 48 months the park will be open with roads, utilities and amenities for overnight, as well.
And, of course, Texas Parks and Wildlife may continue to develop enhancements as public demands and operational needs beyond that timeline, but we will be open to the public at that time.
Texas Parks and Wildlife will also provide detailed updates for the public, as well as the Commission here.
We’re developing a website to make sure that the public understands where we are with each phase of development and the status.
And the staff will report the status of the development phases to the Commission once a year, as the property is developed.
And we will be reporting key milestones during that time.
So, as of this morning we have had eight public comments, all in agreeance of the policy.
So, at this time staff recommends that the Commission adopt the following motion:
“The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission adopts Commission Policy CP-022, New Park Development.”
And with that I will answer any questions you might have.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great, thank you, Mr. Franklin.
Any questions by the Commission?
Rodney, the one element… I’m overjoyed that we are actually, we now are going to have a sense of urgency in terms of the opening of these parks.
I mean, in no uncertain terms we have been slow to open these parks.
The last time we opened one was 2008.
And I understand that there’s a lot of issues related to it.
Regulatory compliance, funding.
But we’ve really got to adopt an entrepreneurial spirit to push forward and get these parks built quickly and cost effectively.
And that’s what I want to talk to for a moment, in terms of the cost effectiveness.
Because we just… there’s just not not enough money in the state coffers to spend $100 million, $150 million a park.
I mean, we’ve got to somehow figure out a way to be more cost efficient.
And I understand state procurement laws are challenging, but there are all kinds of models out there — public, private models.
I mean, I would say, if I was king for a day, I’d put one sharp businessman and get him to volunteer his time.
And his task is to go open park “X,” “Y,” “Z.”
And he puts together a budget, and he figures out how to do it in an entrepreneurial way that’s cost effective.
Because spending $100 million a park, or more, there’s not enough money out there to do this all.
So, we’ve got to figure out how to do things, you know, quick, cheap, easy and good.
And there is a way to do it, but it’s going to take a public/private partnership, I think, in order to do that.
And there is a lot of models out there.
And so, Dr. Yoskowitz, what I would ask you to do is have staff investigate all of the public/private partnerships that are out there, and to be creative and think outside the box as to how we get these parks built on a more cost effective basis.
For example, what did we spend at Palo Pinto?
MR. FRANKLIN: I believe about $50 million.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: About 50?
And how long did that take us to do?
MR. FRANKLIN: About four years?
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Palo Pinto, it only took four years to get it done?
MR. FRANKLIN: From the time we started constructing, yes.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: From the time you started… but when the time you bought the land.
MR. FRANKLIN: Oh, we purchased the land in 2012.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: ‘12.
So 13 years, okay.
Long time.
So, maybe you guys are doing everything that you can through an efficiency of how you get these things built.
But I would really ask you to take a deep look into public/private partnerships, because that is the key to all of this.
The challenge is, you’re using state money.
And I understand.
And so, you’ve got to adhere to state procurement issues.
But a lot of people have created… have come up with creative solutions for this type of investment.
So, if you will, I would ask that you do that.
Whether you need to adopt or create a committee to do it?
I’m not a big fan of committees, but the work’s got to get done to come back to this Commission as to what are some examples and how might one do this?
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Very good, Chairman.
Yep, we’ll take and run with that.
MR. FRANKLIN: Understood.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, Mr. Franklin.
MR. FRANKLIN: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Job well done.
MR. FRANKLIN: Thank you, Sir.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you.
All right.
Okay.
And there’s no one signed up, Dee, to speak?
DEE HALLIBURTON: That’s right.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right, great.
Let’s see.
So, is there a motion for approval?
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Commissioner Bell, so moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: Doggett, second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say, “Aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed?
Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you.
All right.
Action Item No. 2: Cultivated Oyster Mariculture Program Fee Revisions and Triploid Parentage Allowance– Recommended Adoption of Proposed Rules.
Dr. Lindsay Glass Campbell.
DR. LINDSAY GLASS CAMPBELL: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners.
Am I picked up by the mic today?
Y’all can hear me?
OFF CAMERA: Move a little closer.
DR. CAMPBELL: Okay.
Good morning.
OFF CAMERA: Good morning.
DR. CAMPBELL: All right.
For the record, my name is Dr. Lindsay Glass Campbell.
I’m with Coastal Fisheries Division and over at the Cultivated Oyster Mariculture Program.
And today, I will be presenting on two items up for adoption.
One over the provision of permit fees, annual fees for… and the revision of the allowable parentage for triploid oysters.
Just a quick status update of our Cultivated Oyster Mariculture– or COM, as I will abbreviate it throughout this program– permits.
We have permits that stretch from East Galveston Bay all the way down to lower Laguna Madre, 14 permitted grow-out sites.
And those are where the oysters are grown to harvestable size.
38 in conditional status
They are seeking their other agency authorizations.
Seven permitted nursery hatchery sites, and that’s where oysters are spawned and grown in early life.
So, the first item is to reduce annual fees for COM permits.
This is based on stakeholder industry… stakeholder input from the COM industry to encourage the small business growth and development by reducing barriers to financial entry and review of both other state fees and own fees of the program.
So, for the grow-out sites we propose to reduce the current fees, and the proposed reduction would be $150 per acre/per year for the portions that are in public water, and $57 per acre/per year for the portions that are on private land.
For nursery-hatchery sites, the proposed reduction amounts are $150 annually for combined total of the portions of public water at the $150 per acre, and private land at $57 per acre.
The reason that we have a minimum annual fee for our nursery-hatchery sites is that many of them are much smaller than an acre, and the $150 is to help defray departmental costs incurred during their required annual inspections of these sites.
Moving onto our next item, which is allowable parantage for triploid oysters.
Our proposal is to allow the use of oysters from northern Gulf stock as broodstock for triploids, as opposed to just Texas-specific oysters as it stands now.
And this… triploids are desired by the industry because they are faster growing and have year-round meat quality.
We’ve reviewed the current scientific information on oyster genetic stocks, our biosecurity protocols.
And based on our stakeholder feedback regarding seed supply and oyster seed are those juvenile oysters used in mariculture.
Since there are only a few hatcheries that produce triploid oysters using Texas broodstock, and because there’s fewer numbers of our farmers currently, those get down on the production list lower by allowing this change that would open opportunities for more places to buy that triploid stock that is produced in larger amounts to serve the other Gulf states.
And this would encourage industry stability and growth.
So, a quick kind of review of our oyster population stocks, or regions.
Again, this is all the same species.
What we have as our Texas north region is part of the northern Gulf region, as seen in green here.
Now, to the south in Texas and upper and lower Laguna Madre, we have our southern broodstock.
And then there’s that mixing zone where you will find oysters that are from either stock.
So, then that northern region extends all the way through Mobile Bay in Alabama.
And then you start getting into another mixing zone where you can find oysters either from the northern stock or from the Florida stocks.
So, based on the stocks, regions and for triploid oysters created by across, we propose to allow the use of oysters from Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi or Alabama waters.
Broodstock origin must still be documented, as it stands.
And all of our biosecurity protocols must still be followed.
We had a virtual public meeting for these two items on May 6.
Currently, for the fee item, there are 18 comments– 14 in agreement, four in disagreement.
One disagrees specifically that of any fee for private land.
Two disagree for reducing the fees.
One even goes as far to say that the fees should be increased.
One disagrees specifically, citing that they believe the fees should be decreased further, and comparing them to our Certificate of Location fees.
This item was supported by the Oyster Advisory Committee and the Texas Conservation Alliance.
For the triploid oyster parentage item, again, that virtual public meeting was held May 6.
As of yesterday, there were 15 comments– 14 in agreement, one in disagreement, with no reason given for the disagreement, also supported by the Oyster Advisory Committee and the Texas Conservation Alliance.
Staff recommends that the Commission adopt the following motion:
‘“The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission adopts amendments to 31 Texas Administrative Code 53.13 concerning Business Licenses and Permits for fishing as listed in Exhibit A, and 31 Texas Administrative Code 58.353 concerning Cultivated Oyster Mariculture Program Rules, as listed in Exhibit B, with changes as necessary to the proposed text as published in the April 18, 2025, issue of the ”Texas Register.’”
With that I will take any questions you may have.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great, thank you, Dr. Glass.
Any questions?
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: I have one.
Can you help us understand how far behind are we from Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia and maybe Florida on the mariculture production?
Do you know those harvest numbers?
DR. CAMPBELL: No, I don’t have their harvest numbers in front of me.
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: Do you know percentage… any comparison between Texas and what those states have done mariculturally, if that’s a word?
DR. CAMPBELL: Yes, it is… since they permit or limit things a little bit differently.
You know, Florida has been around for a while.
There are over 135 oyster-specific permits there.
And then there’s an additional 100 or more of oyster/clam permits.
Alabama, there are 506 acres permitted for mariculture.
Of public water.
They do have private water there.
And there is not information on how much of that is permitted.
In Mississippi, there are about 75 acres permitted, and there their permits are in one-acre allotments.
And Louisiana, there are 125 acres permitted.
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: So, is it fair to say we’re in the infancy of mariculture in Texas?
DR. CAMPBELL: Yes.
And this is… these programs at other states have been around ten years or longer.
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: Well, I want to thank you for these suggestions.
I mean, I think we need to do all we can to help this industry grow.
I think it is very meaningful.
So, thank you for that.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great, thank you, Doctor Campbell.
COMMISSIONER FOSTER: I have a quick question, as well.
First of all, thank you for your work on this.
Help me… I’m a complete novice on this topic, and so help me understand why the biosecurity and the origin issues are important?
Why do we… why does it matter?
DR. CAMPBELL: Well, you know, while mariculture provides an opportunity for farmers… for business and things here, we are also about protecting our natural resources.
And so, that biosecurity is diseases.
We don’t want to bring any other disease or transfer pathogens from other states, other waters, or even necessarily between our bays sometimes.
So, that’s important.
One, they don’t want to have sick oysters.
And we don’t want to threaten any of our other natural resources in the area.
The genetics integrity has to do more with stocks, and really our southern is our much different.
So, again, it is the same species.
Really have to get a genetic biologist to talk about why we need to protect that.
But it’s just kind of diversity, and the fact that our southern stock is really much different.
So, we don’t want to bring in nonnatives that would push those out of their natural environment.
