Mountain Lions - Proposed Prohibition of Canned Hunting; Trapping Standards

Please limit submissions to one per person.

Summary

• English Summary
• Resumen en español

NONGAME WILDLIFE RULES

MOUNTAIN LIONS

PROPOSAL PREAMBLE

1. Introduction.

         The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department proposes new 31 TAC §65.950, concerning Mountain Lions.

        In 2022, the department received a petition for rulemaking concerning mountain lion monitoring and management. In response, the Chairman of the Commission directed the formation of a Mountain Lion Stakeholder Working Group consisting of landowners, livestock producers, private land managers, trappers, and natural resource professionals. The group was charged with making recommendations on the abundance, status, distribution, and persistence of mountain lions in Texas; development of a mountain lion management plan for Texas; harvest reporting; trap/snare check standards; harvest/bag limits; and “canned” hunts.

        Following a number of meetings throughout 2023, the Working Group’s initial report recommended that the commission initiate rulemaking to prohibit “canned” hunting and to establish trapping standards. “Canned” hunting is regulated or prohibited in many states and countries, including Texas, where it is unlawful to conduct canned hunts for certain exotic species (African or Asiatic lion, tiger, leopard, cheetah, hyena, bear, elephant, wolf, or rhinoceros, or any subspecies or hybrid of these animals), but not mountain lions.

        Proposed new §65.950, concerning Mountain Lions, would prohibit “canned” hunting and establish trapping standards for mountain lions.

        Proposed new subsection (a) would define “captivity” as “the state of being held under control, or kept caged, penned, or trapped,” which is necessary to establish the conditions under which “canned” hunting may be presumed to be occurring.

        Proposed new subsections (b)(1) and (2) would prohibit the hunting of mountain lions in captivity as well as the release of captive mountain lions for purposes of being hunted or training dogs. The proposed provision would prohibit “canned” hunting of mountain lions, which is necessary to protect the species.

        Proposed new subsection (b)(3) would create an offense for a person to allow a live mountain lion to be captured in a trap or snare for more than 36 hours. The department has determined that allowing a trapped or snared mountain lion to remain in that state for longer than 36 hours is inhumane and if the practice is allowed to be indiscriminately employed, will negatively affect the ability of mountain lion populations to successfully perpetuate themselves.

        Proposed new subsection (b)(4) would create an offense for the act of conducting, promoting, assisting, or advertising an activity prohibited by the section. The department believes that persons who aid, assist, encourage, or otherwise act as a party to the commission of an offense should be held accountable in addition to the person who commits the offense.

        Proposed new subsection (c) would expressly state that the section does not apply to the humane dispatch of lawfully trapped mountain lions or apply to the use of snares designed to cease functionality if 285 pounds of force are applied to its mechanism. The department does not wish to interfere with lawful trapping activities conducted for other species and specifically wishes to allow the use of special snares that a large animal such as a mountain lion or bear can escape.

2. Fiscal Note.

        Robert Macdonald, Regulations Coordinator, has determined that for each of the first five years that the rule as proposed is in effect, there will be no fiscal implications to state or local governments as a result of administering or enforcing the rule as proposed.

3. Public Benefit/Cost Note.

        Mr. Macdonald also has determined that that for each of the first five years that the rule as proposed is in effect:

                 (A) The public benefit anticipated as a result of enforcing or administering the proposed rule will be the protection of nongame species, which are crucial to healthy, balanced, and functional wildlife systems.

                 (B) The rule as proposed could result in adverse economic impacts to persons required to comply. Those impacts are identical to the impacts to small and microbusinesses described elsewhere in this preamble.

