TPW Commission
Commission Meeting, November 7, 2024
Transcript
TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE COMMISSION
November 7, 2024
TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT
SOLOMON P. ORTIZ INTERNATIONAL CENTER, NUECES ROOM
400 HARBOR DRIVE
CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS 78401
COMMISSION MEETING
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Good morning, everyone. Before we begin, I’ll take roll call. Chairman Hildebrand, present. Vice‑chair Bell?
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Present.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Mr. Abell?
COMMISSIONER ABELL: Present.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Mr. Doggett?
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: Present.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Ms. Galo?
COMMISSIONER GALO: Present.
COMMISSIONER HILDEBRAND: Mr. Patton?
COMMISSIONER PATTON: Present.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Commissioner Rowling?
COMMISSIONER ROWLING: Present.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right, thank you.
This meeting is called to order, November 7, 2024, at 9:02 a.m. Before proceeding with any business, I believe Dr. Yoskowitz has a statement to make.
DR. DAVID YOSKOWITZ: Public notice of this meeting containing all items on the proposed agendas has been filed in the Office of the Secretary of State. As required by Chapter 551 Government Code referred to as the Open Meetings Act, I would like for this fact to be noted in the official record of this meeting.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you, Dr. Yoskowitz.
First is the approval of minutes from the commission meeting held August 22, 2024, 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 ABELL: Abell, second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say aye.
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries.
Next is the acknowledgment of the list of donations which has also been distributed. Is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER PATTON: Motion to approve.
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, and thank you all, the donors on that list.
We usually appreciate everything that you do for parks and wildlife.
Next is the consideration of contracts which has also been distributed. Is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER GALO: Galo, so moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER ABELL: Abell, second.
SPEAKER OFF CAMERA: All in favor? Please say, “aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries.
Thank you.
Now, for the special recognitions, retirements and service award presentations.
Dr. Yoskowitz, please make the presentations.
DR. DAVID YOSKOWITZ: Chairman, if you would join me down here.
It’s standing room only this morning. It is great to have many of our team members in the room today from the region being recognized for all the great work that they have done for the department over the years.
And some very special awards today in very important incidents that ended successfully with the great work of our team members.
And so, I appreciate everyone being here. I know the commission appreciates all of the work that you do. Thank you very much.
First off, I would like to talk about the Director’s Citation Award. On April 10, 2024, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Aviation received a call for assistance with major flooding in Newton County, Texas.
Aircraft pilot lieutenant Robert Mitchell, tactical flight officer, Sergeant Tyler Stoikes, and rescue swimmer game warden Michael Serbanic responded to the area in the TPWD helicopter to assist with rescues. The flight crew received a call regarding an adult man trapped on top of his semi-truck, tractor‑trailer with surrounding flood waters rising. Without hesitation, the crew quickly responded to the area and located the trapped victim.
The crew deployed rescue gear and conducted a successful hoist rescue of the man to a safe nearby area where ground first responders could maintain his safety. Shortly afterward, the flight crew received a call regarding a young woman who was nine months pregnant and scheduled to have a c‑section procedure performed the following morning. The woman was at home surrounded by floodwaters. She was concerned about the possible labor difficulties being trapped by rising waters and being unable to make her appointment. The flight crew responded and were able to pick up the woman and deliver her to a nearby fire station where she could receive help.
Then later that day, during this flooding event, the flight crew was searching for more victims in need of help in the dark.
They were operating the helicopter’s thermal imager and were able to successfully locate the heat signature of a second adult man involved in the same flooding of the semi‑truck, tractor‑trailer event from the original call. The crew helped to guide the ground units to the man where he was taken to safety as well.
This outstanding flight crew showed tremendous bravery and dedication to the goals of Texas Parks and Wildlife Department’s Law Enforcement Division and public safety and saving lives throughout this disastrous event.
It has been through safe and repeated training, exceptional teamwork, as well as the dedicated spirit of these three rescuers, that they were able to make a difference and save lives on that day.
Robert Mitchell graduated from the Game Warden Training Academy in 2021 and serves as Lieutenant Game Warden Pilot. Lieutenant Mitchell has three years of service.
Tyler Stoikes graduated from the Game Warden Academy in 2012 and was recently promoted to Lieutenant Game Warden Pilot. At the time of this event, Tyler was serving as the department’s first tactical flight officer. Lieutenant Stoikes has 12 years of service.
And Michael Serbanic graduated from the Game Warden Academy in 2009 and serves as helicopter rescue technician and has 15 years of service.
Please join me in congratulating Lieutenant Game Wardens Mitchell and Stoikes and Warden Serbanic for this well‑deserved award.
Gentlemen, please come forward.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Congratulations.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Next, we also have a Director’s Life Saving Award. On July 4, 2024, at approximately 6:18 p.m., while conducting a boat patrol on Lake Lewisville, Game Warden Kyle Allison and his partner received a call from a dispatch of a cut that needed medical attention.
Game Warden Allison immediately moved to assist and continued to communicate with dispatch to narrow down the location, direction of travel, and find an area where E.M.S. could get to the vessel. Once the vessel was located, Game Warden Allison quickly jumped onto the other vessel with his medical go-bag, he assessed the situation and immediately jumped into action to apply not one, but two tourniquets to the injured victim’s right leg.
The cut actually turned out to be a propeller strike of the man’s right thigh.
And Game Warden Allison placed the tourniquets and calmly spoke to the victim to establish his mental awareness and keep him calm.
Allison also covered the man with towels to assuage the shock.
The boat was then maneuvered to the land where E.M.S. was met.
Regarding this incident, Little Elm Fire Department Battalion Chief Hartless had this to say about Game Warden Kyle Allison: “The actions taken by Game Warden Kyle Allison were essential to the victim only losing his leg and not his life due to injuries sustained while recreating and boating on Lake Lewisville. The quick response from the game wardens on the lake and prompt follow‑up medical triage and treatment were essential. I believe Allison and the other wardens should be recognized for their expeditious and diligent actions on that day.”
Kyle Allison graduated from the Game Warden Academy in 2012 and has 12 years of service. Please join me in congratulating Game Warden Allison for his well‑deserved award.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Next up we have another Director’s Life Saving Award.
At approximately 2:30 a.m. on March 17, 2024, Port Aransas dispatch received a call about an individual that had been fishing on the south side jetties and slipped into the water.
The jetties were wet and slippery due to recent rain and the wind, making for hazardous conditions to anyone attempting to fish that morning.
Game Wardens Jenkins, Hendley, Taylor, Failla, and Rappmund had been patrolling for approximately 14 hours already working an enhanced agency assist during spring break patrol. The wardens decided to continue working despite their planned patrol ending hours before so they could continue assisting Port Aransas Police Department with heavy spring break call volume.
The five wardens were some of the first responders on the scene where the individual was clinging to the rocks.
The wardens, without hesitation, traversed the treacherously wet jetties to reach the man in hopes of performing a water rescue.
Once the wardens reached the man, they could see him still in the water appearing to be unresponsive. With slick rocks under their boots and the Gulf of Mexico to their front, they decided to scale the jetties. They knew they did not have much time.
The wardens made it to the victim who appeared to be breathing but still unresponsive.
The wardens had then the daunting task of transporting the man back up the slick jetties, and inch by inch they were able to get the man back to the top all the while, trying to avoid further back, head and neck injuries.
The wardens feared the worst as the man was struggling to breathe with water and foam coming out of his mouth.
Fortunately, for the victim, the wardens were able to perform life‑saving measures by deploying their portable oxygen device which resulted in a positive response from the victim.
The next obstacle the wardens had to overcome was getting the man to the medical care at the end of the jetties. The wardens worked as a team carrying the man on a small litter over the slick rocks below. Once at the end of the jetties, the wardens were able to release the man into the emergency medical care.
He was transported to the hospital and remained in care overnight. Due to the wardens’ selflessness and bravery, the man was able to survive.
Benjamin Jenkins has served as a game warden for five years, currently stationed in Nueces County.
Kyle Hendley has served for a game warden for seven years, currently stationed in Nueces County.
Eric Taylor has served as a game warden for one year, currently stationed in Harris County.
John Failla has served as a game warden for five years, currently stationed in Nueces County.
And Welden Rappmund has served as a game warden for eight years, currently stationed in Nueces County.
Please join me in congratulating Game Wardens Jenkins, Hendley, Taylor, Failla, and Rappmund for this well‑deserved award. Gentlemen, please come forward.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Each year, the Southeast Texas Chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, MAAD, recognizes officers for each law enforcement agency who have demonstrated a devotion to protecting our public’s roadways and waterways from intoxicated drivers and boaters.
The Houston law enforcement districts, in collaboration with the Harris County district attorney’s office and the Southeast Chapter of MADD recently recognized several game wardens for the dedication and achievements against the fight on driving while intoxicated and boating while intoxicated.
Major Edward Tanus and all of us are Texas Parks and Wildlife Department are proud to recognize these game wardens for their exemplary service to citizens of Texas. We are pleased to honor the following Texas wardens for going above and beyond the call of duty when it comes to keeping Texas safe on public roadways and waterways.
Captain Randy Button and his team with Tyler Zaruba, Jeff Putnam, Derrick Lopez, Jordan Bagwell, Vinicus Mathias, Jamie Hill and Michael Blevins.
Before you all come up, I would like to have Marcy McDonald, Regional Director of MADD, and Karla O’Neill, the Director of Development, come up and say a few words.
MS. KARLA O’NEILL: Thank you so much. On behalf of mothers against drunk driving, we extend our heartfelt gratitude.
We feel like every time we give one of these awards away, we have saved a life.
So, we truly commend you for the work you do. We know it is not easy, but we know taking that little extra time is going to end impaired driving. So, thank you.
DR. YOSKOWITZ: If I could have those that are being awarded and recognized today, please come up and receive your awards.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Thank you very much.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Congratulations.
Next up, we have a retirement that we would like to recognize.
He was very local, by the way. Robert Adami started at the department in 1989 working as a fish and wildlife technician and worked his way up the ranks to hatchery biologist, then hatchery manager for both the Perry R. Bass Marine Fisheries Research Station in Palacios, and the CCA Marine Development Center here in Corpus Christi.
As hatchery manager, Robert led his team in producing millions of red drum and spotted sea trout fingerlings for stocking into Texas coastal bay systems. In 1998, Robert became the program leader for the shrimp inspection program. As program leader he was working with regulatory agencies such as the TCEQ and Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services to ensure the protection of Texas natural resources.
The preventions were done by routine inspections of exotic species facilities throughout the state to ensure state regulatory safeguards were always in place. Robert also worked with veterinary pathologists at the Texas Veterinary Diagnostic Lab at Texas A&M and the Aquaculture Pathology Laboratory at the University of Arizona to ensure all aquaculturists practice disease prevention protocols.
While working with the department, Robert was a Texas representative for the habitat subcommittee with the Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission, and he also worked with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Sea Turtle Nesting Program.
Assisting with numerous outings with Texas A&M University and University Of Texas Students, and held a variety of lectures with Texas Master Naturalist members. Robert has always been involved with nature and the environment and has worked towards protecting its natural beauty as much as possible.
With 35 years of service, Robert Adami, Jr.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Next, we have our service awards.
Steve Hall. Steve Hall. Steve Hall started with us in 1985 as hunter education coordinator.