COMMISSIONER FOSTER: Okay, thank you.
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Hi, this is Commissioner Bell.
Also, I do know that we are in the process– and you didn’t address this directly, but it’s related–
we’re in the process of the license buyback.
So, I know that we are… I think we’re authorized for this phase to buy back up to 150.
I think we’ve bought back 70 or 80, at this point.
Is that…
MR. RIECHERS: Thank you for that question, Commissioner.
We will be covering that in the later presentation.
But to answer your question now, yes, we are in the throws of the buyback program.
Currently we have 81 applications in process.
But I’ll talk about that a little bit later, as well.
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: So, that’s going to… that obviously will help streamline the market.
And I wanted to tie that into what you were talking about, Doctor, in terms of the fee reduction, that’s a… I think that is a way to encourage people.
Because that’s a 67 percent fee reduction.
So, it removes… if the fee was an economic barrier, or was part of that barrier, we reduce that.
And how are we… and then along with the stock, I do know that there is the biodiversity issues.
I recall being up in Washington State.
And just even on kayaks.
They were concerned if you took a kayak from one body of water and dropped it into another body of water before you had it inspected.
So, you couldn’t bring something over from Lake A over to Lake B.
So, I do understand it.
But it seems that you are feeling pretty comfortable with the fact that across the Gulf we could…
everything is close enough that it makes sense and offers more opportunity.
Because since we are trying to encourage people to participate, obviously we need the feedstock or the seed stock there.
And that seems to be the greatest opportunity.
That seems like a very positive step overall.
Is that the way you assess it?
DR. CAMPBELL: Yes.
And the biosecurity… before things come in, they must be tested.
It is a bit different.
We don’t have any sort of diseases, or things like that, that we’re worried about as necessarily from checking kayaks.
But, again, we keep monitoring this.
And if that became an emerging issue, as some sort of hitchhiking like that, then we would definitely address that.
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Do you have any thoughts… I know you are doing mostly on the stock, but do you have thoughts operationally on what farmers… any ideas on best practices that we might be suggesting to farmers as they move into this space, potentially?
DR. CAMPBELL: Um.
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Not yet.
That’s fine.
DR. CAMPBELL: I guess best practices for…
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: For raising their stock and creating…
DR. CAMPBELL: Oh, okay.
Well, there are many documents.
Some of that is business decisions on how they do that.
And there’s Sea Grant and other organizations that advise on that.
But we do have restrictions as part of, kind of, here, that are best management practices.
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: And, right now, for someone to successfully enter this industry, about how… do you have an idea about how many agencies they might have to go through for approval to get from actually into operations?
Because we are trying to look at how… we’re trying to streamline our steps.
Are there folks that we should be interfacing with to help streamline that process, other regulators?
DR. CAMPBELL: There are three Texas agencies and two federal agencies that they have to go through, so…
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great.
Okay, thanks, Dr. Campbell.
Appreciate it.
I believe we have two people signed up to speak.
Jim Meyn, PMAR.
Welcome, Jim.
Jim gave me a wonderful tour of PMAR last week.
It was fantastic.
JIM MEYN: It was a pleasure to have you down there, and I encourage the other Commissioners if you’d like to enjoy that same tour just reach out.
Dee knows how to reach me, and I would be happy to offer the same.
Good morning to everyone.
Good morning, Dr. Yoskowitz.
My name is Jim Meyn, and I run the largest oyster hatchery in Texas.
We are a nonprofit organization, and we have really a very simple mission.
We want to spawn Texas oysters to save Texas bays.
The name of our organization is Palacios Marine Agricultural Research, or we refer to it as PMAR.
We support these mariculture rule changes here proposed today.
The expansion of the broodstock origin for triploids will actually provide really valuable opportunities for the farmers to have more than one seed supplier for their farm stock.
Hatcheries are an inherent biological process that are prone to failure.
And sometimes one hatchery isn’t producing seed.
If another one is, that farmer isn’t exposed to that failure, and still able to farm as they intend to.
Also, very happy to see the reduction in fees.
In fact, I commend the staff and the department for continuously looking at the rules and the industry, and coming up with these more efficient, more practical approaches that are going to help the industry grow.
I will, Commissioner Bell, comment that there are other agencies involved.
And when you look at the total cost of running farms in Texas, we’re still the highest cost state in the Gulf.
So, we still have some work to do at the state level across all these agencies to come together on this.
I’d also like to take a moment to celebrate the passing of SB 1215, which allows us to put mariculture oysters, cultured oysters, on basically the bay bottom, whether it’s private, lease or a public bed.
This will allow the state to take full advantage of our oyster production through the department’s approval process.
And we have been working pretty hard this year to prove that we can make a lot of oysters.
I’d like to announce that we have already produced 35 million, and we’re just getting started.
And so, we stand ready to work with the Department, work with this Commission, and come together on what’s the best way to take advantage of that production and save our Texas bays together.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great.
Any questions of Jim?
All right, thank you very much.
Really great, great work.
You are doing good stuff for the State of Texas.
MR. MEYN: Thank you, Sir.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Appreciate it.
And you should go.
You will get a PhD in oyster… the mariculture industry.
All right, David Aparkio of Oyster Brothers.
DAVID APARKIO: How y’all doing today?
I just wanted to come up here and say thank y’all for coming down and checking out the farm.
I know we didn’t get a chance because the weather was a bit choppy, but that is just stuff that we deal with every day.
You know, I’m just here to say thanks for everything y’all have done in the oyster mariculture industry.
I was Permit Number 3, and now we’re 13, as well.
And, you know, I think any kind of relief that we can get on fee reduction cost and being able to use other broodstocks for out-of-state triploids, as well, would be hugely beneficial for our business.
One thing that I kind of… something that you had mentioned to Lindsay just a second ago was about how can we incentivise farmers to get in this.
And I think if we could utilize our entire water column for our lease, this will help us be better prepared for hurricane seasons if we can use bottom cages.
So, that way we are not having all this floating gear on top and three days out we have to sink it all to the bottom and then we have to pick it up.
We can already be ahead of the game, you know, come June, come July and August. you know, for the remainder of the hurricane season.
But it will also allow us to yield more stock and be better prepared for the market.
So, we can hold more oysters per acre and we can be able to produce more oysters and be more competitive on the market as well.
Because it’s very costly to start this business.
You have to buy gear, boats, ropes, all the hardware.
I mean, all that stuff adds up to hundreds of thousands of dollars.
And just like any other startup, you’re going to make lots of mistakes.
All of us have made tremendous amount of mistakes.
And those mistakes cost.
So, anyway that y’all can help us, you know, by allowing us to get fee reductions and better… not better seed sources, but more seed sources that…
You know, all these things will allow us to be more successful down the road.
It’s been very new in the state.
And we just want to be successful.
We want this to be successful.
And I just want to say thanks again for y’all’s time.
For coming down.
If y’all have any questions at all, I can answer anything.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: I’ll attest, this is a very hard-working man that is in an industry that is really… it’s just hard work.
MR. APARKIO: Yes, Sir.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: And I applaud you guys.
MR. APARKIO: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: And your creativity in what you are doing.
And hopefully more will follow your example.
So, thank you and your brother.
Appreciate it.
MR. APARKIO: Yes, Sir.
Thank y’all.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: You bet.
Okay, If not…
Is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: Doggett.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Do we have a second?
COMMISSIONER TIMMERMAN: Timmerman.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say, “Aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed?
Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you.
Action Item No. 3: Public Hunting Program– Establishment of an Open Season on Public Hunting Lands and Approval of Public Hunting Activities on State Parks.
Mr. Mote.
KEVIN MOTE: Mote.
Yes, Sir.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Mote, got it.
MR. MOTE: Good morning, Chairman.
Commissioners.
For the record, my name is Kevin Mote.
I’m the Private Lands and Public Hunting Program Director.
And today I will be requesting your approval of two items related to the public hunting program.
In order to provide hunting activities on public hunting land, the Commission must provide for an open season.
For this purpose, staff requests your approval to establish an open season on public hunting lands that will run from September 1, 2025, to August 31, 2026.
The Commission is also asked to approve specific hunting activities on units of the state park system detailed in Exhibit A, included in your briefing materials.
As of yesterday at 5:00, the department has received a total of six comments.
Five agree completely and one disagrees specifically.
And the comment of disagreement was not germane to these proposals.
So with that, staff requests the Commission adopt these proposed motions:
“The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission authorizes an open season on public hunting lands to run from September 1, 2025, to August 31, 2026.
And second, the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission authorizes the public hunting activities described in Exhibit A to take place on units of the State Park system.”
With that, I’ll be happy to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any questions of Mr. Mote?
Okay.
You know, this is about as appropriate a place as I can insert into this process.
But I want to talk about… because we are talking about hunting on public lands and the potential devastation that this could impact.
And that’s all about the screwworm.
And I will just say, at the highest level in the state people are very concerned about new world screwworm.
And I would just ask you or anyone in the Wildlife Department, what are we doing about… to be proactive in this process?
Because it has gotten the attention of a lot of people.
And it is a real problem.
And, in fact, I think it will be the next chairman’s CWD, if you want to know the truth.
So, this is a problem that’s not going away.
MEREDITH LONGORIA: Good morning Chairman, Commissioners.
For the record, my name is Meredith Longoria.
I’m the Deputy Director of the Wildlife Division.
And we are taking that very seriously.
We are working closely with our partnering state agencies and federal agencies to work on surveillance and monitoring, and prepare staff for informing the public on what they can look for and how to report it, any suspected cases of new world screwworms.
So, we’re on top of it and we’re taking it seriously.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: So, what agency in the State of Texas is the quarterback on this?
MS. LONGORIA: Texas Animal Health Commission and the Department of State and Health Services are working in conjunction with Texas Parks and Wildlife on this.
But I would say Texas Animal Health Commission.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay.
And do they have a taskforce set up?
MS. LONGORIA: Yes, we’re meeting weekly, along with USDA, to keep an eye on this because it is… yeah, it’s in Mexico.
So, we know it is a matter of time.
And we’re working closely with them on a response.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Got it.
So, definitively, I mean, getting together on a weekly meeting is great.
But what is TAHC actually doing about this?
MS. LONGORIA: I can’t tell you specifics about what TAHC is doing.
I can get them for you, though.
