Part 2. TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT
Subchapter D. EDUCATION
The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission adopts an amendment to §51.80, concerning Hunter Education Course and Instructors, without changes to the proposed text as published in the February 22, 2008, issue of the Texas Register (33 TexReg 1488).
The amendment reduces the minimum age requirement for hunter-education certification from 12 years of age to 9 years of age. The current standard has been in effect since 1988. By statute (Parks and Wildlife Code, §62.014), the minimum age for certification may be set by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission.
The minimum age is being lowered to be consistent with the minimum age standards of the department's youth hunting program and similar laws in other states. The department's youth hunting program allows youngsters nine years of age and older to hunt on private lands if they attend and pass a hunter education course. States such as Colorado (no minimum age) and New Mexico (minimum age of 10) require Texans who purchase their state's hunting license to show proof of certification to legally obtain the license.
The amendment will function by reducing the minimum age requirement for hunter-education certification from 12 years of age to 9 years of age.
The department received 53 comments opposing adoption of the proposed rules. Of those comments, 20 commenters expressed a specific rationale or reasoning for opposing adoption. Those comments, accompanied by the department's response to each, are as follows.
Eight commenters opposed adoption and stated that nine years of age is too young to understand the concepts of hunter education. The department disagrees with the comment and responds that other states have similar age requirements and that empirical evidence indicates that nine-year-olds are capable of retaining the training received in a hunter education course. To obtain certification, a person must achieve a minimum score on a department-administered examination and be evaluated by the instructor as acceptable in attitude, knowledge, and skill. As a result, persons who are unable to meet these standards will not receive a hunter education certification, regardless of age. No changes were made as a result of the comments.
Six commenters opposed adoption and stated that most nine-year-old children are not capable of the kind of judgment and awareness necessary for the unsupervised use of hunting weapons. The department disagrees with the comment and responds that an important element of parental supervision of hunting activities is the decision to allow a young person of any age to hunt by themselves. The department believes that parents should exercise good judgment in allowing children to hunt by themselves. Also, as noted above, to obtain hunter education certification, a person must demonstrate a prescribed level of understanding. No changes were made as a result of the comment.
Two commenters opposed adoption and stated that hunters between the ages of 9 and 12 should be required to be accompanied by a licensed hunter 17 years old or older when hunting. The department disagrees with the comment and responds that the department is required by statute (Parks and Wildlife Code, §62.014) to establish a minimum age for participation in hunter education and to issue a hunter education certificate to any person who completes the hunter education course. The statute further provides that anyone who has not completed a hunter education course must be accompanied by a licensed hunter aged 17 or older. The department therefore cannot require a person who has successfully completed a hunter education course to be accompanied by another hunter. No changes were made as a result of the comment.
One commenter opposed adoption and stated that the minimum age for hunter education in other states has absolutely no bearing on Texas regulations. The department disagrees with the comment and responds that Texans who hunt in other states must comply with the requirements of those states, and that the experience of other states is useful in determining what is appropriate in Texas. No changes were made as a result of the comment.
One commenter opposed adoption and stated that special courses should be provided for young persons taking hunter education. The department disagrees with the comment and responds that the department trains instructors to accommodate various learning styles and uses hands-on teaching methods effective for both youngsters and adults. The department also intends the hunter education course be a single standard that must be met by all hunters, regardless of age. No changes were made as a result of the comment.
One commenter opposed adoption and stated that children under the age of 12 should not be required to take the hunter education course. The department agrees with the comment and responds that the rule allows but does not require children under the age of 12 to take the hunter education course. However, a person under the age of 12 will be required to have obtained hunter education certification if he or she wishes to hunt without the supervision of a person 17 year of age or older. No changes were made as a result of the comment.
One commenter opposed adoption and stated that mandatory hunter education should be eliminated. The department disagrees with the comment and responds that there is a demonstrable positive correlation between mandatory hunter education and the decreased frequency of hunting accidents and increased compliance with hunting regulations. No changes were made as a result of the comment.
The department received 307 comments supporting adoption of the proposed amendment.
No groups or associations commented on the proposed amendment.
The amendment is adopted under the authority of Parks and Wildlife Code, §62.014, which authorizes the department to adopt rules necessary to implement the hunter education program.
This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Officeof the Secretary of State on May 6, 2008.