He became education director in 1987, then outreach and education director in 1990. A role that he served up until his retirement in 2011. I’ll get to why he is back with us again.
He worked with the legislature and commission on mandatory hunter education rules in 1987 and boater education rules in 1997, and commission passage of over 40 target range shooting grants.
He wrote the first Texas hunter and boater education student course manuals, was involved with starting aquatic and angler education programs– Texas Becoming an Outdoors Woman, Perry Haines Youth Conservation Camps, and mobile shooting range in the 1990s– as well as formal partnerships with Texas 4‑h shooting sports and Texas youth hunting program.
In 2004, he brought the National Archery in Schools Program to Texas and student arrow rifle program in 2019. He coordinated special events and scheduled all 17 wildlife expos, including all shooting sports activities. He was inducted into both the international and the Texas hunter education halls of fame.
After retiring in 2011, he served two years as executive director of the Texas State Rifle Association and two and a half years as executive director of the International Hunter Education Association.
He and his wife Karen wanted to stay near their kids, so he returned to the department in 2015 to serve in his current role as hunter education coordinator, and we are all benefiting from that.
He plans to retire again in May to continue chasing his kids. And now grandkids, this time in Colorado, his home state.
He plans to consult, teach and volunteer in outdoor recreation when he doesn’t have his own fly rod, bow or golf clubs in his hands.
With 35 years of service, and going, Steve Hall.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Next, we would like to recognize Jose Antonio Salinas, Jr., Tony, who began his journey with the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department in May 1999 as a seasonal worker where he provided maintenance support throughout the park.
His outstanding performance led to his quick promotion to maintenance ranger on July 2 of that same year. Over the next few years, Tony continued to excel, transitioning to ranger four, utility plant operator in March of 2003, and then to lead ranger in September of that same year.
For the past 18 years, he has supervised several maintenance teams, playing a vital role on the ongoing success of Bentsen State Park. Tony’s ability to navigate park and leadership transitions have made him a trusted resource for guidance and support to all departments.
He also carries on a family legacy in public service. His late father, Jose Antonio Salinas, Sr., served as maintenance ranger at Bentsen for over 32 years.
Together they have contributed more than 57 years of service at Bentsen State Park and to the people of Texas.
Thank you and congratulations, Jose Salinas, Jr.
[ APPLAUSE ]
And finally, Chairman, we would like to recognize Justin Foster, who began his career with the department in 2002, where he served as biologist for the Sierra Diablo Wildlife Management Area, research and management of wild sheep, where his passion and responsibility prior to moving to the Kerr Wildlife Management Area.
Kerr Wildlife Management staff organized a jug fishing trip for catfish on the San Marcos River. Justin had partaken in similar activities on the Ohio River in Kentucky. He was asked to bring noodles for the evening. Unbeknownst to him, though, his coworkers used pieces of the kids’ foam swimming noodles as part of the apparatus for catfish jug lines. A short piece of the noodle is more visible from the boat because it stands on end when the fish hits the line in the hook which is attached to the other end.
When asked to produce the noodles, Justin proudly delivered multiple bags of spaghetti noodles to the group as they prepared to go out and set their lines. But to his credit, they were also eating spaghetti that evening. Justin blames the Kerr staff for assuming too much and not speaking in clear terms. Justin has served as research coordinator at the Kerr since 2008.
Much of his effort has gone to investigating the use of toxicants and delivery systems for feral pig control. His recent interests include turkey and bob white quail, and he continues to pursue a safe and reliable tool against feral pigs. He obtained his bachelor’s in wildlife fisheries management from Eastern New Mexico University and his masters in range and wildlife management at Sul Ross State.
He has served state and Native American governments and private landowners during his 26‑year career with 20 years of service to TPWD in Texas. Justin Foster.
[ APPLAUSE ]
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Congratulations.
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Chairman, that concludes my presentation.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right. Thank you, David.
I will say that is always… my favorite part of the two‑day meeting is the service awards and life‑saving awards. I will say as a board it makes us all very proud of what you guys do, you men and women.
And we pledge to you, we will give you the resources that you need to get your job done. And I just want you to know we’ve always got your back. So, thank you. Well done.
All right. Let’s see. 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. And thank you all for coming today whomever is leaving.
Okay. Thank you.
Action Item Number 1: Job Order Contracting Delegate Authority for Approval of Contracts Over $500,000, Recommended Adoption of Proposed Rule.
Ms. Lofye, please make your presentation.
MS. ANDREA LOFYE: Yes, sir. Good morning, Chairman, Commissioners, Dr. Yoskowitz.
For the record, my name is Andrea Lofye, Director of the Infrastructure Division. And this item is Job Order Contracting, the Delegation of Authority for Approval of Contracts Over $500,000.
Job Order Contracting, or JOC, is an alternative procurement method used to expedite maintenance, repairs and minor construction, delivery times, types and quantities are indefinite.
TPWD published a request for competitive sealed proposals for JOC contractors in May of this year. This is a solicitation for a $50 million program. It’s an initial $20 million plus three $10 million renewal options.
And multiple contracts have been awarded in September.
At the direction of the Commission, we published in the Texas Register a proposed amendment to rules governing department contract practices for projects greater than $500,000.
The proposed amendment would delegate authority to the executive director to award JOC jobs, tasks, and purchase orders in excess of $1 million, or greater, and would delegate authority to the TPWD Infrastructure Division Director and Deputy Director for awards in excess of $500,000 but not more than $1 million.
Government Code requires that the governing body of a governmental entity must approve each job, task or purchase order that exceeds $500,000 in value. The same chapter of the code provides that the governing body may delegate its authority under Government Code Chapter 2269. And delegation of this authority would make the JOC program consistent with our other construction contracts.
To date, we’ve received five comments. Four agree, one disagrees, but the comment that disagrees supports the delegation but urges oversight.
Staff recommends that the commission adopt the following motion.
The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission adopts an amendment to 31 Texas Administrative Code 61.21 concerning contracts for public works with changes as necessary to the proposed text as published in the October 4, 2024, issue of the Texas Register.
I’m happy to take any questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any discussion by the commissioners? We have no one that signed up to speak. So, if there is 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, Ms. Lofye.
MS. LOFYE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Action Item Number 2: Rule Review Recommended Adoption of Proposed Changes to Chapter 51.
Ms. Laura Carr, please make your presentation.
MS. LAURA CARR: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners.
I’m Laura Carr. I’m an Assistant General Counsel with the department.
This morning, we will be requesting the adoption of proposed changes to Chapter 51 arising out of the first round of our rule review process.
As you know, we are undergoing the rule review process that is required every four years where we look at our regulations and determine whether the reason for initially adopting them continues to exist.
This gives us an opportunity to make minor housekeeping‑type changes to the rules as necessary. The first group of rules reviewed were in Chapters 51, 52, 55, 60 and 61. We are only proposing changes to Chapter 51 out of that.
So, the first proposed change is to Section 51.61 regarding enhanced contract monitoring. Our current rule lists 16 factors that the department will consider when determining whether a contract will require enhanced monitoring. At the direction of the Comptroller’s Office, whichever oversees the state procuring and contracting process, they have requested that we consider additional factors and will presumably make similar requests in the future.
Therefore, we are proposing to add catchall language to the rule that allows the department to consider additional factors that it determines appropriate, which will not only make the monitoring process more robust, but also more efficient by permitting staff from having to keep asking Commission to add more factors to the rule.
The second proposed change is to section 51.168 regarding nonprofit partnerships to promote hunting and fishing by resident veterans. This is a minor change to align the abbreviations for nonprofit partner throughout the rule.
So, in that particular section we are proposing to change “NPP”, which is the current abbreviation used to “NP” as you see in yellow to match the language used in the rest of the subchapter.
And finally, we are proposing to repeal section 51.301a, which is a rule related to the use and disclosure of customer information. The legislature made significant changes several years ago on the disclosure of customer information, and we repealed multiple rules as a result of that.
Subsection A was voted on for repeal, but due to administrative oversight it remains intact. So therefore, we are proposing to actually repeal it at this time as it is no longer relevant.
We received eight comments as of today, seven that agree completely with at least one of the proposed changes, one that disagrees specifically with the proposed change to the enhanced contract monitoring rule.
And that commenter believes that the change should be highly audited in order to prevent government abuse in awarding contracts.
We believe that the proposed change actually aligns with the commenter’s intent to promote integrity within contracting because, again, it will make our contract monitoring process more robust and more effective.
We recommend that you adopt the following motion: The Texas Parks And Wildlife Commission adopts amendments to Texas Administrative Code Title 31, Section 51.61, concerning Enhanced Contract Monitoring; Section 51.168, concerning Nonprofit Partnerships to Promote Hunting and Fishing by Resident Veterans; and Section 51.301, concerning Duties of the Department as listed in Exhibits A through C with changes as necessary to the proposed text as published in the October 4, 2024, issue of the Texas Register.
And I will be happy to take any questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any discussion by the commissioners?
There is no one signed up. So, if not, is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER ROWLING: Rowling, 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.
Thank you, Ms. Carr.
Action Item Number 3: Cultivated Oyster Mariculture Program Rule Revisions Recommended Adoption of Proposed Changes.
Dr. Lindsay Glass Campbell, please make your presentation.
DR. LINDSAY GLASS CAMPBELL: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. For the record, my name is Dr. Lindsay Glass Campbell. I am the Cultivated Oyster Mariculture Program Coordinator in the Coastal Fisheries Division.
Today, I’ll be presenting proposed amendments to the oyster mariculture subchapter with recommendation for adoption.
A brief history for those who may not be as familiar with cultivated oyster mariculture program, also abbreviated as “COM,” which I’ll be using that term throughout this presentation.
In May of 2019, the 86th Legislature enacted House Bill 1300, which created Texas Parks and Wildlife Chapter 75 and delegated the authority to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission the authority to regulate the process of mariculture in Texas, allowing this to become a new industry in Texas. Texas was the last state, coastal state, to allow oyster mariculture.
Oh, sorry.
In turn, the department in 2020 adopted the first and current regulations governing oyster mariculture. The first COM permit was issued in July of 2021, and in April of 2022, the first harvest occurred.
Currently, we have 12 grow-out sites, often called farms.
This is where oysters are raised to marketable size harvested for human consumption. In addition, we have 13 conditional sites and status waiting on their final other authorizations. We have two nurseries and two hatcheries where oysters are grown… spawned and grown in early life.
Since harvest began, over now 1.7 million oysters have been harvested and these oysters are sold individually. And the average price, ex-vessel average price, currently is $0.68 per oyster.
When the program started, it was new to Texas. We knew that as it grew and developed, there’s going to be chances to come back and refine and streamline our rules. And so, the goal of these proposed amendments are to clarify and refine the program rules, improve programmatic efficiencies, reduce regulatory burden both to our permit holders and within the department.
And this was all done with extensive communication and input from our COM industry members, our department biologists and our game wardens. And also, as always, along with guidance, from the Texas Department of State Health Services and the National Shellfish Sanitation Program, NSSP, and that is the federal adopted regulations that govern the health and safety of oysters across the country.
So, an outline of where we’re going in the topics here: Tumbling and sorting of oysters; Permit transfers, the ability for permit transfers; Proposed extension of the sunset provision governing oyster genetic integrity; and proposed reduction in size limit;
and then section on clarifications which are changes to existing regulations just to, again, add those clarifications; and finally, covering repeals that are due mostly to changes that make these redundant.