And we are working on a communications plan right now, as well, in conjunction with those other state agencies to inform the public on all the things that we’re doing to monitor for this and prepare.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay.
Well, this is of utmost importance from a wildlife and livestock standpoint…
MS. LONGORIA: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: …for the governor.
And he wants some action on this.
And we need to bring this to a level of exposure so that people understand, and that we’re actually doing something about it.
It is complicated, it is a federal issue, and it’s sterile flies that have got to be manufactured.
And so I would just ask you… I don’t… our own task force is probably not needed, it is, David?
DR. YOSKOWITZ: No, I think coordination with the other agencies– and I would also note stakeholder groups such as cattle raisers, Texas Wildlife Association, Farm Bureau, others– are involved in that broader effort as well.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: In the ‘60s, when it was most prevalent, do we know what was the impact to wildlife?
MS. LONGORIA: I don’t have the exact numbers about how greatly it reduced the deer population in Texas, and the impact that it had on the cattle industry.
But it was significant.
It was significant.
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Our techniques today in measuring deer population densities weren’t the same as in the ‘60s, but there was definitely a noticeable… a significantly noticeable reduction on all wildlife.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: But that’s all well and good.
But you guys need to go back, do some as quantitative work as you can.
I know the data will be sparse and loose.
But you need to come back to this Commission and say, “Look, based on qualitative, quantitative measures, this is the level of impact that we think it had on the White-tail population, or feral hogs,” or whatever data…
There is going to be… I will assure you there is a lot of research papers out there that dealt with this back in the ‘60s relating to wildlife.
So, someone in the staff has got to accumulate the data and not just… it’s not just good enough to say…
MS. LONGORIA: No, we have that.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: “Well, it had a negative effect.”
MS. LONGORIA: Impact.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: These guys want to know what kind of effect, and what kind of effect it may have on a projected basis if it is rampant in the State of Texas.
MS. LONGORIA: Sure.
And If you would like we can provide a report to you before the next Commission meeting so that you have that information at hand.
Whatever you need, just…
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: That would be great.
That would be great.
So David, let’s push this hard and bring this to a level of scrutiny that it deserves
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay.
Good, thank you.
But no billboards, okay?
[ LAUGHTER ]
Who remembers the CWD billboards?
Who thought that was a good idea?
Not me.
So anyway, no billboards.
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Can I make one comment?
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Yes.
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Also, just in terms of how this plays out.
If we can get some I will call it “simplified language” so that lay people, you know, people not part of the industry, can understand it.
Because that way we are not necessarily… we’re not trying to scare anyone, but we’re trying to make sure the appropriate level of attention is brought to this.
And also, we may have people that are just out and about that observe something.
And the more they know about this particular item, the better off we would all be.
So, just as simplified language as we can have around that.
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Vice-Chairman, Michelle Diaz, Communication Director, and her team are doing that exact thing right now, putting together talking points, simple language, a way to communicate to the general public, hunters, et cetera.
Yep.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: And the way to identify if something’s… if some wildlife is affected by it, or cattle, obviously.
Are there certain symptoms?
I mean, I know it’s fatal, right?
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Yeah, left untreated it’s fatal.
Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: But if you treat it, even though the animal, cattle or livestock, if you treat it, the animal will recover?
DR. YOSKOWITZ: I am not the person to answer that.
Yes, yep.
But you have to get to that animal soon.
Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Yeah, this is just the kind of knowledge we need to get up the curve on to understand because it’s coming.
And so…
MR. MOTE: Chairman, I will add.
I am the department point of contact for the Private Lands Advisory Committee.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Good.
MR. MOTE: And we met yesterday morning.
And a representative from Texas Southwest Cattle Raiser’s Association and our vet, Dr. Hunter Reed, briefed that committee on this very topic.
So, we are trying to cover all of our bases…
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Good.
MR. MOTE: …and keep our advisory committees informed.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great.
Stay on top of it.
Thank you, Mr. Mote.
Let’s see.
So, do I have a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER PATTON: Patton.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Bell, second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say, “Aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed?
Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you.
Then there’s Motion 2… there are two Motions.
Sorry.
That was Motion 1
Motion 2: Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission Authorizes the Public Hunting Activities Contained in Exhibit A to take place on units of the State Park System.
Do I have a motion?
COMMISSIONER ROWLING: Rowling, so moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER TIMMERMAN: Timmerman, second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say, “Aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed?
Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you.
All right, Action Item No. 4: Designation of Nonprofit Organization for the Help Feed Hungry Texans Program.
Mr. Blaze Kor-keskwa.
BLAZE KORZEKWA: You’re getting closer.
Korzekwa.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Korzekwa.
Korzek–wa.
What is that?
Is that German?
MR. KORZEKWA: Polish.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Polish, Czech?
Polish.
Okay.
All right.
MR. KORZEKWA: Good morning, Chairman and Commissioners.
For the record, my name is Blaise Korzekwa, White-tail Deer Program Leader.
This morning, I will present a recommendation for the designation of a nonprofit for the Help Feed Hungry Texans Program that will be considered for adoption.
The Help Feed Hungry Texans Program was established in 2015, by Senate Bill 1978, in the 84th Legislative Session, and is found under Parks and Wildlife Code 42.011.
This program allows a person purchasing a hunting license to make a voluntary contribution to a nonprofit in increments of $1, $5, $10 or $20.
And I will note that during yesterday’s meeting a question was brought up regarding those with lifetime licenses.
I just want to provide some clarification that those who have a lifetime license do have the option to make a voluntary contribution at the time of renewal for that season.
This nonprofit is designated by the Commission, and is responsible for administering a statewide program to provide hunters a way to donate legally harvested deer to local food assistance providers.
These monetary contributions are held in trust by TPWD, and then sent to the designated nonprofit to administer the program.
The Parks and Wildlife Commission has designated Feeding Texas as the nonprofit since the inception of the Help Feed Hungry Texans Program in both 2015 and 2020.
Since the program’s inception, the Parks and Wildlife has passed through over $1.5 million in voluntary donations, and Feeding Texas has distributed over 773,000 pounds of venison and served over half a million hungry Texans.
The current contract is set to expire on August 14, of 2025.
Staff recommends that Feeding Texas, which operates the popular Hunters for the Hungry program, should be the designated nonprofit for the Help Feed Hungry Texans program.
Feeding Texas has a well-established program with over 25 years of history and strong name recognition.
And it is also the largest hunger relief network in Texas, with 20 food banks across the state, and has strong fiscal controls and reporting.
Staff have received five public comments, and all five comments have been in support of the recommendation.
Staff recommends that the Commission should adopt the following motion, as shown on the slide.
“The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission adopts the resolution attached as Exhibit A, the designation of Feeding Texas as the nonprofit organization to receive donations made by persons when they apply for a recreational license to administer a statewide program that provides hunters with a way to donate legally harvested deer to local food assistance providers.”
That concludes my presentation.
And I’m happy to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great, thank you.
Any questions?
I believe…
Thank you very much.
I think we have two people signed up to speak.
Celia Cole.
CELIA COLE: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Good morning.
MS. COLE: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners.
My name is Celia Cole.
I am the CEO of Feeding Texas, which is the state association of food banks.
I want to thank you for the opportunity to be here today, and for your past support of our efforts to nourish hungry Texans.
I’m here to support the staff recommendation to designate Feeding Texas as the nonprofit organization to administer the Help Feed Hungry Texans program.
We have managed this program since 2015, resulting in the distribution of about a million pounds of venison to the food and secure Texans that we serve.
We have 20 food banks in our state association,
Collectively, they reach every county of Texas through a network of over 3,000 local partners, most of them churches, but also senior centers, boys and girls clubs, and other nonprofits.
And together we serve about four million Texans every year.
Our statewide reach and local distribution network uniquely position us to operate this program.
It ensures the venison donations are safely stored… processed, stored and distributed to communities with the greatest need.
Each of our food banks has a commercial-style warehouse that is equipped to safely receive and store the venison donations, a refrigerated fleet for transporting those donations to our partners, and then that well-established network of local partners that also has the capacity to receive and distribute that venison.
By leveraging our preexisting network, we are able to make sure that the majority of the donations that come through this program go directly to processors to offset their costs of participating in the program.
This provides a vital source of really nutritious, lean protein that we don’t get donated.
So, obviously, it is much loved by our partners and the people we serve.
But, obviously, it also provides an excellent tool for land management, and gives hunters a way to give back to their communities while doing their favorite sport.
So, we’ve taken a lot of steps over the last year to grow the program.
And we hope that growth will continue.
So, I will just close by saying I think this program is really a testament to the hunters who participate and the processors.
Also really successful partnership we have built with Texas Parks and Wildlife over the past ten years.
So, thank you so much for your consideration.
Happy to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Sure.
Has the federal reduction of grants to organizations like yourself, is that having an adverse affect on you?
MS. COLE: Unfortunately, yes.
We have lost millions of dollars in the last several months, including funding for a local food purchase program, as well as some funding that was supposed to send additional USDA commodities to food banks.
So, we are definitely concerned.
We are seeing really heightened need in our communities, kind of at the level during the pandemic.
I think largely due to inflation and food and other… the cost of other basic needs.
So, definitely concerned, and makes this program that much more important to us.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: And do you think other people will step into the gap and fill…
“The Chronicle” in Houston had a large article on this.
MS. COLE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: So, will somebody fill the gap?
I mean, clearly, this is one small part of that food bank.
MS. COLE: Yeah.
I mean, we currently distribute three quarters of a billion pounds of food every year.
So, this is one piece of that.
Unfortunately, there is no way…
I don’t think that private philanthropy could make up the loss, particularly in the cuts that are going to come through to the SNAP program, the former food stamp program.
That program puts about nine meals on the table for every one meal we are able, so it operators at a scale so much greater.
So, those are the cuts that are the most concerning to us.
And, you know, we have had a great relationship with the Texas Department of Agriculture and USDA for decades.
So, we will continue to work with them.
And we’re confident that they’ll continue to support food banks with USDA commodities,
But it’s the bigger cuts, I think, to that SNAP program that are most concerning to us.
Thank you for your question.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Yeah.
You bet.
Thank you very much for what you do.
Good work.
Thank you.
MS. COLE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Anyone else?
Okay, Mr. Ross Sinicropi.
MR. SINICROPI: I’m also with Feeding Texas.