                 (C) Under provisions of Government Code, Chapter 2006, a state agency must prepare an economic impact statement and a regulatory flexibility analysis for a rule that may have an adverse economic effect on small businesses, micro-businesses, and rural communities. As required by Government Code, §2006.002(g), in April 2008, the Office of the Attorney General issued guidelines to assist state agencies in determining a proposed rule’s potential adverse economic impact on small businesses. Those guidelines state that an agency need only consider a proposed rule’s "direct adverse economic impacts" to small businesses and micro-businesses to determine if any further analysis is required. For that purpose, the department considers "direct economic impact" to mean a requirement that would directly impose recordkeeping or reporting requirements; impose taxes or fees; result in lost sales or profits; adversely affect market competition; or require the purchase or modification of equipment or services. The department has determined that the proposed rule could result in a direct economic cost to small businesses and micro-businesses. There are persons in the state who trap mountain lions (among other species) for profit; the precise number is unknown but is believed to be in the hundreds. The adverse economic impact to those persons would consist of the cost of increased frequency of the checking of traps/snares in order to ensure that traps or snares set for mountain lions, if successful, do not hold the target for longer than 36 hours. This cost would be related to the cost of fuel used while traveling to check traps. Given the large sizes of properties in mountain lion habitats, the magnitude of trapping effort in any given location, the variety of vehicles used, and the number of places where a person may have set traps for mountain lions, it is difficult if not impossible to estimate what that cost might be; however, the department believes it to be less than $500 per year. The department notes that in many cases, traps can be checked in the process of other activities that would be occurring anyway, which would reduce the cost of compliance. In addition, technology is available that would allow traps to be checked remotely.

        The department considered several alternatives to the rule as proposed.

        One alternative was to do nothing. This alternative was rejected because the department has a statutory duty to protect nongame wildlife. Doing nothing would frustrate that duty.

        Another alternative considered was mandatory reporting of all mountain lion take, which would allow the department to develop specific data to inform future management options. This alternative was rejected because the department determined that cooperation and compliance issues would complicate the department’s ongoing efforts to comply with the recommendations of the Working Group.

        Another alternative considered was to create a season and bag limit for the take of mountain lions. This alternative was also rejected because of the potential to interfere with department’s ongoing efforts to comply with the recommendations of the Working Group, particularly the development of a mountain lion management plan, which requires the cooperation and inclusion of landowners, land managers, and trappers.

        The department has determined that the rule as proposed will not affect rural communities, as it does not directly regulate any rural community.

                 (D) The department has not drafted a local employment impact statement under the Administrative Procedures Act, §2001.022, as the agency has determined that the rule as proposed will not impact local economies.

                 (E) The department has determined that Government Code, §2001.0225 (Regulatory Analysis of Major Environmental Rules), does not apply to the proposed rule.

                 (F) The department has determined that there will not be a taking of private real property, as defined by Government Code, Chapter 2007, as a result of the proposed rule.

                 (G) In compliance with the requirements of Government Code, §2001.0221, the department has prepared the following Government Growth Impact Statement (GGIS).  The rule as proposed, if adopted, will:

                         (1) not create a government program;

                         (2) not result in an increase or decrease in the number of full-time equivalent employee needs;

                         (3) not result in a need for additional General Revenue funding;

                         (4) not affect the amount of any fee;

                         (5) create a new regulation (to prohibit “canned” hunting of mountain lions and establish trapping rules);

                         (6) not expand an existing regulation;

                         (7) neither increase nor decrease the number of individuals subject to regulation; and

                         (8) not positively or adversely affect the state’s economy.

4. Request for Public Comment.

        Comments on the proposed rule may be submitted to Richard Heilbrun, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, 4200 Smith School Road, Austin, Texas 78744; (512) 389-8104; email: richard.heilbrun@tpwd.texas.gov or via the department website at www.tpwd.texas.gov.

5. Statutory Authority.

        The new rule is proposed under the authority of Parks and Wildlife Code, §67.004, which requires the commission by regulation to establish any limits on the taking, possession, propagation, transportation, importation, exportation, sale, or offering for sale of nongame fish or wildlife that the department considers necessary to manage the species.

        The proposed new rule affects Parks and Wildlife Code, Chapter 67.

6. Rule Text.

        §65.950. Mountain Lions (Puma concolor).

                 (a) In this section “captivity” means the state of being held under control, or kept caged, penned, or trapped. 

                 (b) No person in this state may: 

                         (1) hunt a mountain lion that is in captivity;  

                         (2) release a mountain lion from captivity for purposes of:  

                                  (A) being hunted;  

                                  (B) training dogs;  

                         (3) allow a live mountain lion to be captured in a trap or snare for more than 36 hours; or 

                         (4) conduct, promote, assist, or advertise an activity prohibited by this subsection.

                 (c) This section does not: 

                         (1) prohibit a person from humanely dispatching a lawfully trapped mountain lion; or 

                         (2) apply to the use of snares designed to break away or disassemble with 285 pounds of force or less.

        This agency hereby certifies that the proposal has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be within the agency’s authority to adopt.

        Issued in Austin, Texas, on