Tumbling and sorting is a mechanical process commonly conducted in mariculture. This cleans the oysters and sorts them by size.
While most of our farmers can conduct this on both in their sites, due to our bays–, we have a lot of wind and wave injuries– at times this is unfeasible and unsafe.
So, the department recognized this, and farmers request that the oysters can be removed from their sites, taken to shore to tumble and sort, provided that they are then returned to their sites prior to harvest.
The proposed amendment would– and we saw this was reasonable– and the proposed amendment would codify a mechanism for this activity.
We propose to allow our COM permits to be transferred. These have a ten‑year terms. They result in business activities.
And due to many of these factors, the permit holders would apply for a transfer for a $200 fee, which is the same as an application fee. All the permit terms, conditions and dates would stay the same.
While this industry was developing in Texas, we currently have what we call a “sunset provision,” which allows the use of a non‑Texas tetraploid line in creating triploids. And use of non-Texas hatcheries to produce oysters with the intention that after our sunset date we would revert to the Texas only clause in the regulations.
The development of the Texas tetraploid line, which is being done outside of the department by industry members, has… talking with them, they currently do not expect that that line will be fully developed, stabilized and distributed to the nurseries and hatcheries that would use it by our sunset date. In addition, while we have two hatchery groups producing oysters in Texas, only one of them is on the commercial scale. So, for these reasons, we propose to extend the sunset date to 2033 to allow this burgeoning industry to establish a more robust infrastructure within Texas.
Next, we propose changing the size limit from 2.5 inches to 2 inches. Consulting with our staff and determining that because COM oysters can readily be distinguished from wild oysters, this minimum size limit can be reduced. This gives farmers more flexibility and opens opportunities for them to meet market demands at a variety of sizes. The proposed amendment would also create a 5 percent allowance for undersized oysters and cargo, which is similar to what is in place for our wild harvest.
I’m going to take a second to go off script here and say that, you know, this is one of those changes that working with our game wardens– and our game wardens have been so great to really learn this industry, be interested, be willing to go out and learn that… speak with our… the farmers and the farmers speaking with them. And that kind of coordination has allowed these types of changes.
Now onto our clarification section. As many hatcheries act as nurseries, it would be more efficient to group these two types into one permit.
So, we recommend that the COM Nursery Only permit be changed to a COM Nursery-Hatchery permit and expand the text around that to include hatchery activities. We propose to refine our current text on the rules surrounding oyster seeds, those baby oysters, that are grown in prohibited and restricted waters, to harmonize our language with the NSSP, which as a reminder, are the federally approved guidelines over oyster health and safety.
This will help reduce any confusion and discrepancies between two versions of the same text, or the same meaning of text.
To reiterate an important health and safety requirement specified by the NSSP for consumption safety, we propose to explicitly state that oysters that are out of the water for any reason longer than the current time to temperature controlled limits established by our Texas Department of State Health Services must be resubmerged for at least 14 days prior to harvest for market for raw consumption. This allows the oysters to purge any contaminants. And as a reminder, presented yesterday, we seek to add the clarification language highlighted in yellow here, that marketing for raw consumption.
Next, we would like to contemporize the way permit holders can be contacted if their gear is lost by adding the option to put a phone number on gear tag. We proposed to revise the current… the text on current processes that are already outlined in our rules covering adding subpermittees to their permit and obtaining oyster transport authorization, which is a documentation to have for oysters being transported around the state that are not otherwise documented through harvest tax.
And to make our COM public meetings more efficient, we propose that those meetings be… notices be effective via department website and adding the option for virtual public meetings.
Our final clarification is adding the com harvest authorization.
This is an annual authorization that more clearly meets our internal practices, but more clearly meets NSSP guidelines that harvest authorizations only be valid for one year by having those date range clearly printed on the authorization.
This authorization will not require any new requirements to our permit holders or any more fees issued to those grow-out permit holders annually.
Our final topic is repeals. The first… the rule concerning oyster seed hatchery with the other proposed changes and streamlining of that nursery hatchery permit, this section would no longer be relevant.
The proposed repeal, the rule within this chapter on the agency’s decision to refuse to issue or renew a program of permit. However, adding COMs, the Chapter 56 list of permits covered by that chapter, which is the agency’s universal processes for these activities.
And finally, the prohibited acts are proposed to repeal as the majority of the text in that section is redundant to regulations already in our general provisions. The two items that are not redundant be moved up to general provisions. So, everything that was still… was prohibited, it’s still prohibited, just streamlining it there.
So, bringing this back in focus. Again, the purpose of these revisions and amendments are to clarify and refine that program, increase efficiencies, and really are based on a lot of feedback from our staff and industry members.
As of yesterday evening, we had 16 public comments, all in agreement. Two of those in agreement did request for reduction in fees and the use of Gulf of Mexico parentage triploids.
We also received unanimous support from the Coastal Advisory Committee and the Oyster Advisory Committee. Additionally, the GLO federal consistency coordinator determined that these revisions were consistent with the coastal management plan.
We received organizational letters from Texas Press Association regarding disagreement with removing the requirement to publish in the newspaper.
The Texas Oyster Mariculture Association and the East Coast Shellfish Growers Association request a revision to allow the use of non‑Texas parent triploids from Gulf of Mexico lines.
And the Texas Aquaculture Association was in support but
did request the use again of those Gulf of Mexico triploids and a reduction in fee to a flat rate of $450.
With this, the staff recommends that the Commission adopt the following motion:
The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission adopts amendments to T 31, Texas Administrative Code Sections 58.352, 58.353, 58.355 and 58.356 with the repeal of Sections 58.354, 58.359 and 58.360 concerning Cultivated Oyster Mariculture rule revisions as listed in Exhibit A, and an amendment to 31… Texas Administrative Code 31, Section 56.7 concerning Permits and License affected as listed in Exhibit B with changes as necessary to the proposed text as published in the October 4, 2024 issue of the Texas Register.
With that, I will take any questions. However, to forestall a common question I’ve been getting from y’all, our mariculture oysters went out had some last night… and to describe– and talked with an oyster guru– to describe their taste: our warm waters and productive waters provide that these are consistently meaty all year‑round.
Sometimes those oysters from colder northern areas in the winter are not quite as plump and meaty as what our oysters can be. One thing you will notice is they are, like I said, plump, that silky texture of the meat, there’s the salt intensity.
And from the different farms that you can get them from that intensity varies.
So, from a stronger to a less intense upfront briny flavor.
Sometimes you will taste beyond that umami flavor.
You’ll taste a slight sweetness. Those are usually the oysters that are triploids. You’ll get a vegetal or green kind of undertone in there. That has to do a lot with they are raised in the upper water column for phytoplankton and all the good green stuff is growing.
And sometimes you’ll even get that shrimp or fish‑‑ not in a bad way‑‑ that fresh of the ocean taste but have a really clean finish.
AND when these are tasted by people throughout the country, they also always comment on the excellent merroir of our oysters.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Wonderful. Thank you. Meaty and plump.
Okay. All right. Is there any discussion?
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: I would just say, doctor, thank you for that description. We need to record that and then put that in some marketing materials. That was delightful.
DR. CAMPBELL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: By the way, you guys have seen “Shark Tank”, right? So typically, when the entrepreneurs will get up, they provide a food product for the board to consume.
[ laughter ]
So I’m hoping some of the speakers today brought some meaty and plump oysters.
DR. CAMPBELL: You know, I thought about that, but I didn’t want it to seem like we were trying to sway y’all’s decision on anything.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Sway away. All right.
[ LAUGHTER ]
Okay, all right. Any questions for the doctor, Dr. Campbell?
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Commissioner Bell, one question.
I think you mentioned in your presentation that we’re the kind of the last to come online on this, which actually gives us some potentially distinct benefits.
With everyone else already doing this, and there should be a body of information out there, do you feel like we’re going to be able to bring on really best practices from lessons learned in other places and maybe even accelerate what we do in our program?
Because this seems to be very, very popular, something people want to get into.
And obviously the supply of oysters‑‑ I’m allergic to seafood, so it’s not a thing for me, although I did like your description, too. But do you think that we can accelerate this program?
What’s the opportunity, or option, for that?
DR. CAMPBELL: You know, I think prior to me being with the department, there was a lot of great work done. Again, looking at those lessons learned, talking to the other states.
I’m part of … we have a state marine agriculture coordinators network where coordinators from across the country we talk with each other, we talk about upcoming issues, issues people are having and really trying to learn from each other. So, it definitely has helped in being able to reach out to them and say, “Hey, what’s going on with this?”
This is a great opportunity. I think we’ve sidestepped a lot of pitfalls that other states have seen by putting some of these regulations in place early and using that cautionary approach.
So, it’s not, “Ooh, we’ve got to back‑pedal”, you know, type of thing. So, it’s really helped accelerate the process just because there were examples there.
We didn’t have to create from absolutely nothing. But getting familiar, Texans and everybody familiar with mariculture, you know, that’s still a process.
They are getting that. They are embracing the oysters here.
They are requesting them at restaurants and things like that.
So really the opportunity is just opening up for this industry.
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any other questions? Okay. With that we’ve got three speakers. The first is A.J. Minns.
And what I might ask is, each of the speakers, give the commission one item which you think would be beneficial to your industry that would allow more competition, ease of entry into it, and the recommendation can’t include us giving you money.
[ Laughter ]
So, what can we do as a board to make this a more vibrant industry? But you give whatever testimony you want.
A.J. MINNS: Good morning, Chairman, Commissioners.
My name is A.J. Minns, I’m the owner of blackjack point…
Sorry. Good morning. A.J. Minns, I own Blackjack Point Oyster Company. We currently hold permit number 4.
I’d like to start off by saying I fully support the recommended changes proposed by Dr. Campbell in the presentation earlier, but I would encourage the Commission to consider going one step further as far as the size limit changes. Instead of going from 2.5 inches to two inches, I’d like to see the regulation completely done away with.
That would put us more in line with certificate of location leaseholders who can now harvest oysters at any size outside of the wild oyster season.
That regulation change could benefit farmers in multiple ways.
As we’ve seen in this industry, you’re always going to have runts or slow growers, oysters that may never get to two or 2.5 inches, or it may take them an exorbitant amount of time to get to that point.
If we were able to get those animals off the farm earlier, that would make more space for additional oysters, and it would significantly reduce the labor cost we have invested in those animals.
Another place that could be beneficial is with impending weather if we were facing a hurricane. It might make better business sense to remove the animals from the farm at a smaller size, rather than take a chance of losing those animals with a storm.
The last thing I’d like to bring up today, and this is something, Chairman, that would make the industry much more successful going forward.
And that’s something that’s been brought up by Dr. Campbell through the comments, and it was brought up at the last commissioners meeting by David Apparicio from DJ’s Oysters in Palacios, and that’s to allow triploid oyster seed created from non‑Texas broodstock to be stocked on Texas farms.
Oyster seed availability is a major concern of any farmer in the state currently.
If we were to change that regulation, that would open up options for‑‑ I’m not seeing a time but I’m seeing a yellow light…
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: It’s okay.
MR. MINNS: …Open up options for more seed availability to farmers in Texas, allowing us to better plan our stocking to create a more consistent pipeline of product the following year.