Nothing further to add.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay.
All right, great, thank you very much.
All right, if there’s no other questions, is there a motion for approval?
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Commissioner Bell, so moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER PATTON: Patton, second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say, “Aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed?
Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you.
Okay.
Action Item No. 5: Texas Statewide Recreational Trail Grants Funding– Recommended Approval of Trail Construction, Renovation and Acquisition Projects.
Mr. Chris Sheffield, please make your presentation.
CHRIS SHEFFIELD: Good morning Chairman and Commissioners.
For the record, my name is Chris Sheffield.
I’m the Manager of the Recreational Trail Program and Recreation Grants in the State Parks Division.
This morning we are requesting your approval of our 2025 recommendations for recreational trail grants.
The federal funds come from the fuel tax paid by off highway vehicle users.
That gets rebated back to the state.
So, a portion of them are to be used for recreational trail funding.
We have a little over $5.2 million in federal funds available to award.
We have an additional amount of over $1.5 million in state funds from the sporting goods sales tax also to award for recreational trail grants.
And that leaves a total of, again, over $6.8 million to award.
We had 56 projects submitted by our February deadline.
They requested over $13 million in funding.
Our State Trail Advisory Committee reviews these.
They are made up of a number of different… representatives from different trail user groups.
They rate the projects for quality cost effectiveness, recreational opportunity and geographic distribution of funds.
And then that happens to be done in prior years, where requesting an allocation of $900,000 that would fund trail improvements in our existing state park systems.
Seen here are some of the parks that have upcoming or in progress projects.
We have had five total public comments, with the majority in agreement.
Some respondents did want more information about the program.
And that is available on our website and our public guidance documents.
We have two motions for you:
Motion 1: “The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission approves funding for 24 trail projects listed in Exhibit A, and a $900,000 allocation for state park trail improvements, for a total amount of $6,804,642. “
The second motion allows us to fund further down the list if more funding is available.
“The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission approves funding for projects listed in Exhibit A, in the amount of additional funding that is made available in the current fiscal year. “
Thank you, and I can take questions if you have them.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great, any questions for Mr. Sheffield?
All right.
Okay, same question.
If the $5.2 million of federal funds goes away, or will it go away, it’s a fuel tax.
Is that concerning?
MR. SHEFFIELD: It is in the Highway Bill.
And so, I think this year’s appropriation is solid.
The Highway Bill will come back up in, I guess, next September.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: So, it may be on the block as well… chopping block?
MR. SHEFFIELD: It’s always a concern, yeah.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay.
And has it been pretty consistent in terms of the federal money that’s been provided? MR. SHEFFIELD: It has been.
Since ’92, it’s been very consistent.
It has a pretty good constituency in that the off highway vehicle users and the equestrians, all those people are supportive of this.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great.
Okay.
All right.
Thanks very much.
So, Motion 1 for approval.
“Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission approves funding for 24 trail projects listed in Exhibit A, and a $900,000 allocation for state park trail improvements, for a total amount of $6,804,642.”
Do I have a motion?
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: Doggett approves.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER ROWLING: Rowling, second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor please say, “Aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed?
Hearing none, motion carries.
Motion 2 for approval: “Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission approves funding for projects listed in Exhibit A in the amount of additional funding that is made available in the current fiscal year.”
Do I have a motion?
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: Doggett approves.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER FOSTER: Second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say, “Aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed?
Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you.
Action Item No. 6: Disposition of Land– Williamson County– Approximately 56 acres at Twin Lakes Park.
Mr. David.
STAN DAVID: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners.
For the record, my name is Stan David.
I’m with the Land Conservation Program.
This presentation is regards to disposition of land– Williamson County– approximately 56 acres at Twin Lakes Park.
Red star is Williamson County.
This is a more zoomed-in map where you can see the Twin Lakes Park red star.
Twin Lakes Park is located in Cedar Park, and has been jointly operated by Williamson County and the YMCA for 30 years.
Twin Lakes Park offers many very nice amenities, listed there in the slide.
In 1994, after legislative direction, TxDOT transferred 50 acres of what is now Twin Lakes Park to Texas Parks and Wildlife with the requirement that TPWD allow Williamson County to operate the property as a public park.
In 2012, TxDOT transferred an additional six acres to TPWD, which was added to the park.
TPWD now seeks to transfer full ownership of the property to Williamson County.
Transferring the property to the county will reduce operational oversight responsibilities on TPWD, while not reducing the quality of services provided by Williamson County.
As a condition of the transfer, Williamson County will be required to continue to operate the property as a public park.
Red outline of the park there, you can see some of the many amenities there in the satellite view.
Five responses– all agree.
Staff recommends that the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission adopt the following motion:
“The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission adopts a resolution as attached as Exhibit A.”
That concludes the presentation.
And I can answer any question you might have.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great.
Any questions for Mr. David?
COMMISSIONER PATTON: Patton.
On the diagram there’s a red outline.
Is that just the park, or is that the…
MR. DAVID: That’s the 56 acres.
Yes, Sir.
So they have pretty much covered the full 56 acres with amenities.
COMMISSIONER PATTON: Is there any part out…
So, the park is the total… the park is 56 acres and the… it’s all one in the same, right?
MR. DAVID: Yes, Sir.
Yes, Sir.
COMMISSIONER PATTON: So, we own their whole park?
MR. DAVID: Correct.
COMMISSIONER PATTON: Got it, all right.
Just wanted to clarify that.
Thank you.
COMMISSIONER TIMMERMAN: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Yes, Sir?
COMMISSIONER TIMMERMAN: I will be abstaining on this item.
I’m on the board of Central Texas YMCA.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Understood.
Okay, thanks very much.
Appreciate that, Mr. Timmerman.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right.
If not, do I have a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER ROWLING: Rowling, so moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Bell, second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say, “Aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any Opposed?
Hearing none, motion carries.
MR. DAVID: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Action Item No. 7: Lease of Land, Anderson County, approximately 543 acres of the Gus Engeling Wildlife Management Area.
Dr. Whitney Gann, please make your presentation.
DR. WHITNEY GANN: Good morning, Chairman, Commission.
I’m going to present a request for a lease of land on the Gus Engeling Wildlife Management Area.
The Gus Engeling Wildlife Management Area is located in Anderson County, as illustrated by the red star on the map.
And we can zoom in.
You can see that the Gus Engeling WMA is north of Palestine, Texas.
The Gus Engeling WMA is located in northwest Anderson County.
It’s a 10,958 acre area that was purchased between 1950 and 1960, under the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act using federal aid and wildlife restoration program funds.
The WMA’s primary purpose is to function as a wildlife research and demonstration area for the Post Oak Savannah ecoregion.
Trinity Gas, LLC, requests a lease of several tracts that total approximately 543 acres to store and retrieve natural gas from underground.
The location for natural gas injection and retrieval is on an adjacent property.
So, no anticipated impacts to the service of the WMA will take place.
We’ll have minimal ingress… or egress, and any access would be associated with long-term monitoring for leaks.
Outlined in red is the boundary of the Gus Engeling WMA.
In yellow, are the two adjacent underground storage lease potential areas.
To date, we’ve received eight responses– five are against, one is neutral, and two are pro.
The against comments have a general sentiment and objection to any industry on state-owned public lands.
Staff recommends that the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission adopt the following motion:
“The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission authorizes the Executive Director to take all necessary steps to grant an approximate 543 acre lease at the Gus Engeling Wildlife Management Area.”
And I’ll take any questions at this time.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great, thank you.
Any questions by the Commission?
All right.
Thank you, Dr. Gann.
DR. GANN: Thank you,.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER FOSTER: So moved, Foster.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER TIMMERMAN: Timmerman, second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor please say, “Aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed?
Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you.
Action Item No. 8: Disposition of Land– Parker County– approximately 3.8 acres near Lake Mineral Wells State Park and Trailway.
Mr. Zach Spector, please make your presentation.
ZACH SPECTOR: Good morning, Chairman, Commission.
For the record, my name is Zach Spector.
We are going to talk about a disposition of approximately 3.8 acres near Lake Mineral Wells Trailway in Parker County.
Parker County is located in north Texas, as indicated by the star on the attached map.
Zoomed in, you can see that Parker County is just west of Fort Worth and Tarrant County, and Lake Mineral Wells is to the west of the County.
In 1995, Texas Parks and Wildlife received approximately 295 acres of a former railroad right-of-way in a quitclaim deed that led to the establishment of Lake Mineral Wells Trailway.
The quitclaim included approximately the 3.8 acre right-of-way that was never developed and is disconnected from the rest of the trailway.
Staff received a request from a private landowner to dispose of this right-of-way.
We do not utilize this right-of-way, nor is it connected to other TPWD property or facilities.
Staff believes that the current right-of-way ownership will serve no future use to the department.
It is no longer in our best interest, and staff proposes quitclaiming TPWD’s interest to the owner of the underlying property in exchange for fair market value of this right-of-way.
The attached map you can see in yellow the proposed right of way.
And in red, the disconnected Lake Mineral Wells trailway.
To date, we have received six responses– three comments agree with the disposition, three disagree.
Reading through the disagreement, there appears to be a misunderstanding that we will be compensated for this, and that this is not going to affect the state park or the trailway in any way.
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.
I’m happy to answer questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any questions for Mr. Spector?
If not, is there a motion for approval?
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Commissioner Bell, so moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER PATTON: Second, Patton.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor please say, “Aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed?
Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you.
Action Item No. 9: Land Acquisition– Walker County– approximately one acre at Huntsville State Park.
Mr. Trey Vick, please make your presentation.
TREY VICK: Great.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners.
For the record, my name’s Trey Vick, I’m with Land Conservation Program.
I will be presenting a one-acre acquisition in Walker County.
Walker County is in southeast Texas, identified here on the map with the red star.
Huntsville State Park sits just south of the city of Huntsville.
Huntsville State Park’s approximately 2,100 acres located in Walker County.
TPWD staff has located a one acre vacant lot on the southwestern portion of the park available for purchase.
Acquisition would improve staff access to the remote areas of the park that are difficult to access now, including the southern portion of Lake Raven.
Improved access would also expand habitat management opportunities for TPWD.
As you can see here, the red outline is Huntsville State Park.
The proposed acquisition is the small yellow rectangle there on the bottom left-hand portion of the map.