TRD-200802379
Ann Bright
General Counsel
Texas Parks and Wildlife Department
Effective date: May 26, 2008
Proposal publication date: February 22, 2008
For further information, please call: (512) 389-4775
Subchapter A. HARMFUL OR POTENTIALLY HARMFUL FISH, SHELLFISH, AND AQUATIC PLANTS
The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission adopts amendments to §57.112 and §57.113, concerning Harmful or Potentially Harmful Fish, Shellfish, and Aquatic Plants, without changes to the proposed text as published in the February 22, 2008, issue of the Texas Register (33 TexReg 1492).
The amendment to §57.112, concerning General Rules, prohibits the removal of live grass carp from public waters where grass carp have been placed under a permit issued by the department. The department issues permits authorizing the purchase and release of grass carp to control aquatic vegetation in public waters. The removal of grass carp from waters where they have been released frustrates the biological goal of controlling aquatic vegetation and reduces the cost effectiveness of that control effort. The amendment is necessary to make grass carp introductions as effective as possible.
The amendment to §57.113, concerning Exceptions, prohibits the release into public waters, importation, sale, purchase, transport, propagation, and possession of black carp (Mylopharyngodon piceus), silver carp (Hypopthalmichthys molitrix), and all species of crayfish within the family Parastacidae.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has added the black carp and the silver carp to the federal list of injurious fish, which prohibits live fish, gametes, viable eggs, and hybrids of listed species from being imported into or transported between the continental United States, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico or any territory or possession of the United States. The silver carp was added to the list on July 10, 2007 and the black carp was added to the list on October 18, 2007. Although the federal listing does not affect any state's authority to permit possession of black carp or silver carp, by prohibiting importation and interstate transport it effectively makes commercial production of those species moot. The department is aware of no person in the state cultivating or selling black or silver carp under an exotic species permit. The amendment makes Texas regulations consistent with federal regulations.
Prior to this rulemaking the possession, importation, sale, purchase, transport, propagation, and release into public waters of all species of southern hemisphere crayfish with the exception of the family Parastacidae was prohibited. Crayfish in the family Parastacidae could be possessed, propagated, transported, and sold under an exotic species permit, but live Parastacidae could be possessed by non-permitted persons only at a restaurant or other food service establishment for purposes of on-premises consumption as food or while being transported to an out-of-state destination.
The department recently conducted a risk analysis of escapement, establishment, and environmental impacts of Australian red claw crayfish (Cherax quadricarinatus). The risk analysis concluded that there is a high potential of escapement from both open and closed systems and a high probability of survival and population establishment in natural systems in Texas. Closed systems are tank or pond systems that do not allow free ingress or egress. Open systems are ponds that allow organisms to enter or leave as they wish. The department finds that the potential detrimental effects on native Texas crayfishes and other aquatic organisms provide ample justification for the prohibition of the possession of live red claw crayfish in the state.
The impact of a specific exotic species on a given native ecosystem is difficult to predict, but in general terms, the threat potential can be characterized by 1) evidence that the species is invasive elsewhere; 2) potential suitable range; 3) reproductive potential; 4) habitat quality; 5) the presence/absence of similar species; 6) the prey/predator relationship within the prospective habitat; and 7) food abundance. In addition, other factors such as dispersal dynamics (the movement of organisms as they distribute themselves between habitats) can affect the efficiency with which an invasive exotic species can become established. Once established, invasive exotic species are extremely difficult if not impossible to eliminate.
The Australian red claw crayfish (Cherax quadricarinatus) is native to remote areas of tropical northern Australia. Escapement of other nonindigenous crayfishes into natural systems in the U.S. has resulted in the elimination of native crayfishes from lakes and streams, the loss of habitats and forage important for native fish production and recruitment, and reduced abundance of native amphibians (Lodge et al. 2000). These negative impacts, coupled with the observation that most North American crayfishes occur within small ranges throughout the southeastern United States, suggest a potential cause for concern regarding the vulnerability of native aquatic communities to nonindigenous crayfishes in Texas.
Escapements from aquaculture facilities, as well as both intentional and unintentional releases by aquarium and pond enthusiasts, have been responsible for the establishment of many nonindigenous fishes in the United States. Aquaculture has been identified as the fourth most important vector in crayfish introductions in North America (Lodge et al. 2000), and an estimated 65% of escape events have resulted in the establishment of exotic populations (Beveridge, no date). Escapement of the red claw crayfish from aquaculture environments has been documented in Africa, Puerto Rico, and Venezuela (Williams et al. 2001; de Moor 2002). Adults have exhibited the ability to climb air supply lines, whereas juveniles climb the sides of tanks or become drawn into filter and drainage systems and subsequently released (Masser and Rouse 1997). Red claw crayfish also exhibit the ability to escape natural or man-made pond environments over land (J. Furse, Griffith University). These results indicate a high escapement potential of red claw crayfish in both open and closed systems.