Right now, currently we have farmers that have suspended sales because they have no market-sized oysters to sell. And that is a direct result of not being able to stock oysters when they wanted to earlier in the year.
If this regulation would have been different, and they were able to bring in non‑Texas broodstock-created triploids they may not be in the situation they are in today, which is facing months of no sales, which as you well know equates to no income.
I would appreciate your consideration in these matters and thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great. So, do away with size limitation, disaster relief on impending hurricanes– let’s call it in terms of being able to pull up your stock– and the allowance of triploid oysters non‑Texas that you can stock.
MR. MINNS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Got it. Thank you.
MR. MINNS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right, next Bill Strieber.
Clearwater oyster gardens of Texas.
BILL STRIEBER: Yes, sir.
Thank you very much for having this opportunity for us to speak toward you. Anybody that knows me personally, I’m not one to heap praise on governmental agencies, but I’ve really got to thank the Parks and Wildlife Department, specifically Dr. Campbell.
Everybody in the Parks and Wildlife Department has been a fully engaged partner in helping this new industry, farmers, starting up. I started this process just under three years ago, and I did my first harvest yesterday. That’s the timeline we’re talking about to get this going.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Congratulations.
MR. STRIEBER: Thank you. So, you’re asking for samples, I believe you’re all going to have access to some of the local grown Texas oysters. But self‑servingly, the Port Aransas farmers market this Sunday, come on out there and we’ll have some for you. Again, the question you asked… Let me backup.
I support fully the proposed changes and regulations that Dr. Campbell presented earlier. It’s a process. This is a new industry.
You are correct that we are learning from other states.
They have refined their processes, their regulations, and we can learn a lot from them. Having said that, I understand the trepidation of moving too quickly. We don’t want to repeat some of the previous issues we had with other aquaculture. But this technology is proven. It’s been in effect for decades in other places. The one thing I that think would actually benefit growth of the industry, and I know you guys don’t have purview over this, but a lot of the land, that’s submerged land, that is available for oyster mariculture also has oil lease on top of it.
Whether it’s production or pipeline or just reserved as an oil lease, the GLO will not let us sublease that from somebody.
That would open up all kinds of prime mariculture opportunity if, one, we could either sublease it or if it’s a non-production or nonused lease, then there would be a lot more opportunity to grow. That’s my testimony.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: That’s it? Okay. Thank you very much. And congratulations. Three years from inception to harvest, really?
What did it cost you to get to that, if you want to say. You don’t have to.
MR. STRIEBER: Probably somewhere in between a quarter million to $400,000.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay, so less than $500,000 to get kind of startup mode and first harvest.
MR. STRIEBER: That’s two acres.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Two acres.
MR. STRIEBER: Two acres will… can produce anywhere between 750,000 to one million oysters per year.
I hope to expand to five soon.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Do you think you’ll make money doing this or is it a hobby?
MR. STRIEBER: Well. No, it’s definitely business. I was in technology development for a long time and understand ROI and cash flow. Business plans are business plans. It looked like we were going to make money like that right off the bat.
But as we discovered things that we didn’t know, the ROI gets pushed out a little bit further, the cash flow gets pushed out a little further. But it definitely can be profitable. But there’s lots of regulations. Seven different agencies that have their finger on the scale.
I just cut a check to TCEQ for $250 for a discharge permit. Each oyster filters 50 gallons a day. They should be paying us.
So…
[ LAUGHTER ]
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: I agree. I agree.
MR. STRIEBER: I oysters discharge into cleaner water than they came in. But we’re learning. So, thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Thank you very much, Mr. Strieber. And last, Brad Lomax. Is Brad here?
BRAD LOMAX: Morning, everyone. Good morning, Commissioners, TPWD staff. My name is Brad Lomax, and I’m the proud holder of Texas Cultivated Oyster Mariculture Permit Number 0001. And I’m very proud of that fact. And I would not hold that permit if it wasn’t for the help and the assistance and the support and the guidance and the encouragement of TPWD staff, and that beginning back in 2018 when this was just an idea and getting all the way through the legislative process to this meeting today.
I’m speaking in support of the revisions to the COM permit process as presented by Dr. Campbell. And I ask that you all approve those revisions.
The other thing I would like to say, and I’m going to mention some people specifically because I really do feel like I’ve been involved with this from conception.
And people like David Eichler and Robin Riechers and Dakus Geeslin, and for sure Lindsay Campbell have been instrumental in helping us get to this stage. And also on the enforcement side, Les Casterline and Carmen Rickel.
I mean, they show up on our boats with guns which is a little off putting but we… they have helped us help them to create enforcement guidelines.
I would say that I would… my family restaurant is water street oyster bar.
I would have brought you product today, but thankfully we sold out last night thanks to all the TPW people that were down there sampling copano uno oysters and copano creams, which is Lauren Dutton… and we were the first one… he didn’t mention me, but I’m the first one to sell Bill Strieber’s oysters to the public out there.
He’s pushing some farm to market deal in Port Aransas.
[ laughter ]
And quick, I gave you a lousy answer, Commissioner Doggett..
You said, “Do they taste differently from wild?”
My answer after a night’s sleep is that they are at least as good as any dredged oyster you’ve ever tasted with the added sweetness of the fact that you’re benefiting the environment by consuming them.
So, thank you all very much for all you’re doing. This is a true partnership and look forward to working with you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great. Thank you very much. All right.
Okay, if there’s no more comments, do we have a motion for approval?
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Commissioner Bell so moves.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER ABELL: Abell, second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say, “Aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries. Thank you.
Action Item Number 4: Statewide Oyster Fishery Proclamation Temporary Closure of Oyster Restoration Areas in Galveston Bay Recommended Adoption of Proposed Changes. Ms. Lindsey Savage.
LINDSEY SAVAGE: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners.
My name is Lindsey Savage and I’m the Restoration and Artificial Reef Team Lead in Coastal Fisheries.
Today, I will be presenting a recommendation to adopt proposed changes to the statewide oyster fishery proclamation to temporarily close two oyster restoration areas until November of 2026.
Parks and Wildlife Code Section 76 grants the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission the authority to close an area that is being reseeded or restocked for oysters.
Multiple reefs across the coast are being planted with cultch material to restore degraded and lost substrates. A two‑year closure gives the oyster larvae that recruit to fresh cultch the opportunity to grow to harvest full size and repopulate the reef.
Successful reef restoration projects are dependent on larval recruitment and growth within the first two years.
Post construction monitoring data has shown that our restorations have been successful, and reefs that were closed for two years are still healthier than natural reference reefs for up to nine years later.
Here is a picture of the oyster growth on a recently restored and recently reopened site on Grass Island in Aransas Bay.
As you can see, the oyster growth creates the habitat itself.
The two‑year closure allows the structure to develop uninterrupted by dredging activity, it allows two cohorts of oysters to recruit to the site and grow to maturity.
In July and September 2024, nine acres of oyster reef were restored on Desperation Reef in partnership with oyster dealers as required by House Bill 51 by the 85th Legislature in 2019.
We plan on using the remaining five acres on the Desperation Reef area for additional restoration associated with these H.B. 51 funds in the coming year.
This closure would encompass the full 14 acres. In 2022 and 2023, mitigation efforts consisting of oyster restoration on seven mitigation pads was conducted by Port of Houston and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on Dollar Reef as a result of adverse impacts to oyster reefs from the Houston ship channel expansion improvement project. This closure would encompass 529 acres in total.
This map shows a location and acreage of the proposed temporary closure areas outlined in red in the Galveston Bay system.
The northern site there is Desperation Reef with 14 acres and the southern site is Dollar Reef with 529 acres.
This is a close‑up view of the proposed U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Dollar Reef Mitigation closure area shown outlined in white.
Note the seven oyster mitigation pads shown in dark blue range in size from 13 to 20 acres each. The hashed area on the left represents the Texas Department of State Health Services’ restricted waters, and the one and a half pads shown in red within these waters are not included in the proposed closure as they are already closed to oyster harvest.
The full restoration area is being recommended for closure as opposed to individual oyster pads to avoid potential confusion that could result from multiple closings and proximity. The area encompassing the three oyster pads to the west was previously closed to harvest in November of 2022.
The proposed closure would expand this closure area to include the four oyster pads to the east and extend the closure period until November of 2026. This would allow all restored areas to be opened to harvest simultaneously.
The amendment we propose is to temporarily close two oyster restoration areas in Galveston Bay, which will then reopen for harvest in November 2026.
These proposed changes were published to the Texas Register for public comment on October 24, 2024. As of 5:00 p.m. November 6, seven comments have been received, all in favor of the changes.
These changes were also presented to two advisory committees: the Oyster Advisory Committee on September 27, 2024, and the Coastal Resources Advisory Committee on October 29, 2024. Both committees support the proposed changes.
Staff recommends that the Commission adopt the following motion:
The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission adopts an amendment to Title 31 Texas Administrative Code Section 58.21 concerning taking or attempting to take oysters from public oyster beds: General Rules, with changes unnecessary to the proposed text as published in the October 4, 2024, issue of the Texas Register.
Thank you for your time, and I’d be happy to answer any questions you may have.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great. Thank you very much, Ms. Savage.
Any questions? We have one speaker. And that person may come up.
Shane Bonnot.
SHANE BONNOT: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Vice‑Chairman Bell, and Commissioners. My name is Shane Bonnot, and I’m here representing the coastal conservation association.
I just wanted to briefly state that we support this proposal and really appreciate the department working with industry members, commercial oyster fishermen, on not only, you know, this project but other restoration sites, in use of their infrastructure and their vessels for these projects. It’s a very appropriate and excellent use of their vessels.
And I just wanted to take a moment to say thank you for moving forward with the discussions yesterday regarding certificates of location for restoration purposes. To state that our organization is a super fan of that concept would be an understatement, and I think there’s a lot of opportunities and a bright future ahead for that type of work. So I appreciate you moving forward with that discussion. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great. Thank you very much. Okay. If there’s no more comments, do we have a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER DOGGETT: Doggett, motion for approval.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER GALO: Galo, second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say, “Aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries. Thank you.
Action Item Number 5: Acquisition of Land, Bexar County and Medina County, Approximately 823 Acres of Government Canyon State Natural Area. Mr. Zach Spector.
ZACH SPECTOR: Okay. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commission.
For the record, my name is Zach Spector, Chief of Land and Conservation Initiatives.
We’re talking about the acquisition of 823 acres at the Government Canyon State Natural Areas in Bexar and Medina Counties.
This first map shows the location of Government Canyon in Bexar County. The second map is a close‑up. As we can see, Government Canyon State Natural Area is located in northwest San Antonio.
Government Canyon State Natural Area consists of approximately 12,000 acres, it’s situated along the edge of the Balcones Escarpment, again on the northwest side of San Antonio. This is a karst preserve that protects water quality and water quantity supply for the Edwards Aquifer.
This area is incredibly important for the City of San Antonio’s drinking water supply. It’s also home to several endangered invertebrate species that are found nowhere else in the world.
Staff prioritizes acquiring state park inholdings and adjacent properties from willing sellers to minimize operational and management conflicts, and to ensure the conservation of existing TPWD public lands. We’ve identified this 823 acres as an excellent addition to Government Canyon State Natural Area.
This will help conserve the Edwards Aquifer recharge zone and allow for protection of the SNA’s viewshed and expand public recreational opportunities.