As of this morning, we received eight responses– all eight in agree.
And staff recommends that the Parks and Wildlife Commission adopt the following motion:
“The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission authorizes the Executive Director to take all necessary steps to acquire approximately one acre in Walker County adjacent to Huntsville State Park.”
And I’d be happy to answer questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great, thank you.
Any questions?
If not, is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER ROWLING: Rowling, so moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER TIMMERMAN: Timmerman, second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor please say, “Aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed?
Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you, Mr. Vick.
And our final Action Item today is a big one.
Briefing Item No. 1: Status of the Oyster Fishery and Resource in Texas.
Robin Riechers.
Mr. Riechers.
ROBIN RIECHERS: Chairman and Commissioners, for the record my name is Robin Riechers.
I’m Director of Coastal Fisheries.
And as the Chairman indicated last year… or last meeting, he had asked for this briefing.
So, what we are going to do, we have talked a lot about oysters since the last legislative session.
Several things have come before you.
And I’m going to try at a 40,000 foot level bring that all together, and then highlight some real strategic activities that you all have asked us to do with the industry.
And then lastly, point towards the future a little bit on some of the activities that we’re doing.
So, the first one I kind of want to hit, because we have talked a lot about commercial oyster mariculture, and we’ve certainly recently passed things dealing with Certificates of Location.
And we’re working on that.
But I also want to point out that we do have this public reef fishery that we have.
It runs from November to April.
There are 545 licenses in that fishery.
And unfortunately, for us, in the past three seasons there have been very few areas open at the beginning of the seasons.
Approximately out of the 28 Department of State Health Services areas– and that’s how we open those, by those different areas– we’ve been able to open either eight to ten at the beginning of each season.
Now, what we do is we monitor the season.
And before the season we basically use a metric trying to determine whether there’s enough market oysters to create a reasonable level of harvest off of those areas.
And if so, we open them.
If it’s below a certain metric, we don’t open those and we keep those closed.
Throughout the year we go ahead and monitor those.
And we will open areas if they meet the metric and grow into the metric.
And, of course, we will close them if they get below that metric as well.
And that metric is designed to really also protect the habitat.
Because, of course, oysters are both a resource source for food, but they are also a critical element of the habitat and the ecosystem services and the ecological services that they provide.
And so, that’s the reason why we went to this open and closed kind of situation, where years and years ago we did not have that kind of authority.
So, this is kind of an historic look at both our public harvest landings.
Public harvest, as compared to the leases, typically make up about 75 percent of our landings, on average.
Little bit busy of a slide here, but to your left it’s the number of sacks in thousands.
To your right is the value in millions of dollars.
And so what you can see, and especially looking back towards the left-hand side, from about ‘06, ‘07, if you look at that… the numbers of sacks, we were up about 800 to a million sacks in that range.
And you see a much more stable pattern.
And if you graph that back in time it would be a much more stable pattern, as well.
Well, right about that time is when we had Hurricane Ike and we lost about 8,000 consolidated acres in Galveston Bay.
What that basically did… Galveston Bay had made up anywhere from 75 to 90 percent of our harvest production on most years.
Now they are basically equivalent to the other bay systems, each ranging in 25 to 30 percent each year.
And that’s equivalent to Matagorda, San Antonio Bay and Aransas Bay system.
And so that erratic pattern that you see after that we really believe… and you can mark it by some severe weather events that we typically have here in Texas.
And whether it’s the flooding that occurred in Copano Bay in ‘21 and ‘22, whether it was Hurricane Beryl in Galveston Bay last year, where it stayed fresh for about eight to nine weeks.
Oysters can survive fresh hits like that for about two weeks.
But after that you end up with severe mortalities.
And certainly that occurred in Galveston Bay last year.
When we look at that downward trend, as you all recall we passed quite a few rules and legislature got involved with House Bill 51, in 2017.
There was action here at this Commission.
And you do see that downward trend.
And we are at a level that’s more like 200,000 sacks.
And that is a double-edged sword, though, because, remember, we are using those closures to protect that habitat and those ecosystem services that oysters provide there, in addition to the resource as a food.
Next I’ll turn… and, of course, Dr. Lindsay Campbell presented to you earlier today.
And you have heard quite a bit about cultivated oyster mariculture in the last several meetings.
But she presented to you the reduction in fees and the triploid oyster seed issue.
But I’m going to remind you just of a couple of things that when we presented those rules to you in November of ’24, that also helped the industry out.
And I just wanted to share those again with you.
We went from 2.5-inch limit to a 2-inch limit.
There’s market for those oysters.
And when we originally put this in place we were fearful that our law enforcement couldn’t tell the difference between… and there would be mixing and mingling of wild caught oysters and those mariculture oysters.
They assured us now that they can do that, so we were about to reduce that limit.
We also, of course, we want a full Texas triploid line eventually.
We pushed the date out on that because we knew we weren’t meeting that when we were visiting with our Texas A&M people who were working on that for us.
So, we pushed that date out to 2023.
And then, of course, another thing that we did was clarify that, yes, that tumbling, which is really the sorting of the mariculture oysters, could occur on land without any chance of penalty.
And so, those were things that we did to help the industry out as well.
At the last meeting we talked a little bit about working with USDA.
We’ve been sharing information with them regarding crop insurance policies, providing that information about the environmental parameters and the regulations of the program.
And what we’ve learned is that it basically takes the industry members being in place for four years before they can start to be umbrellaed underneath that program, and that’s basically to create some level of history for USDA to kind of help with that.
But we will continue to work with them on that and try to make that available to our industry members here.
Lastly, probably the one we want to highlight, is that we are going to… or we are in the process of creating an economic impact study for the mariculture industry of the State of Texas.
We believe that now that they have about three years under their belt, that will be useful to them to understand how that one dollar spent on a mariculture oyster rolls through the economy, and how many jobs and other dollars it creates.
And so, we’re going to finish that up and get that to industry as soon as we can.
So, clearly, all of this takes a lot of stakeholder engagement.
And I just want to highlight this.
We’ve had oyster working groups and oyster restoration work groups for quite some time, but we officially appointed an oyster advisory committee at the direction of the chairman.
It’s a 13-member committee representing industry academia and NGOs.
And since they were formed in 2024, we’ve met with that group five times.
In addition to that, in the last legislative session, there was a Governor’s Mariculture Advisory Group, or Taskforce, created.
That’s a seven-member group.
And that group was appointed… roughly finished up being appointed in November of 2024.
And that group has met twice this year.
And then lastly, we‘ve kept the Oyster Restoration Workgroup that we had.
It is made up mostly of practitioners, people who are doing restoration activities.
People at Heart Research Institute, University of Texas, at Marine Science Center, Nature Conservancy, our bays and estuary programs.
And so, those are people that really get together and share the lessons learned on restoration.
Because it’s both an art and a science.
And also just to make sure that we are coordinating our efforts as we apply for grants together, and that sort of thing, just to make sure that we are picking the highest priority areas and doing the best work that we all can do.
So, in January of 2025, you adopted the Certificate of Location Program, the rules that basically help us establish that.
Of course, it was passed during the last legislative session.
And that allowed us to created additional Certificates of Location in bay systems outside of Galveston Bay and for restoration purposes.
We are continuing to work on the draft citing and application procedures.
We have ongoing coordination with GLO and the U.S. Corps of engineers.
But as asked by the Chairman last meeting, we’ve now set our meetings in…. for meeting with the Oyster Advisory Committee and the Coastal Resources Advisory Committee to take this before them in June, early June.
Then after that we anticipate we will hold those public workshops, which basically will allow anyone interested in a COL to come to those meetings, understand better what our application procedures are going to be, and how we’re going to go about that citing, which is going to be very similar to what we’ve used for the mariculture program.
But it will allow us to inform the public about how we anticipate doing that.
And then we would hope that we can open that consulting and application period no later than September 1, of 2025.
So, it’s hard to talk about oyster these days without talking some about the restoration activities that we do, because there are many.
But what I really want to focus on on this particular slide is that House Bill 51, as we all know in 2017, really for the first time brought shell that was being harvested and oysters that were being shucked, bringing some of that shell back into the water.
Really quite a historic event in that perspective.
So, we are using those dollars and/or shell that is given to us to do that.
We are also obviously looking at grants and philanthropic donations.
And a lot of times, especially with the grants, that will determine what type of reefs are built by these types of restoration projects.
And when I say “what types of reefs,” whether it’s in areas that can be fished or areas that may be closed or cannot be fished.
We’ve done over 1,800 acres of restored oyster reef since Hurricane Ike.
That’s really when most of the restoration activity really started, both with us and with the outside interest groups.
And I do want to note we have now restored over 100 acres using that House Bill 51 dollars and/or cultch material.
The future restoration projects I would like to highlight– and we may have mentioned these in one of our past presentations, but they are quite significant— one is in east Galveston Bay, one is in upper Galveston Bay.
The total of those is about 87 acres in total oyster reef restored.
That’s to the tune of about $16 million.
Those both come from natural resource damage assessment Deep Water Horizon monies
And so, obviously, a lot of activity going on with this.
That goes through the federal trustees, as well as the state trustees that work in the Natural Resource Damage Assessment Program.
All of those will be non-harvestable reefs, basically in places that ensure that we’re getting those ecological values, but they won’t be allowed to be harvested.
In addition, we might have mentioned to you, as well, this more recent grant that we’ve received In Mission Aransas estuary.
It’s got a host of partners from Nature Conservancy, Heart Research Institute, University of Texas, as well as local interest groups in the fishing community that have also helped as we have talked about this one.
And what this is, is a network of non-harvestable reefs across those acreages.
And it’s really testing a philosophy that’s been talked about a lot, which is to create these sanctuary reefs that then feed other reefs that can be harvested.
But it’s to ensure we always have that ongoing spat production and enough oysters to carry us forward, even in the face of some of these, kind of, episodic, fresh-it events that we will have.
So, Commissioner Bell asked earlier about the oyster buyback summary, so I wanted to give you a quick highlight of… preliminary highlight of that.
Before this, of course, we got our authority to do that in 2017, create a buyback.
We started those rounds, and we typically would do a reversed bid procedure.
That worked very well when we did buybacks in shrimp, crabs and finfish.
Over those eight rounds, we had 78 licenses, or bids, received, and we were only able to purchase three at a price of $7,150, so about $21,000.