This map shows the location of the proposed tract in yellow and Government Canyon State Natural Area in red. To date, we have received 187 responses, 186 of those are in support and one is in opposition.
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 acquire approximately 823 acres in Bexar and Medina Counties adjacent to Government Canyon State Natural Area from a willing seller.
And with that I’m happy to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Any questions for Mr. Spector? We have one speaker, Miss Pamela Harte.
PAMELA HARTE: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Good morning.
MS. HARTE: For the record, I’m Pam Harte, and I want to thank the commission and the department for acquiring land for additional state parks.
I’m thrilled that this is happening. I would personally like to challenge the department to design and build the needed infrastructure, create the roads and trails, and install utilities as quickly and efficiently as possible so these parks can be available for the public. That’s my challenge to you. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay. Great. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Harte. If nothing else, is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER GALO: Galo, approves.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER ROWLING: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say, “Aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries. Thank you.
Action Item 6: Acquisition of Land, Llano County, Approximately 3,073 Acres of Enchanted Rock State Natural Area. Mr. Zach Spector.
MR. SPECTOR: Okay. There we go. Mr. Chairman, commission, for the record, I’m still Zach Spector, Chief of Land and Acquisition Initiatives.
We’re talking about the acquisition of 3,073 acres at Enchanted Rock State Natural Area in Llano County. Here is a map highlighting Enchanted Rock in Llano County. Here is a close‑up. As you can see, Enchanted Rock State Natural Area is just north of Fredericksburg.
Enchanted Rock State Natural Area consists of approximately 2,300 acres in the central Texas Hill Country and protects Enchanted Rock, a National, Natural Landmark. Enchanted Rock hosts approximately 250,000 visitors annually, making it one of the most visited state parks in Texas.
Staff prioritizes acquiring state park inholdings adjacent properties from willing sellers to improve recreational opportunities and to ensure the conservation of TPWD public lands.
This tract, which, again, totals just over 3,000 acres, will more than double the size of Enchanted Rock State Natural Area and allow for improved access to management, recreation and conservation.
The proposed tract is outlined in yellow in this map. Enchanted State Rock Natural Area is located in red. To date, we have received 676 public comments, 669 of those have been in support, seven have been in opposition.
Staff recommends that the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission adopt the following motion: Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission authorizes the Executive Director to take all necessary steps to acquire approximately 3,073 acres in Llano County adjacent to Enchanted Rock State Natural Area from a willing seller.
And with that I’m happy to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Commissioners, any questions? We have no one signed up to speak. I will just say what a wonderful acquisition opportunity that is to append onto Enchanted Rock.
In terms of visitation, how does it rank in our state parks?
MR. SPECTOR: Enchanted Rock is typically the fifth or sixth most popular state park.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Fifth or sixth. And that’s how many, a couple hundred thousand people a year?
MR. SPECTOR: 250,000 to 300,000 a year annually.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: And with this, we think that this will give you, what, more room for parking, it will give you more camping options? What are you going to do with the 3,000?...
MR. SPECTOR: Camping options, hiking options, hunting options.
Really, it’s going to expand the opportunity for people to get out and see different parts besides just the rock itself.
And it’s also going to protect the viewshed from the rock.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: And the original footprint of the park was how much of Enchanted Rock?
MR. SPECTOR: 1,700 acres, and we acquired 630 acres last commission meeting. So, this is doubling, more than doubling that.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: So, you go from 1,700 to 5,300 acres.
MR. SPECTOR: Plus or minus, yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Wow, well… well done. That’s a great acquisition for the State of Texas. Thank you. Is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER ABELL: Abell, so moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Second?
COMMISSIONER GALO: Galo, so moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say, “Aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries.
Action Item Number 7: Acquisition of Land, Uvalde County, Approximately 1,721 Acres, Uvalde County, Mr. Spector.
MR. SPECTOR: Mr. Chairman, Commission, for the record, Zach Spector, Chief of Land and Conservation Initiatives. We’re talking about acquisition of 1,721 acres in Uvalde County.
Here is a map highlighting where Uvalde County is located within Texas.
Here is a close‑up. As you can see the subject tract is just southeast of garner state park in Uvalde County.
The proposed property consists of approximately 1,700 acres, including over a mile of the Frio River, rugged, beautiful hill county, diversity of native habitat in Uvalde County. Staff believes this property is very suitable for a new state park.
Property is located just outside the town of Concan, approximately one mile southeast of Garner State Park, which is Texas’ most visited state park.
Mr. Chairman, just for the record, Garner receives somewhere around 500,000 visitors annually, making it very, very popular.
This acquisition will create new recreational opportunities, expand opportunities for people that can’t get into Garner, create additional habitat protection.
Staff prioritizes acquiring state park inholdings, and, in this example, new state parks from willing sellers to improve recreational opportunities, conserve fish and wildlife habitat, ensure the conservation of existing TPWD public lands.
This acquisition will help create a new state park for Texas.
Again, enhancing the outdoor experience and opportunities for citizens to get outside.
The proposed subject tract is outlined here in yellow just southeast of Garner State Park which is outlined in red.
To date we have received 155 responses, 154 in support and one has been in opposition.
Staff recommends that the Commission adopt the following motion: the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission authorizes the Executive Director to take all necessary steps to acquire approximately 1,721 acres in Uvalde County from a willing seller for future development and operation as a new state park.
With that I’m happy to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great. Any questions?
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: This is Commissioner Bell. I have one question.
As I recall, it’s like I know the parks, or the two pieces of land are not physically connected, but did you mention there was a possibility that you might be able to float down the river from one piece of property to the other?
MR. SPECTOR: There is. And as you can see right here on this map, Vice‑Chairman, the river flows from the southeast corner of Garner, loops back over to this. So, in the fullness of time, that may be something that we’re able to open up and offer to the public.
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great, thank you. Is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER ROWLING: Approval.
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.
Action Item 8: Acquisition of Land, Burnet County, Approximately 2,020 Acres Near Colorado Bend State Park. Ms. Andrea Lofye.
MS. LOFYE: Yes, sir. Thank you, Chairman, Commissioners. This item is the acquisition of land in Burnet County, approximately 2,020 acres near Colorado Bend State Park.
On this map, you see the location of Colorado Bend State Park.
Here is a close‑up. At the top of the map, you see Colorado Bend and subject tract, which is on the east side of the Colorado River.
The proposed property consists of approximately 2,020 acres including two miles of frontage on the Colorado River, rugged hills, and a diversity of native habitat in Burnet County.
Staff believes the property is suitable for a new state park.
The property is located across the river from Colorado Bend, and it is approximately ten miles upstream from Lake Buchanan. The acquisition will create additional recreational opportunities and habitat protection.
Staff prioritizes acquiring state park inholdings and new state parks from willing sellers to improve recreational opportunities, conserve fish and wildlife habitat and ensure the conservation of existing Texas Parks and Wildlife Department public lands.
Acquisition of this tract will help to add a new state park to the department’s public land system and provide greater outdoor experiences and opportunities for the citizens of Texas. Here you see Colorado State Park outlined in red and the proposed acquisition is in yellow. To date, we have received 173 responses, 172 are in support, one is in opposition.
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 acquire approximately 2,020 acres in Burnet County from a willing seller for future development and operation as a new state park.
I’m happy to take any questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great. Any questions for Ms. Lofye?
If not, 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.
Action Item Number 9: Acquisition of Land, Marion County, Approximately 32.5 Acres at the Caddo Lake Wildlife Management Area. Ms. Lofye.
MS. LOFYE: Yes, sir.
Thank you, Chairman, Commissioners. This item is the acquisition of land at Marion County, approximately 32.5 acres at Caddo lake Wildlife Management Area.
On this map, you see the location of the WMA. On this map, you see a close‑up of the WMA and the state park, which is just south of it. The WMA became a WMA after the acquisition of additional acres at this state park. Caddo Lake State Park was established in the 1930s. It was built by the Civilian Conservation Corps.
And as additional acres were added, they became the WMA. And the WMA now consists of 8,100 acres that protect much of the lake and the adjacent swamps, flood plains, slopes and upland forests that exemplify the habitats of northeast Texas.
Staff prioritize acquiring WMA inholdings and adjacent properties from willing sellers to minimize operational and management conflicts and ensure the conservation of TPWD public lands.
Acquiring this tract would allow permanent protection of the habitat, and maintain, enhance, and restore its ecological functions and value.
The tract is available from a willing seller and would add excellent habitat and operational utility to the WMA.
Here you see in red the existing WMA. Outlined in yellow is this acquisition. To date, we’ve received 130 responses; all in support.
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 acquire approximately 32.5 acres in Marion County for addition to the Caddo Lake Wildlife Management Area.
I’m happy to take any questions.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great, thank you. Any questions for Ms. Lofye? If not, is there a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER ABELL: Abell, so moved.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER GALO: Galo, second.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All in favor, please say, “Aye.”
[ CHORUS OF AYES ]
Any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries. Thank you.
MS. LOFYE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: And I’ll just say these… what an exciting six acquisitions.
This is, you know, really the first tranche of new properties that we are in the process of acquiring through, if everyone recalls, the Centennial Fund, which in our last legislative session Chairman Aplin was so involved with and really instrumental in that process, but how exciting is it to be able to go out…. Our mandate is expand the state parks of Texas. And I am really excited about that. I think the number is we’re 33rd in the country in terms of some metric in terms of per rata, per capita. And the state of Texas doesn’t need to be 33rd in anything. It needs to be first.
So, with Zach and Ms. Lofye, I mean, I really am excited about this initiative, and I think the fund is going to lead to many, many great acquisitions over time so that our citizens can enjoy the great outdoors. So anyway, thank you guys. Really well done.
MS. LOFYE: Thank you. Thank you all.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right. Yeah, let’s give them a hand.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Briefing Item Number 10: Texas Parks and Wildlife Foundation, Mr. Phil Lamb, please make your presentation.
PHIL LAMB: Thank you, Chairman, Commission. For the record my name is Phil Lamb, I’m the Director of Philanthropy for the Texas Parks and Wildlife Foundation.
On behalf of the Foundation, thank you very much for having us here this morning. We know that as the official nonprofit partner of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, you are familiar with our work and our Foundation. But we recently celebrated our 30th anniversary of existence and partnership with the department. And it’s been a while since we presented to the Commission, so we thought we would share some highlights from those 30 years and perhaps share a few things you didn’t know about the work that we do as well.
So, we’re proud of our reputation as a conservation champion.
As a nonprofit, we’re constantly evaluating our own work, whether we are fulfilling our mission, whether we are reaching and serving Texans who are interested in getting outdoors.
And one of our corporate partners recently performed their own independent market research about conservation organizations.
And they sat us down for a meeting, and we were visiting about ways to work together and they informed us that TPWF has a 67 percent recognition and approval rating amongst Texans.
This is a fact that we did not know. We were thrilled to find out about it. And when we asked how we compared to other organizations, we learned that the next closest organization was at 6 percent. Again, a fact we didn’t know. And we attribute that rating and that approval and that recognition to our strong partnership with this Department and this Commission and the value of our work to protect our wild things and wild places.
We’re also proud of our reputation as a nonprofit leader with respect to our ratings on Charity Navigator and GuideStar.
There are a variety of organizations that assess the work of charitable groups out there. These are two of the best-known assessment organizations.
With Charity Navigator, we have a four-star rating that we’ve maintained for over a decade. And on their website, they’ll note that only those organizations that operate exceptionally and demonstrate the best practices in the nonprofit industry receive that rating. So, we’re proud to have that for over a decade.
And then with GuideStar, we have their Gold Seal of Transparency, which means we just share what we do.
We’re not hiding anything. We undergo a voluntary independent financial audit of our work every single year, and we try to be smart with our funds. With 90 percent, or more than 90 percent, of every dollar given to the foundation goes directly into projects and programs.
We work with a variety of corporate partners as well.
And we wanted to highlight three here today. The first logo you see there is Toyota. And our friends at Toyota, and Gulf States Toyota particularly, in Houston, they are our longest-standing partner having supported the Foundation, and therefore, the department, since 1997.
H-E-B, Texas’s favorite grocer and a new partner to the Foundation. They have their own eco‑friendly product line called “Field and Future” that a portion of proceeds of the sales of those products goes to the Foundation and then therefore directly supports the work of the Department.
And then Rambler Sparkling Water out of Austin has supported TPWF since their inception.
Our logo is on every single package and every single can of Rambler Sparkling Water. So, folks go to the grocery store whether they are at Central Market or anywhere else, they pick up that can; they see that logo and, again, our recognition improves just a little bit more right there.
So now we’ll talk about how we impact the state, and really the scope of our efforts. We make investments in conservation across Texas. And we have a simple pie chart here with some numbers.
But we highlight… the total is $254 million overall in programmatic investments since our founding in 1991. We’ve got some categories here– Steward, Lead, Conserve and Engage.
And we’ll talk about those but that’s how it’s generally how it is broken up here.
We also like to point out those dollars, when we talk about the $254 million, that’s private funding. We work with families, other nonprofit organizations, corporate partners. That’s not governmental funding. That’s all private philanthropic gifts to the foundation that we then invest across Texas.
So, our first category of investments is the Stewards category, Steward category. And that’s really the protection and restoration of habitat and land across the state. When this slide was created for our 30th anniversary, we were approaching the 200,000-acre level of protection. But since that time, we’ve exceeded it. And that number exceeds 215,000 acres in protected land so far. And again, that’s an $80 million investment in those lands.
So how do we make those investments? Well, we help the department acquire land or protect land. So, we’ve got a few noted here with the Chinati Mountains State Natural Area, The Dan Allen Hughes Unit at state… at the Devil’s River State Natural Area; Enchanted Rock, we’ve assisted with that transaction, that 42 acres in 2023.
And then down there on the coast, you’ll see our note about Powderhorn WMA and State Park. So, Powderhorn WMA, you know we all know is a major park coming online in the next few years, but that was a $50 million acquisition. It was the single largest conservation investment in the history of the state of Texas. The cost of the land was $37 million, and the Foundation invested an additional $13 million and immediately began restoring the property of the habitat and really getting it to the iconic coastal prairie that it should be.
So, when we talk about what the Foundation does, that’s a great example of in addition to rounding up those dollars, we then take possession of that property, work on it, and get it to a place where it would be appropriate to transfer it to the Department. When I say that I mean, literally building buildings and providing equipment and having boots on the ground, work being done out there at Powderhorn. And then through a series of real estate transactions, making turnkey donations to the Department so that it has that property in its portfolio. So, we made a series of transactions and donations here. The first was a 15,000-acre donation that became the Powderhorn WMA, and then a couple more transactions totaling 2,300 acres that became the Powderhorn State Park. And it will soon be that state park, and we make it a reality. We also hold a small endowment at the Foundation for the continued care and maintenance of this property.
Also, under the “Steward” flag and investment bucket that we focus on, we have a Landowner Incentive Program which we run jointly with the Department. And this program assists private landowners wishing to enact good conservation practices on their own properties. So, this is private landowners doing work and the Foundation and Department helping those folks for the benefit of wildlife and habitat on their own lands. To date–this has really been around since 2012, so 12 years– more than 100,000 acres have been restored through that program.
Our next investment category, or bucket, is the “Conserve” category, which is protecting wildlife and plants, simple as that.
That number back from the pie chart is more than $90 million invested in this category alone since 1991. One example of that investment in wildlife is our efforts to help the pronghorn in West Texas. And that’s a partnership between the Foundation, the Department, and one of other nonprofit partners, The Borderlands Research Institute (BRI).
And we helped with funding to translocate 775 pronghorn from 2012 to 2018. Additionally, we provided funding for fence modifications that opened up more than 400,000 acres of land for pronghorn to move freely. Those efforts have paid off with the numbers increasing in pronghorns. From 2011, there were a population estimate of 2,700 pronghorn in Texas, and now that number exceeds 4,500. So, it shows that those practices, that translocation effort, those fence-cutting efforts, those have paid off.
That partnership with BRI is continuing today with the new work beginning on Bighorn Sheep. And we have provided funding.
We’ve already hired Clay Brewer as a Bighorn Project Manager on that, and additionally a veterinarian expert has been hired as a consultant on that project as well, which is just another example of how we partner with not only with the department but specialty conservation groups like BRI when it’s appropriate.
Furthermore on the conserve front, we’ve helped quail and grassland birds as well. We’ve provided funding for staffing, programmatic support, research and fellowships. We also have our own Grassland Restoration Incentive Program, which is a voluntary program that pairs landowners and wildlife biologists with management experts to create healthier grassland habitat.
Examples of this work includes working with landowners on prescribed fire, prescribed grazing plans, brush management and planting native grasses in fours. TPWF also has its own conservation license plate featuring the bob white quail which raises funds for habitat work and education.
Our work doesn’t stop on the land, though. We also do aquatic support with inland fisheries and coastal fisheries and having made $10 million investment, or more than $10 million, in those programs alone.
And that includes work for research, fish hatcheries, to stock our bays, rivers and lakes. We have a project right now, the Texas Freshwater Fisheries Center, that will conclude in the middle of 2025, probably May or June. That’s a $6.5 million project alone and that number is not counted in the $10 million. When you count TFFC and then the forthcoming work that we’re going to be sending out on Sea Center in the coming years, that $10 million investment on coastal and inland fisheries work will more than double.
One example on the coast is our support for the southern flounder. Everybody here will recall the celebration recently of the billionth freshwater saltwater fish release over the summer.
Well, Texas has become a leader in the development of flounder, has stocked over 750 flounder back in our bays. But that has been accomplished with the help of TPWF providing a specialty building and equipment for southern flounder. It was interesting, fascinating to me to work with our coastal fisheries’ folks and learn that you can’t create flounder as easily as you can create trout or redfish. And those flounder require specialty equipment, very specific temperatures, pH balances in the water. And so, they described to us the need for the facilities they needed to make flounder, and now Texas is the leader in flounder production across the U.S. And we host others states that are coming here to learn how they can create flounder, too. So Texas has become a leader on that front.
The Foundation also created… provided funding for the shrimp license buybacks starting in the ’90s and greatly reduced the number of near shore shrimp boats on the water, which has led to sustainable healthy populations of shrimp in our waters.
On the “Engage” bucket of investments, we’ll talk about our work to help with state parks and our Stewards of the Wild Conservation Leadership Program. More than $57 million in investments have been made by the Foundation in this category today. So, we talk about a few state parks here. Just this slide alone represents more than $15 million worth of investments at Balmorhea, Government Canyon, Devil’s River and Palo Duro Canyon State Park. Again, only private funds being used here. When we provide funding for these state parks, we do so with capital projects, land acquisitions, and when we do a capital project, the Foundation directly manages that project. We’ll talk about more of that here in just a moment.
This slide represents another $17 million in investments by the Foundation: Sheldon Lake, the World Birding Center, and Palo Pinto Mountains State Park. So, Palo Pinto Mountains State Park will be the department’s and Texas’s newest state park. The Foundation has invested $12 million in private funding for the verticals on that property and has overseen the construction management of those vertical structures. That process will be completed in February. And once that’s wrapped up, we will make a donation of those verticals directly to the department.
The Foundation also partnered with the Department on the 2023 Centennial Celebration. It was a wonderful celebration, considerable funding from Toyota and H-E-B to make that happen.
And the Foundation raised more than $2 million to provide a new improvement or project at every single one of our 88 state parks across the state.
Also, on the “Engage” front, we have our Stewards of the Wild Program, which I know has come up at a few commission meetings before. But this is our program to cultivate Texans, young adults ages 21 to 45, and get them more engaged with the outdoor happenings in Texas. It’s really an effort to educate them on what’s happening here at these meetings and what the conservation priorities of the Department are. That organization has eight chapters across the state and over 800 members. Each member… or each chapter is led by a voluntary group. Those groups then work with their members and try to provide educational opportunities, opportunities to get outside and meet folks from the Department and other nonprofit organizations.
When I say “meet folks at the department,” these chapters have heard from everybody from Dr. Yoskowitz and Carter Smith to park superintendent, to migratory game bird biologists, game wardens, you name it.
These folks are hearing directly from the Department, and then also from other partner groups like Ducks Unlimited, Borderlands Research Institute, the Cesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute, which has been instrumental in supporting that organization. So, these young conservation leaders are really making a difference across the state. They also have a really significant mentor hunting and fishing program. And when those events happen, members of the Stewards’ program are paired one‑on‑one with another member and the more experienced member teaches the novice how to go deer hunting, dove hunting or fishing. And we make those opportunities happen. We organize weekends. We ask landowners to open the gate, and then we provide the programming and bring those folks afield and get them… help them become new hunters.
Our “Lead” bucket is our support for Texas game wardens.
That investment alone totals more than $30 million to date.
It’s well spent.
The first example of that is the Foundation’s investment of $22 million to help with the construction of the Game Warden Training Center in Hamilton. When we invested those dollars to improve that facility, we led the construction of the cadet dormitories and the leadership living quarters. Those are buildings that are critical to the operation of that facility.
And we managed the multiyear construction of those facilities and then made a donation of them directly to the department.
In 2017, we created an internal program at the Foundation called “Gear Up for Game Wardens”. And that program is an opportunity for us to step in and help our game wardens with specialty, advanced equipment that they have not yet received from the state. That equipment provides thermal drones, snake boots, side scan sonar to look for drowning victims, search and rescue equipment, all the way up to $100,000 airboats. Those purchases are made by the Foundation and then directly given to those game wardens.
We have a full-time staffer who has run that program since its inception, and he has raised with the support of the Foundation team more than $5.5 million for this program and has leveraged those dollars to purchase more than $6 million worth of gear, direct equipment.
And it’s a fascinating program in which a landowner can call us or a local group of folks can say, “How can we help our local game wardens?” And when those conversations happen and donations are made, we make the purchases and put the equipment directly into those game wardens’ hands. That program is also successful, thanks to a series of 20 volunteers, who cover multiple counties each and work with the game warden leadership to learn what their needs are and then how to work with us to meet those needs.
We also try to help other nonprofits in their conservation work across the state. After doing this for three decades and having such a strong partnership with the Department, we are recognized as a leader amongst other nonprofit organizations. So, we try to amplify those partners and step in and help with their projects.
We’re frequently asked to assist with advising how to execute a project, assist with fundraising, and we have a few examples here of just the Borderlands Research Institute out of Alpine, the Gulf of Mexico Trust, the Texas Foundation for Conservation and nonprofit partners in other states including Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi.