That reverse bid procedure basically has as a backstop a metric that we created the value of that license.
So, if the bid is below that, we would accept it.
If the bid is not below that, we would not accept it.
And, of course, again, we weren’t as successful as we thought we should be.
So, what that did lead us to do is starting to talk.
Because we had had philanthropic donations in past buybacks that would allow us to pay over a certain amount or be in addition to the dollars that we could provide.
And so we started having discussions with those same individuals and groups that we had worked with in shrimp buyback and finfish and crabs.
And so amongst the parties we all decided we were going to try to change this up into a flat-rate fee offer of $30,000 for the license.
And so we put that out to our industry members on March 14.
It will close on May 31.
We, of course, tried to advertise that in a number of ways, with public meetings and in-person activities along the coast, and through our different user groups that we have.
And to date, we do have, as I indicated earlier, Commissioner Bell, 81 that have been received.
We will begin, or we will continue discussions with our philanthropic community about that.
Obviously, the target was 150.
That target wasn’t met, but I will tell you I think a lot of folks are excited that we have 81 right now.
Many people deem that as a pretty big success, and so we are certainly excited about having those further discussion with those groups.
Of course, it’s philanthropic dollars.
And they had some say in how that money gets spent, as well.
And so we are having those conversations with them as we speak, and will continue right after it closes up here in about a week or so.
In addition to that, I wanted to just, kind of, inform.
Because obviously we are an applied research outfit as well as a regulatory outfit.
And so, I wanted to share with you some of the continued work that we try to do when we think about our assessing of oyster beds out there.
And one of the things we use is a hydraulic tong activity, or sampling gear, in addition to dredge sampling, which is similar to what may go on in industry.
We obviously do our dredge sampling in a very systematic way, over and over.
But hydraulic tongs allow us to actually look at that, compare it to what we’re also seeing with our dredge sampling.
And there may be ways we can improve using both of those our indications of what’s going on in those reefs.
The hydraulic tongs really allow you to look at what’s going on at the top and further down into the substrate, and really gives you a better picture of overall oyster reef health, if you will.
In addition to that, we are looking at different stock assessment techniques that we may use as well. Some other states use some of these.
Some get to a point… and I will say those states have relatively small amount of acreages and not as large an area to sample as we have.
But they do get to a point where they can maybe create a finer measurement of what can be removed from that oyster reef using that stock assessment technique each year.
And then lastly, we are going to look at, and continue looking at, oyster restoration techniques.
The Chairman has asked us numerous times to try to find ways to do more restoration faster.
And so, we clearly are going to continue to look at different materials.
But we’re also looking at the cost benefit of different ways to create those oyster reefs– whether it’s a six- inch layer, whether it’s a one-inch layer.
Obviously, a six-inch layer is going to cost more than a one.
But the real question is: after five years which is better and how much it costs to get you there.
And then there’s also mounding that we can do around… and you’d then let the reef fill in.
And so we’re going to test those… continue to test those kinds of things as well.
Already talked to you a little bit about some of the oyster larval transport modelling that we may have in some of those restoration studies, especially in that Aransas one.
But we’re also doing that in Galveston Bay, and looking at that.
And we think all of those different studies that occur will eventually help us when we think about citing restoration, citing COLs, and really how we go about our restoration business.
And so, clearly, we still have a lot of work to do.
And we’re going to continue doing that work as quickly as we can.
But with that, I would certainly be happy to answer any questions.
COMMISSIONER PATTON: Patton.
Do you mind going back to your first slide, the one with the graph?
It talked about the 200,000 sacks.
I was first wondering how many oysters are typically in a sack, and how much would a sack weigh?
MR. RIECHERS: A sack will weigh… a sack is defined as 110 pounds, and it’s 210, or so, oysters.
Obviously, that’s different sized oysters weighing different amounts.
COMMISSIONER PATTON: Right., okay.
And then my… trying to make notes as we went.
With the yellow line, those are the… those are the sacks…
MR. RIECHERS: Yes, Sir.
COMMISSIONER PATTON: Then the blue line?
What does that blue line mean?
MR. RIECHERS: That’s “X” vessel value, or dollars that are paid for the sack to the individual who is selling the sack– from the wholesaler or whomever it may be; restaurant.
It’s clearly one of the things you can see by looking at both those lines.
We have ranged in the framework of anywhere from… and we’ll call it… because now we’re in the 200 sacks… 200,000 sacks per year to as much as 800,000 sacks per year.
And from a value perspective it seemingly ranges in that typical $10 million to a $30 million industry here in Texas.
COMMISSIONER PATTON: So, really, I would think as the supply would go down, the price would go up.
But it really isn’t the price.
I mean, they really moved in lockstep.
Do you have an opinion on that?
MR. RIECHERS: They have moved in…
COMMISSIONER PATTON: Because maybe there’s other supply from the east coast and Mexico, Pacific, I don’t know where, but…
MR. RIECHERS: Well, what I will do, Commissioner Patton, is let you look at that 2014, 2015 number.
And that’s kind of a low point in that time frame.
And then you can see that the blue line, and of course the value of the sacks– we’ll talk sacks and value.
Sacks and value started going up dramatically at that point in time.
That was the point in time when we were the only game in the Gulf, basically.
Florida had closed their fishery entirely for five years.
Alabama had issues with their fisheries, and it was all but closed.
Mississippi and Louisiana had flooding.
And so, that’s when the price of sacks started going up tremendously.
And that’s when we saw people harvesting in areas that we had never seen them harvest before.
That’s when we passed rules regarding a 300-foot buffer on shorelines.
We closed some of those very sensitive minor bay systems where there was harvest going on that traditionally would not have received harvest.
So, that clearly drove activity going up here in the State of Texas.
But you are right.
There are other sources, and certainly they’ve come back online, as we’ve gone through time from that high point in about 2019, 2020.
COMMISSIONER PATTON: And this grant would only be really relevant to the 534 license holders, is that right?
MR. RIECHERS: That is correct, this is the public oyster harvest.
COMMISSIONER PATTON: Public.
So is there a… I was going to ask about the mariculture… How many sacks did– maybe last year is our best year– how many sacks did we have in the mariculture?
MR. RIECHERS: We did that on the fly in November.
And it was about 1/50th of this amount, as I’m recalling.
COMMISSIONER PATTON: 1/50th.
So like 10,000 or something, 20,000?
DR. CAMPBELL: So, approximately, in 2024, about 5,500 sacks equivalent.
COMMISSIONER PATTON: Sacks.
Okay, so it’s still… Now, are there private harvest landings that generate sacks as well?
MR. RIECHERS: You talking about Certificates of Location?
COMMISSIONER PATTON: Maybe.
I really don’t know.
I’m sorry.
MR. RIECHERS: Okay, well, private lease… And, again, typically, on average, the leaseholder sacks have been about 25 percent of what public reef holder sacks have been.
About 25 percent of the harvest.
In a more recent two or three years, probably closer to 30 or 35 percent.
But you have to remember those Certificates of Location are also impacted by those same weather events, except that they’re only in Galveston Bay right now.
But as we move down the coast they will also be impacted.
As well as… In fact, the mariculture, as David Aparkio stated earlier, they are also subject to hurricanes and the forces of nature as well.
COMMISSIONER PATTON: And then do you anticipate if we are successful with the 81 buybacks, I don’t know the percentage 81 of 534, that’s 7 or 8 percent maybe?
How much?
What is it?
COMMISSIONER ROWLING: 15 percent.
COMMISSIONER PATTON: 15 percent, okay.
Do you think that that’s going to… it’s got to affect the gross number, right, by 15 percent?
MR. RIECHERS: Well, certainly it affects the gross number of licenses.
But I think there is an important fact– and I should have shared it with you as we talked about that 81 licenses, there’s really two important facts.
One is that 56 percent of those licenses that have been turned in to date have showed landings in three of the last five years.
The other is that just over 50 percent also are selling back the only license that they hold, when we look at that and analyze it by individual customer.
COMMISSIONER PATTON: Okay.
So, you can’t just ratably apply it over the whole harvest?
MR. RIECHERS: It’s not going to be one for one, but we clearly are getting some licenses, or quite a few, over half the licenses that have been harvesting in the last five years.
COMMISSIONER PATTON: All right, that’s all I have.
COMMERCIONER ROWLING: Commissioner Rowling.
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: Commissioner Doggett.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: One, thank you for this data.
I mean, it’s very revealing.
I mean, from a million sacks– I know you like to say 800,000, but we hit a million four times– down to 200,000.
Wow, that’s a huge impact.
And so, it… what it brings into focus is that we really got to take care of these healthy reefs, right?
MR. RIECHERS: Yes, Sir.
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: And the degredated reefs.
We got to pay a lot of attention to those.
But, I mean, to be, you know, 20 percent of the production that we did at the height is pretty alarming.
I hear about that.
I was very fortunate I got to spend a little time with some oyster farmers.
And I want to tell you, those are some passionate folks out there.
And it’s… they are really great Texans.
I mean, they are just really passionate about the bay area and about the farming they do and about the wildlife and the oyster beds– the majority.
And then there are some that are just interested in the number of sacks they can get, right?
But thank goodness the vast majority have done this for generations.
And they really want to take care of the land.
And they are a testament to all the good things Texas, I think.
So if we could, you gave us a good 3,000.
I got about four things.
If we could come down considerably from the 3,000-foot level and talk about those things.
So, the first would be the license renewal fee, which is $550, is that right?
MR. RIECHERS: It’s $441 for a resident license, of which we only have about… it’s 55 nonresident license, 45, I believe.
I will get that right number for you.
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: And is it the same amount regardless of the size of the boat?
MR. RIECHERS: Yes, Sir.
It’s just a license for the vessel regardless of size.
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: And back on the premise, the initial premise that we really need to take care of our healthy reefs and the degredated reefs, why would we charge the same amount for 70-foot boat that we charge for a 24-foot boat?
Do you know?
MR. RIECHERS: Well, I would just say it’s by long-term practice.
And it’s the same way…
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: We can stop right there…
MR. RIECHERS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: We always like to jump all over long-term practice, right?
So, what I would do… and I asked the Chairman that we looked at that.
You know, these 70-foot boats are the ones that are pulling these four-foot dredges, they’re bringing up 500 pounds at a time and devastating some of the reefs.