We list a few other just more organizations that we’ve supported over the years. But a recent example we’d like to share is the Virginia Department of Natural Resources sent their game wardens to Texas to learn about our headquarters and our Gear Up for Game Wardens Program. Their colonel and leadership of that game warden division traveled to Texas and spent two and a half days here, one of which was with us, to learn exactly how you have this public/private partnership to support those law enforcement officers, and literally taking notes of okay, How do you have an advisory council? How many counties do they cover? How does the piece of equipment move from the nonprofit partner into a game warden’s hands. And we walk them all the way through that, which is gratifying to us to know that they have that level of interest.
As we wrap up this 30 years, we can’t help but just note this is all made possible with a legacy of leadership.
And it’s the folks like you all who have volunteered to serve on these commissions over the years.
There’s been a strong legacy of leadership in that regard. And then the men and women who work at the department and the nonprofit partners we work with so closely. There have been too many folks to name over the years, but thought we would leave you with this photo of Chairman Emeritus Bass who has been an inspiration to us all. Thanks very much.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great. Thank you,Mr. Lamb.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Any questions of Mr. Lamb?
Just a couple. One, are there any other regulatory agencies in the State of Texas that have kind of an associated 501(c)3 associated with them?
MR. LAMB: I don’t think so. I’m not aware of another agency having an equivalent of the Foundation.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Yeah, it’s really, really unique.
MR. LAMB: Yeah, it is.
ANNE BROWN (in audience): DPS does.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: DPS does? Yeah, I know I’m on the Houston Police Board, and we have kind of an affiliate that provides gear and things of that sort. Secondly, I just want to bring light to the Reed Morian “Gear Up for Game Wardens”. Reed was a much-beloved chairman here. He sadly passed recently, but he was just so passionate about Texas Parks and Wildlife and this program. So, if anyone feels so inclined, I know Chairman Morian is watching. He’d love to see any contribution you can get. It’s a huge benefit to our folks. The third is the license plate, does Parks and Wildlife Foundation provide that through the state of Texas? I know I’ve got a quail one, and there’s multiple ones. Is that through your organization?
MR. LAMB: The quail plate is through the Texas Parks and Wildlife Foundation.
When you spend the $35 to purchase that plate, I think $31 or $32 of the dollars come to the Foundation, and then we invest that in upland grassland research and habitat restoration.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Got it. Okay. Good. Lastly, I was curious.
Like for game wardens, folks that have ranches, and things of that sort, periodically do ranchers house our game wardens kind of on a complimentary basis? Have you heard of that before?
MR. LAMB: Yes, sir, I have.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay, so that happens quite a bit or a little bit?
MR. LAMB: I think it happens from time to time. I’m not sure how frequently that happens. But I know that especially when game wardens are assigned a new county for them, often they will not have a place to live right away. And if a rancher has a place to house them, maybe a guesthouse or a cabin, they will open the gate for those game wardens.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Good. So, if anyone has got a ranch and an extra house, let us know.
MR. LAMB: It’s extremely helpful.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: All right. Okay, great. Thank you, Mr. Lamb.
All right.
MR. LAMB: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Next, Briefing Item Number 11: Renewable Energy and White Paper Update. Ms. Laura Zebehazy.
LAURA ZEBEHAZY: Zebe-hay-zee. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the commission. For the record, my name is Laura Zebehazy, Ecological Environmental Planning Program Director within the Wildlife Division.
During this briefing, I will provide an update on the state of renewable energy development in Texas and share TPWD’s role and engagement with renewable energy projects and national initiatives. I will also follow up on a request by the Commission last November to prepare a document summarizing renewable energy impacts on wildlife, habitat and public lands.
Land-based commercial wind energy development has been occurring in Texas since the late 1990s. Wind energy contributes approximately 25 percent to the Texas energy portfolio, and it is second only to natural gas production. The August 2024 U.S. Wind Turbine Database pictured here shows the locations of 275 Texas wind facilities with over 19,000 turbines. Initially, wind energy development was concentrated in the Panhandle, West Texas and South Texas.
Due to technological advancements and turbine design and construction, facilities are expanding into other areas of the state. Several factors influence renewable energy facility placement. However, room on the transmission grid and willing landowners drives many siting decisions. Currently over 37,000 megawatts of installed capacity are in place and another nearly 4,500 megawatts are under construction. In March 2021, the Biden Administration announced a goal to deploy 30 gigawatts of offshore wind in the United States by 2030.
In the summer of 2021, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, or BOEM, began to announce in the federal bureau waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Soon after, TPWD became a member of the Gulf of Mexico Intergovernmental Renewable Energy Task Force, and we actively provide input to BOEM during taskforce and other agency meetings and through public comment opportunities.
On August 29, 2023, the Biden Administration held the first ever offshore wind energy auction for the Gulf of Mexico region which resulted in BOEM awarding a lease for the Lake Charles Wind Energy Lease Area, pictured here as the blue polygon. No bids were received for the Galveston Wind Energy Lease Areas, pictured as the tan polygons.
In March 2024, BOEM announced another proposed sale notice for the wind energy lease areas off the coast of Galveston, but due to a lack of competitive interest, BOEM canceled this sale.
BOEM may decide to move forward with a lease sale at a future time based on industry interest.
In late July, BOEM released a request for competitive interest for two wind energy areas off the coast of Matagorda Island due to receiving an unsolicited lease request from Hecate Energy.
The two wind energy areas of interest are pictured on the map in green and total over 140,000 acres. If BOEM receives one or more indications of interest in acquiring a commercial wind lease from qualified entities, BOEM may decide to move forward with a competitive lease sale.
If BOEM does not receive competing indications of interest from qualified companies, BOEM may move forward with a noncompetitive lease issuance to Hecate Energy. Hecate Energy’s proposal aims to generate up to two gigawatts of renewable energy and considers multiple potential uses for this renewable energy including interconnection to the electric grid, sale and power purchase agreements to private off takers, or use for wind‑to‑x technologies through which offshore wind energy is used to produce another energy resource. The proposed project would consist of up to 133 fixed-bottom wind turbine generators, each with a capacity of 15 to 23 megawatts. This would result in an overall maximum capacity of approximately 3,000 megawatts. TPWD provided input on BOEM’s request for competitive interest in early September. As of today, there has been no word on BOEM’s decision on this matter.
According to the solar energy industries association, in 2023, a new solar project was installed every 39 seconds in the U.S.
and over 6 percent of the U.S. electricity comes from solar energy, over six times its share a decade ago. In Texas, utility scale solar energy development has increased significantly over the last five years, and it is predicted to soon outpace wind energy development in the state.
Utility scale solar facilities are typically defined as ground-mounted solar projects with an energy capacity of one megawatt or above… and above.
Depending on solar panel technology and individual project design, it takes approximately five to ten acres of solar panels to generate one megawatt of energy. Currently, Texas receives almost 7 percent of its electricity from solar. In 2019, Texas solar energy capacity was approximately 2,400 megawatts.
Now, it is approaching 35,000 megawatts.
Last fall, the U.S. Geological Survey and the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory launched the U.S. Solar Photovoltaic, or PV, Database to create an accurate, comprehensive and publicly accessible National PV Database of large‑scale PV facilities that includes estimates of the total footprint of each facility. The map pictured here illustrates the location of 114 operational utility scale solar projects in Texas through 2022.
Of note, last month, one of the largest solar projects in the country opened in Milam County, and it has 875 megawatts of capacity and spans over 5,000 acres. Most of the power was purchased by Google to supply energy to their data centers in Ellis County and cloud‑computing in the Dallas region. Any excess will be used on the Texas grid. Texas solar capacity is expected to increase to over 50,000 megawatts over the next five years.
In the second quarter of 2024, Texas surpassed California in the amount of installed utility‑scale solar energy capacity.
An area of significant growth in the Texas energy market belongs to the deployment of battery energy storage systems, or BESS.
Battery storage’s main function is to capture energy from different sources and store it in rechargeable batteries for later use. This infrastructure is often combined with renewable energy sources to accumulate the power produced during an off‑peak time for use when needed.
According to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, Texas is projected to install 6.5 gigawatts of utility‑scale batteries in 2024, increasing the state’s total install capacity to approximately ten gigawatts.
These facilities are either being built along with new wind and solar facilities, retrofitted into facilities under development, or a stand‑alone infrastructure.
Overall, all indications point to renewable energy development increasing in Texas particularly utility‑scale solar and battery storage. Texas Parks and Wildlife Code 12.0011 directs TPWD to provide recommendations on, or information about, protecting fish and wildlife resources to entities that approve, permit, license or construct development projects or make decisions affecting natural resources.
During coordination, environmental review biologists in the Wildlife Division’s Ecological and Environmental Planning Program will provide project‑specific recommendations and assistance in avoiding or minimizing impacts to fish, wildlife and other natural resources that have the potential to be impacted by renewable energy development projects.
TPWD also provides multiple resources that can assist developers during preliminary area evaluation, site characterization, and design stages of development. TPWD engages with some, but not all, renewable energy project proponents or developers.
TPWD strongly encourages developers and their project proponents to engage with the department early and throughout the planning stages of their solar and wind energy project to assist in identifying impact avoidance and minimization measures. TPWD is also available to provide further technical guidance during construction, operations, and decommissioning of a project.
A key point to highlight is that engagement with our department and implementation of our input by developers is voluntary.
Staff also actively participate in national discussions related to renewable energy and natural resources impacts through the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, or AFWA, Energy and Wildlife Policy Committee and associated working groups,
as well as the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, Playa Lakes Joint Venture, Bat and Wind Energy Cooperative, and the Gulf of Mexico Avian Monitoring Network.
TPWD’s participation in these discussions ensures that our perspective, experience, and unique challenges assist in identifying opportunities to protect and conserve our public trust resources. Some examples of the AFWA facilitated discussions and initiatives at the Ecological Environmental Planning Program have or are contributing to include drafting the recently released communication frameworks for wind and solar project proponents and state fish and wildlife agencies.
These frameworks are nationally focused and establish a set of communication objectives and milestones that are flexible enough to address state and project specific concerns. They serve as a guide for early and iterative communication and good faith between project proponents and state fish and wildlife agencies that establish expectations for the frequency of engagement and the suggestive communication triggers.
With assistance from the states and the Renewable Energy Wildlife Institute, AFWA has also developed a Solar Beneficial Management Practices, or BMP, Database as a resource to collate existing state fish and wildlife agency beneficial management practice documents in one standardized searchable database and as a resource for state agencies to update or develop their own state‑specific BMPs.
Other efforts include the wind and solar siting consultation policies reports that compile state policies that either require, allow for, or encourage consultation with state wildlife agencies during decision making related to renewable energy projects.
Lastly, we are currently engaging with AFWA, American Clean Power, The Energy and Wildlife Action Coalition, seven solar energy developer representatives, and six other state fish and wildlife agencies, on developing a national solar energy siting assessment framework with the goal of creating a standard of practice for addressing wildlife and habitat impacts during solar facility siting.
As renewable energy development in Texas continues to grow, the construction, operation, maintenance and decommissioning of these facilities can have negative impacts on native Texas wildlife and associated habitats. Another concern relates to how the renewable energy industry may potentially impact state‑owned and managed lands and the conservation of natural resources, recreational and hunting opportunities, and overall beneficial visitor experiences provided by those properties.
During the November 2023 commission meeting, the Chairman and Commissioners requested staff to develop a white paper that assessed renewable energy impacts on the state’s natural resources and public lands.
Staff and the Wildlife and State Parks Divisions compiled, reviewed and summarized current and foundational research findings on solar and wind energy development impacts focusing on studies directly related to Texas or those with implications for the state’s wildlife, public lands, and other natural resource concerns.
The document is not a comprehensive review of all published renewable energy research findings, nor does it provide an assessment of the renewable energy industry siting process or their efforts to mitigate impacts to natural resources. For both wind and solar energy development, key focus areas of the paper summarized findings related to habitat use and loss and general wildlife impacts.
Further research was summarized for impacts to bats and birds since most national research efforts investigating the impacts of wind energy facilities on wildlife have focused on those taxa due to the direct mortality that occurs when volant species cross through the rotor swept zone of a turbine.
Native birds are also protected by several federal laws which motivated studies to understand and mitigate direct impacts and behavioral changes. Bats are also facing unprecedented declines from white‑nose syndrome and impacts from wind energy infrastructure only compound population declines as the disease moves across the nation.
Due to the increasing conflicts from renewable energy development on viewsheds of public lands in iconic underdeveloped areas of the state, the paper summarizes research findings on how renewable infrastructure may influence visitor experiences, visitation rates and local economies. Spatial tools were identified as an important means to assist in identifying areas important to retaining scenic value and character.
Early coordination with TPWD and the public regarding potential visual impacts could allow developers to integrate mitigation measures during planning. Some common minimization measures that can be applied to utility‑scale energy projects include vegetation management, limited lighting, reclamation of disturbed areas, screening, reducing glare, reducing project area footprint and selecting finishes, colors, heights, and textures that blend in with the surroundings.
To highlight efforts to protect public land and undeveloped landscapes from renewable energy development, the paper includes a case study on the Devils River. The case study describes the ecological importance of the Devils River and Devils River State Natural Area, the designation of one of the state natural area units as Texas’s first international dark sky sanctuary, and how TPWD and other conservation and community groups and legislators are actively pursuing the continued protection of this special place.
Lastly, the document also includes a list of research needs and gaps, since TPWD believes a better developed understanding of wildlife and renewable energy interactions will be mutually beneficial to all involved parties. Acknowledged advancement will enable more effective and meaningful avoidance, minimization and mitigation of wildlife and habitat impacts.
At this time, I’m happy to answer any questions you may have.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great. Thank you, Ms. Zebehazy. Commissioners, any questions on the paper?
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: This is Commissioner Bell. I have one question.
MS. ZEBEHAZY: Yes, sir.
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Just from a concept you might say of development corridors, so if you are looking at habitat and how to preserve habitat, preserve animal migration patterns and whatnot, is there any… are we giving any thought process, or is there any… what is the thought process behind maybe certain areas are… support the development of those energy patterns without adversely impacting or having less of an impact on wildlife versus the opposite?
MS. ZEBEHAZY: That is definitely a priority of my program to try to facilitate spatial tools and models that could help that discussion of where connectivity across the landscape is really important to allow local and any kind of migration of any species in response to any type of pressures that they may be experiencing.
We are currently in our Landscape Ecology Program developing a conservation opportunities area model that’s going to be associated with our State Wildlife Action Plan that will be helpful in that matter. And then our next step is then to look at connectivity of the landscape using our ecological mapping systems of Texas data to develop the potential of connectivity corridors that would help highlight where conservation actions and priorities need to focus and where potentially it’s better to site things outside of those areas for thinking about the future of conservation of our species and habitats.
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Right. And that seems like maybe a lean‑in strategy if we are expected to have some input or feedback to developers or businesses in this space.
MS. ZEBEHAZY: Yes, sir.
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: So we might have thought about that in advance.
MS. ZEBEHAZY: Right.
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: So that we wouldn’t be reactive to a request.
MS. ZEBEHAZY: Right.
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: We could say, “Well, we thought about that. Here is the suggested feedback.”
MS. ZEBEHAZY: Yes.
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: And I don’t know exactly how that approval/denial process might work, but at least to have that information as a starting basis could be helpful.
MS. ZEBEHAZY: Yes, sir. And definitely we would love it to be publicly available for use by everyone, but particularly developers, so that it can help them in their due diligence tasks and their planning of where it is appropriate potentially to site projects.
VICE-CHAIRMAN BELL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great. Any other questions? Well, one, thank you for the report. It’s great, and I think it is a good start. And I will say there is a lot of things in here I find pretty disturbing in terms of the impact on wildlife and viewscape in the state of Texas. Under section 12.0011, Parks and Wildlife is charged with providing recommendations to developers…
MS. ZEBEHAZY: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: …but has no authority over it. As I understand it, in most instances, we generally don’t even get a call back from the developers in terms of our recommendations, what they might be from a siting standpoint. Is that correct?
MS. ZEBEHAZY: That’s correct. That is something that doesn’t happen as frequently. So, we don’t have that feedback loop of what the recommendations that we are providing are being implemented on the ground and how practical they actually are. You know, we are biologists. We are not engineers. We’re not construction managers. So that feedback, that communication, would be helpful for us to help create beneficial management practices and recommendations that will help our goal but also assist them in minimizing their impacts that they are having to our natural resources. Those communication frameworks that I spoke about during my presentation is an attempt on a national scale to address that very problem, Chairman, about not having that back‑and‑forth, and improving that discussion going forward.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: So, but basically our recommendations go kind of unregarded by the developers.
MS. ZEBEHAZY: They can. There are some that will implement what we are recommending.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Got it. And I’m just going to pick out a couple of points because there is a lot to unpack in your paper.
So, thank you for it, but (inaudible) just to conclude that the behavioral adjustments… pronghorn relative to wind turbines could reduce the functional benefits of their migration such as foraging success, the availability of routes. Pronghorns were observed avoiding areas with turbines. That’s one. Two, bat fatalities in South Texas, a median of 8,336 bat fatalities per year. Basically 16 bats per megawatt, goes basically, you know, unfocused on. In West Texas, the development of utility‑scale solar energy facilities and associated infrastructure resulted in direct loss of habitat, contributed to habitat fragmentation, and increased pressure on limited water resources. Would you agree with all of that?
MS. ZEBEHAZY: I mean, I agree that it’s in the paper and that’s what the research findings found. I will say that particularly in the solar sphere, deployment is happening a lot faster than the research is occurring but that is changing. So, there are still a lot of unknown aspects of the impacts of solar, but you can assume that a lot of solar development is similar to other land‑clearing activities and how it impacts wildlife and habitat and displacement and loss and fragmentation. So yes.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Well, you effectively, on a solar facility, you denude the entire landscape. I mean, there is nothing that grows under a solar panel, I assume.
MS. ZEBEHAZY: Well, they are looking at a lot of different vegetation options of putting in pollinator habitat under those facilities or around those facilities. They have to balance that with their maintenance needs and then the cost of doing mowing at different times of the year, and that sort of thing. There’s also a lot of research looking into how to use the land underneath those panels for sheep grazing, goat grazing, that sort of thing. So, they are trying to figure out how they can have dual purpose on those properties.
I think in those areas where you are thinking of that as a complete, you know, removal of all the vegetation, that tends to be in the more arid locations that’s happening. In the areas like in Central Texas or up through to North Texas, there is an attempt to seed and manage and create vegetation underneath there. But yes, it is a change. If it isn’t on an already degraded property, there is a loss of habitat that’s occurring there.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Yes. I’m going to bet a white‑tail deer probably wouldn’t go underneath a set of solar panels.
MS. ZEBEHAZY: Yeah, I don’t know. Again, that’s an area of potential research.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Just a couple of other things and then I will conclude. But some birds may collide with PV photovoltaic panels because they perceive them to be water bodies. Bats may fail to detect angled collector panels or mirrors due to reduce echolocation output. And then the one, you know, all about the viewscape, “Development on public or private lands adjacent to parks can adversely impact scenic views that extend beyond park boundaries, and then impact important experiences of park visitors and solar facility can occupy a significant portion of the visual field. Somewhere here, “A significant deterioration of the terrain by 35 percent of study respondents.” So, as I said, a lot to unpack.
You’ve got a lot of bullet points here that need further research. And I think, in conclusion, it’s my hope that this research paper really is the beginning of a more thoughtful and pragmatic discussion on the siting and permitting in the state of Texas on turbines, wind turbines, and solar arrays. To a large degree, I believe the developers have gone kind of unchecked in terms of the implication on wildlife fragmentation.
And clearly, our mandate is the protection of the parks in the state of Texas. And we can all say that a viewscape that is destroyed via wind turbines in a pristine park area is nothing… we do not want that in the state of Texas. We want to keep the state pristine. We want to clearly be an advocate for renewable energy, but we want to do it in the right locations with the right siting knowledge. So anyway, thank you very much for your study.
MS. ZEBEHAZY: You are welcome.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: And as I said, I hope multiple shareholders, stakeholders will use this study to move forward on a more comprehensive and thoughtful regulatory process. Thank you.
MS. ZEBEHAZY: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Okay. All right. We are at the end of our meeting. And so, I’ve got a couple of things.
First, I didn’t really give full credit… I want to thank the fine game wardens, men and women, who were involved in saving multiple lives. I kind of passed over that quickly. I mean, looking at the employee survey that we looked at, there is “Highly Engaged,” “Engaged,” “Moderately Engaged,” ”Disengaged.”
Well, those folks are highly engaged in what they are doing.
And I can’t tell you how much we appreciate them going beyond the call of duty. So, thank you to all our game wardens that did that.
Secondly, thank you for the executive and the I.T. staff for the excellent job in moving from Austin to our off‑site here in Corpus Christi. You guys stand up. We are going to give you some applause.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Come On. Stand Up. Stand Up. Dee, it was seamless and flawless.
So, thank you so much. Really well done. I appreciate it very much.
And then finally, thank you for the City of Corpus Christi, the Port of Corpus Christi for hosting us. They have been great, great hosts for us.
And with that, I think…
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Yes?
DR. YOSKOWITZ: Chairman, I just have one thing. We have a lot of staff in the room. I do want to remind you all at 2:00, we are going to have our town hall which local staff is more than welcome to join us in person at the Harte Research Institute Gulf of Mexico Studies on the Texas A&M University Corpus Christi campus. So that is at 2:00. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HILDEBRAND: Great. Thank you, Dr. Yoskowitz. With that, the Commission has completed its business, and I declare us adjourned at 11:24 a.m. Thank you very much. You guys have a great day.
(Commission Meeting Adjourns)
In official recognition of the adoption of
this resolution in a lawfully called public meeting of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission, we hereby affix our signatures this _____ day of ______________, ________._______________________________________
Jeffery D. Hildebrand, Chairman
_______________________________________
Oliver J. Bell, Vice-Chairman
_______________________________________
James E. Abell, Member
_______________________________________
William "Leslie" Doggett, Member
_______________________________________
Paul Foster, Member
_______________________________________
Anna B. Galo, Member
_______________________________________
Robert L. "Bobby" Patton, Jr., Member
_______________________________________
Travis B. Rowling, Member
_______________________________________
Dick Scott, Member