Now that can be done there a manner that protects the reef, but I think a lot of times it is not.
So why don’t we look at a progressive fee so the independent guy that’s got a 24-foot boat, you know, if that’s $550 or $441, that might make sense.
But the industry guys, they got a 70-foot boat that are dragging the four-foot… I would suggest that their renewal fee is substantially more.
Just because of the impact it has on our healthy reefs, all right?
So I would suggest to look at that.
And let’s come up with a consensus on what makes sense on that front.
I don’t know why it couldn’t be $4,000, $5,000, actually, for the renewal of the big boat, which I think is taking many, many, many more sacks than the smaller boats are.
The second issue, are you kind of familiar with the three-foot and four-foot dredges?
MR. RIECHERS: Familiar to the extent that we have lots of different size dredges that we use throughout the Texas coastline.
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: I know the difference is a foot.
But that’s not really what I’m talking about.
MR. RIECHERS: Right.
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: The four-foot dredge, as I understand it, the teeth are located a lot closer together, it goes deeper and it weighs a lot more, and they bring up, like I said earlier, 500 pounds of reef when they dredge it.
I would suggest another hard look.
And I know traditionally we hadn’t distinguished between what size dredge it is.
Back to the original premise that we really have to protect– only producing 20 percent of what we did before– we really got to protect these healthy reefs, right?
And… I mean, I wouldn’t be opposed to banning four-foot dredges.
I don’t know that that’s… we’d need to research all that.
But the three-foot dredge gets you sacks, but does a lot less damage.
And I understand that four-foot goes really deep.
And if we don’t have the right surveillance and management of that, it can degrade a reef horribly.
And so I would ask that we do some research on the four-foot versus three-foot, with one extreme being to ban the four-foot.
But if not, we charge more for that, right?
Another progressive.
I mean, I don’t know why you would charge the same for a three-foot that you would a four-foot, because you are doing much more damage to the reef with the four-foot.
So, I would suggest we look at all that.
And maybe there is a progressive fee that we charge– or ban it.
But I think it’s worth looking at, giving the degradation of the entire reef system, right?
So, we need to look at everything differently these days.
All right?
So, we’re getting to the end here.
One of the third issues is what is… is there a sack limit?
MR. RIECHERS: It’s 30 sacks.
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: 30 sacks.
MR. RIECHERS: Yes, 30 sacks per day.
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: Well, I think independents typically limit themselves to 15 sacks voluntarily.
MR. RIECHERS: There are certain dealers whot limit the people who are coming to them to sell sacks on a daily basis, yes.
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: And so the thought behind that, is they’re being good environmentalists, right– a lot of the farmers, and who’s buying it.
But they’re taking care of those reefs that they’re farming.
I would think that we need to tighten up the number of sacks.
I mean, from 30.
But let’s review that as well, the sack limits that we have on boats.
All right?
And finally, are you a believer in the leases for these partially degredated leases… reefs?
MR. RIECHERS: Certainly that’s what the statute provided us.
And our guidelines have now set out that we can use partially degraded reefs and cite COLs on them.
Before the legislation that changed, we could not have done that.
And so, yes, clearly we supported that and tried to help that along.
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: Like the Chairman, my short PhD with these farmers.
It seems to me that those are great folks to give these long-term leases to the degredated reef because they love it and they treat it as if it’s their own.
So, they take care of that reef.
And I think you could see a big rebound in a lot of the degredated reefs if leased to people with that mindset.
You know, leased with folks who are going to take care of that reef– because that could be their future, right, so that they help that reef come along– versus some of the industry guys that would go onto a reef and see how many sacks they could get, right?
So, I think we’re headed the right direction on the GLO partially degredated reef leases, I really like that.
And so the more we can do on that front I think can have a very meaningful, impactful… be impactful for the reefs as a whole.
So, I’m pretty excited about that.
But if we could look at all that, I think we can change some rules that help get us back to somewhere in between this 200,000 and a million sacks.
And being a guy who just loves oysters, like no tomorrow, I’m a big proponent.
And I’m equally a proponent for the mariculture.
I think that’s pretty exciting.
A lot of growth to go there.
But we got to make it that the economics is something that gets people excited.
Not just people who love oyster farming, but get folks economically excited about it.
And so we are sort of uniquely positioned to be able to do some of those things, I think.
So, that’s what I got.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Anyone else?
COMMISSIONER ROWLING: Yes, Commissioner Rowling.
Robin, you answered my first question, which was what percentage of the 81 we are buying back are active?
It’s about half of them, or less than half are active?
MR. RIECHERS: Over 50 percent showed some landings in the last five years.
COMMISSIONER ROWLING: Is that the definition of “active?”
MR. RIECHERS: Well, active is landings, yes.
That’s the way we’re doing it.
We’re not differentiating whether it’s ten pounds or… ten sacks or 3,000 sacks.
COMMISSIONER ROWLING: Any landings in five years is considered an active life cycle?
MR. RIECHERS: Well, we just look back five years as we got these license applications, trying to get some determination are we buying just completely inactive licenses or are we getting some that are active?
And so, the flip side of that is 20 percent showed no landings in the last five years, but plus-50 percent showed landings in three of the last five years, at least.
COMMISSIONER ROWLING: What percentage of the 534 are considered active?
MR. RIECHERS: Last year there were 310 active.
Five years before that it was 485, 490, it had almost gotten up to the 500 mark.
COMMISSIONER ROWLING: Okay, so help me understand this.
It’s $10 million of total value.
And say there’s 400 of them active.
That is $25,000 per boat.
That doesn’t pay for the gas.
I don’t follow the math on the value of the landings versus how many people are out there fishing the resource.
MR. RIECHERS: So, maybe I can help with that a little bit.
So, clearly, obviously, with the amount of closures that we’ve had in the past few years– and when I say closures as we start the season not as many areas being open– we haven’t had the full fleet go out like we might have had in the early 2000s, or a large part of the fleet.
And it’s a very mobile fleet.
It can move from Galveston to Aransas in just a day, or two days.
Again, some boats will come in and out, depending on what they’re doing.
But clearly, as you suggest, and I think you hit on a good point, people are probably doing other activities. And what those other activities are, we certainly can’t know.
Some of them could be participating in other fisheries, like the shrimp fishery, which a lot of these vessels are easy crossover vessels for that.
But some of them are not like the luggars that Commissioner Doggett mentioned ago.
Those obviously aren’t obviously shrimp boats as well.
But clearly the income on a total value perspective, which is what this is, you clearly aren’t completely… that’s not your sole resource that’s providing your livelihood at this moment in time.
COMMISSIONER ROWLING: But you do feel… that definitely answers part of it.
You do feel, I don’t know. I would suggest maybe we are not accounting for the total value; that this is potentially way understated.
I just think the industry has to be more lucrative than what we’re showing here for them to be more interested.
MR. RIECHERS: All I can share on that is clearly there can be underreporting.
And it is mandatory reporting for the dealer.
But, you know, we also understand that there may be some bad actors out there from time to time.
But it is mandatory reporting.
So, hopefully we are getting all those reports.
And that is what it is showing now.
But, again, I don’t disagree with your point that there could be some value that is going unaccounted for here in some ways.
COMMISSIONER ROWLING: Thanks, Robin.
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: This is the value that the wholesaler pays for the oyster, right?
MR. RIECHERS: That is correct.
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: So, the real margin likely is from the wholesaler to the retail.
MR. RIECHERS: Certainly, if you talk almost with any of the commercial fisheries on the ground that’s where a larger markup occurs.
And If you have been following any of the discussion regarding shrimp and shrimp imports, and all of the shrimp pricing that’s going on, that’s an issue in their industry as well.
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: It looks like the farmer is getting the bad end of that economic ladder, right?
MR. RIECHERS: Certainly they don’t gain those margins that go up above them, that’s exactly correct.
COMMISSIONER TIMMERMAN: I have a question.
Timmerman.
These licenses, these 534 licenses, when do they expire?
Is there an expiration on these things?
Because we are having to buy them back.
Couldn’t we just let them expire?
What is the expiration on those?
MR. RIECHERS: So when the moratorium that was put into place, went into place in 2007, 2008, it… basically, the licensure runs just like your hunting and fishing license.
It runs from September 1 to August 31.
And so each August 31 they expire.
If anyone in sight of that moratorium did not purchase the year before, then they basically have lost that license short of a review board appeal that they could make.
But then that license would go away.
But as long as they’ve been renewing that license, they’ve been able to stay in the fishery, based on the moratorium rules as set forth in the statute.
COMMISSIONER TIMMERMAN: Okay, so it’s a statutory thing.
We couldn’t make the change.
When they expire they expire, and they’re up to the department to decide if they’re going to be renewed or not?
MR. RIECHERS: Well, certainly there’s some questions about renewal that we could possibly address.
Currently, the way we address that is: if they bought in the year before and they’re still the owner of the vessel and they’ve come to purchase the license, we are deeming they have intent to use that commercial license; and therefore, we renew that license.
There are other parts of the statute that might allow us to cut those numbers down in some way.
And, you know, I think Commissioner Bell brought it up several meetings ago, maybe a couple of years ago, about a lottery type of system.
And we do believe that probably would be best served coming to us from some sort of statutory framework.
But certainly the Commission still could take action on something like that.
It probably just holds some level of risk, litigation risk.
COMMISSIONER TIMMERMAN: Okay.
I think it be something we ought to check into.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any other questions?
All right.
Thanks, Robin.
Look, I think you guys were incrementally getting there.
We are improving the rules, we’re reducing fees, triploids, crop insurance, COLs, which I think is ultimately going to be the savior of the oyster industry, buybacks.
You know, I would say, I think that we should be more aggressive in terms of the department, in terms of the renewal of these licenses.
As I understand it, they’ve got to require proof that the vessel… it has an intent to use the vessel for oystering and.. . but we don’t really check that, do we?
MR. RIECHERS: Currently, when they come to renew, no, we do not, Sir.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: And from a regulatory standpoint, manpower standpoint, I’d ask game wardens is that something that we could do?
I mean, if you apply for a renewal, then you simply… you got to pull your boat up to the dock.
And we got an officer that inspects it and says, “You know, that vessel is…, the primary intent is for oystering,” which is what the rules say.
MR. RIECHERS: You want to answer that?
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Here we go.
We got the pro.
LES CASTERLINE: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, good morning.
For the record, my name is Les Casterline.
I’m the Assistant Commander of Fisheries Enforcement for Parks and Wildlife here at headquarters.
To answer your questions, Sir.
Possible yes.
We would have to come up with some framework for that, and some criteria that we’d have to look at.
I know y’all are looking at the total amount of boats.
And of course that would be pretty burdensome.
But I think to begin off, we could start with probably looking– as has been shown with the three to five years back that’s been presented today– and come up with some sort of criteria, whether it’s one year, three years, five years of activity, and that possibly we run those records and then we maybe inspect the vessels that have not been active within that time.
But we would have to develop some sort of framework or criteria that those… that we would inspect.
I believe we could do it.
We do other things.
We do inspections on things such as floating cabins.
We also have some vessel requirements to where there is a maximum length on some of our bay boats.
And that’s achieved by the registration that exists for those boats.
It would be tasking but…
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Could you do it… get the guys to take a video of their boat.
I mean, and submit the video.
Look, if they are fraudulent in their actions, then we’ll find them.
MR. CASTERLINE: Yes, Sir.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: But they take a video and say… I mean, any officer could look at a video and say, “Okay, yeah, that boat, yeah, it’s got engines, it’s got nets, it’s got cargo holds, it’s got…
It’s actually… and it floats.”
MR. CASTERLINE: And I think through the process you would identify all those things and then you would work with that license holder and basically go through a checklist of “they’re stating that they intend to use it.
Okay, let’s go through the process.
How do you intend to use it?”
Then also, as Director Riechers mentioned, we do have some probable reasons that people may not be using those licenses properly, their bays in their area may have not been open for a certain amount of time.
But those could also be things that as you move through that process and you build out a criteria.
Of course we have a review board for the oyster licenses that’s built into that chapter.
So there are different avenues in which even if we go through and inspect to where there is some process for them to possibly argue that they are an active vessel and move through a process if it with was developed.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Well, I would just ask, David, as you guys proceed through this that we look at this renewal process and get more aggressive, and just not make it a free lunch for these folks.
And look, 80, 90 percent of the people are doing the right thing.
And I don’t think that there’s any conspiracy here.
But there should be a minimum number of landings, and the boats should be in an operable basis, versus them sitting around waiting to get a free ride on a buyback on a boat that they have no intention of ever oystering with.
MR. CASTERLINE: Yes, Sir.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: I mean, that’s a pretty good deal.
MR. CASTERLINE: Yes, Sir.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: $500 gets you $30 grand!
I’ll take that deal.
MR. CASTERLINE: Yes, Sir.
There’s other variables we can look at, not only the oyster licenses, but we have several limited entry licenses.
Folks that are generally holding onto licenses and not utilizing them.
You will somewhat see a pattern of folks– you know, the license year is from September 1 to August 31 for all commercial licenses– you may have a small portion that show up just before the end of license year so that they are renewing those licenses simply so that they can renew it again the following year.
So, those could also be things, or patterns, that we look at when doing some sort of a review of their license to see if it’s actually intended to be used.
But I do think that we would have to work through legal, work with coastal fisheries, look at the tools we have and develop what that criteria would be.
And then we would have to provide that criteria to the fisherman so that they know that they’re going to be held accountable for these certain criteria to be met to be considered to have the intent to use that license.
I think it will have to be drawn out, whether that would be in Commission rule or within some policy at the department.
Probably more likely a Commission rule that would set forward those criteria.
But whether it be department employees other than law enforcement or law enforcement, yes, we could come up with something that we could go inspect to try to achieve that.
And then they would also have an avenue for due process to contest that as well.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Absolutely, you bet.
Right.
And we don’t want to apply overt regulation.
I mean, that is not the idea here.
But this is for the greater good of the State of Texas, not for single digit number of commercial operators that are hammering the reefs.
It’s just… I still don’t understand this.
I will get on my soapbox for a moment.
But it’s the equivalent of the State of Texas having acreage that it owns that it says to a farmer, “I will put your crop in for you, I’ll plow it, I’ll fertilize it, I’ll put herbicide on it, I’ll water it.”
And then you get to harvest the crop at this de minimis fee.
And when you harvest that crop, it has huge impact to the State of Texas and to the citizens that are actually using all this farmland. “
I don’t quite understand the logic.
It is a taking of a public resource for a tiny group of people.
And I just… can anyone… Robin, can you comment on just the logic of this?
MR. RIECHERS: Well, I don’t know that I can say that it’s logical.
Obviously it is a natural public resource.
Historically, these have traditionally been fisheries that have been managed through time.
We’ve been more aggressive as a state in putting in limited entry programs, and at least trying to put caps on licenses and get those license numbers down.
But, as you suggest, and certainly we have past Commissioners who clearly wanted to see a greater– and what we call it is “economic rent” in the language of natural resource economists– for the state to get more of a value for the public resource that is being extracted.
And so clearly, Fisheries has been treated differently at the state level maybe than some other natural resources.
And it’s often at the federal level is treated quite differently than other natural resources as well.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right, well, look.
David, we just… we need to look holistically at this.
Expansion and acceleration of the COLs, that is a big, big element.
Mariculture, big issue here.
We need to do something.
And I think we are, but it’s been incremental in nature.
But hopefully over time we can restore the reefs, improve the habitat, and really have a resource that’s available to a growing population of recreational users.
And that’s the thing is, I mean, if you talk to any of the game wardens, I mean, you go out on a bay today and it’s just chockerful of fishermen.
And these activities are having a huge negative effect on those.
Anyway, thank you.
Anything else?
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Chairman, one comment.
And I know we were just talking about the fisheries.
Any chance that we could start getting maybe a draft together of what might look like proposed rules around relicensing?
You know, just to come up with a straw man that we could start looking at based on all the comments that have happened today?
MR. RIECHERS: Well, certainly, I think we would create a draft of licensing as well as some of those gear questions that Commissioner Doggett asked about, and try to get that vetted, make sure our folks here in the agency who have to enforce it, and us as thinking through it from a logistical standpoint, how that would look, pros and cons, obviously in a white paper.
And then also we would get some level of input from our advisory committee that are also helping us through these difficult issues.
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Good.
Commissioner Doggett, you need to learn a little about the oyster wheel.
That is a gastronomic tasting of oysters that if you go down to PMAR, you can… there are all kinds of distinctive tastes in an oyster, so you should do this.
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: Oyster wheel.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: An oyster wheel.
[ LAUGHTER ]
It’s like someone describing wine is what I… a blackberry currant of minerality.
So, anyway.
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: Like the description of the mariculture when we were in Corpus.
She was very articulate about the tastes.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Absolutely.
Robin, thank you very much.
Really well done.
And thanks for all your work you’re doing.
Okay, that is it.
And if you guys will…
I thank you for a great meeting.
I’ve got a couple of comments.
You’ve got to bear with me.
It won’t be that painful.
As this is my last meeting as member of the Commission, the Chair.
I would like to say it’s been a distinct honor and a privilege to serve on the Commission these past six years.
I am grateful to the governor for appointing me to the Commission.
The work has really been immensely rewarding to me personally.
Thank you to all my fellow Commissioners, both those currently here and those who were previously on the Commission.
We had a great conversation last night around the fire… or around a fire pit that was not lit about Reed Morian just so many great chairmen that have come before me and will come after me.
It was like old folks home, or old times.
Without exception, I can say each of you has made a positive impact for Texas.
And it’s been an honor to serve with you.
Thank you, David, the entire department.
I’ve got a deep appreciation and respect for the department, its mission, and for the 3,000-plus employees across the 13 divisions that are truly providing value to all Texans.
And I will say, this is the most bought-in, dedicated, passionate group of people for state employees.
I mean, and that’s a hard thing to find.
And I just can’t thank you enough for your conviction and your willingness to do the extra work for the greater good.
I know from time to time some of the issues we’ve brought up before the Commission have been contentious.
I think that speaks to how important the department, the Commission are to Texans.
I take great pride in being from a state where the work this department means so much to the people.
We love our state– its parks, fishing, hunting and the wildlife.
We want the things we enjoy, that our parents and our parents enjoyed, to be preserved and protected for our children.
I am proud we’ve done a lot of good things.
And this is not me, this is the department, the Commissioner.
But a couple of keynotes:
We’ve bought almost 60,000 acres into the public land inventory, 25 new acquisitions, WMAs, 11 state parks, expanded five WMAs.
We’ve done a lot of good work to expand the parks system.
We enacted the first mountain lion management rules.
We were involved with the release of Billy, the billionth hatchery saltwater fish.
That was a big moment,
Billy the Billion.
First significant change in spotted seatrout regulations, reducing the slot from 15 to 20, and allowing only one oversized trout.
CWD, I think we put together a comprehensive rules package.
Johnathan, you are there, thank you.
We brought together two groups of people that didn’t always see eye to eye with each other.
And I think we got detente between them.
But we’ve come up with, we think, better testing protocols.
We removed the burden importantly– and people forget this– is a million-plus acres were tied up in containment zones and surveillance zones.
And we did away with that.
That was Oliver.
He was on that very much so.
Visible ID tags, we got it.
And it’s a requirement.
And we think it’s important to mitigate the disease of CWD.
So, I would just say to the new Chairman and Commission, there will be lots of changes and challenges. Oysters, screwworms, CWD, funding, and many other issues I don’t know about today.
But there’s really huge opportunity.
I’m hopeful that you continue to expand the parks system in the great State of Texas, so that our citizens can experience the great wild outdoors for things that provide health and happiness to these families in ways that only a state as unique as Texas can provide.
So, God bless Texas Parks and Wildlife, God bless Texas, and God bless the United States of America.
Thank you. [ APPLAUSE ]
Let’s see, David.
Dr. Yoskowitz, this Commission has completed its business, and I declare us adjourned at 11:32 a.m.
[ GAVEL POUNDS ]
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Thank you, Chairman.
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
_______________________________________
William "Leslie" Doggett, Member
_______________________________________
Paul Foster, Member
_______________________________________
Anna B. Galo, Member
_______________________________________
Robert L. "Bobby" Patton, Jr., Member
_______________________________________
Travis B. Rowling, Member
_______________________________________
Dick Scott, Member
_______________________________________
Timothy "Tim" Timmerman, Member