Red claw crayfish are habitat generalists, exhibiting broad dietary requirements and the ability to survive a broad range of environmental conditions (Masser and Rouse 1997; Kats and Ferrer 2003). Optimal growth and survival occurs at water temperatures above 21°C (70°F); however, individuals can survive at water temperatures as low as 7 to 10°C (46 to 50°F; Masser and Rouse 1997), with reproduction occurring at temperatures greater than 15°C (59°F; J. Furse, Griffith). Red claw crayfish can also persist at relatively low dissolved oxygen concentrations (< 1 ppm; Masser and Rouse 1997), and high levels of salinity (e.g., up to 1.75%). Mean annual water temperatures in many regions of Texas are within the thermal tolerances of the red claw crayfish, suggesting that these regions, as well as thermally influenced areas (e.g., springs, municipal warmwater discharges, etc.) may facilitate the survival of red claw crayfish in natural environments. In addition, red claw crayfish have the ability to burrow into substrates (Masser and Rouse 1997) which may provide thermal insulation and allow individuals to persist at sublethal temperatures.
The reproductive characteristics of the red claw crayfish suggest the potential for rapid population growth in a suitable environment. Individuals reach reproductive maturity at 6 to 12 months of age and have the ability to produce multiple broods each year with high reproduction rates (i.e., up to 1,000 eggs per female per spawn; Masser and Rouse 1997). In contrast, most native North American crayfishes spawn once per year during fall and females bear eggs during spring (Helfrich and DiStefano 2003). The growth of juvenile red claw crayfish is rapid, and aggressive behavior and cannibalism are known to occur at this lifestage (Masser and Rouse 1997). It is unknown whether these behaviors exhibited towards other red claw crayfish would be extended to other species under competition in a natural environment.
Little information exists regarding competition between red claw crayfish and native North American species. Masser and Rouse (1997) reported that red claw crayfish did not negatively affect native red swamp crayfish during interaction experiments in an Alabama culture environment. However, red claw crayfish are known to dominate local Australian crayfish and prawn species (Cook et al., no date) and out-compete native shrimp species in Puerto Rico (Williams et al. 2001). Studies of the impacts of other exotic crayfishes on native species indicate highly detrimental effects, including reductions in distribution or extirpation (Reigel 1959; Bouchard 1977; Lodge et al. 1986; Olsen et al. 1991; Jezerinac et al. 1995; Light et al. 1995; Taylor and Redmer 1996; Lodge et al 2000b). Competitive advantages of the exotic species were found to be related to a number of interacting mechanisms, including food consumption rates (Olsen et al. 1991; Willman et al. 1994), individual growth rates and potential (Hill et al. 1993), competition for shelter and food (Hill and Lodge 1994), differential susceptibility to fish predation (DiDonato and Lodge 1993; Garvey et al. 1994), and genetically confirmed hybridization (Perry et al. unpublished data; Lodge et al. 2000b). The relatively large body size, rapid growth rate, and reproductive potential of the red claw crayfish suggest that these characteristics may provide similar competitive advantages over native Texas species.
Approximately 350 species (75% of the world's total) of crayfish inhabit the United States. Many of these are among the most threatened of all terrestrial and aquatic species (Lodge et al. 2000a; Lodge et al. 2000b). In addition, the majority of these crayfishes occur within small geographic ranges in the Southeastern U.S., rendering them highly susceptible to environmental change (Lodge et al. 2000b). A total of 35 species of crayfish are native to Texas, 13 of which are endemic and distributed over a relatively small geographic scales (e.g., drainage basins, counties, etc.). In 1996, the American Fisheries Society listed four Texas species as of special concern, one as threatened, and an additional six as endangered (Table 1). The status of these species, coupled with the limited geographic distribution of many Texas crayfishes, suggests that conserving these populations and their respective environments are future challenges faced by the department. In addition, other state and federally listed aquatic organisms, such as the San Marcos salamander Eurycea nana, the Comal Springs riffle beetle Heterelmis comalensis, the Comal Springs Dryopid beetle, Stygoparnus comalensis, and the fountain darter Etheostoma fonticola, could be negatively affected due to predation, alterations in habitat, food web dynamics, and competition from invasive exotic species. Although little is known about the direct impacts of the red claw crayfish on native aquatic communities in the U.S., information from other countries, case histories of other invasive crayfishes in the U.S., and the population status of many aquatic species in Texas suggest that detrimental effects on natural systems in the state are probable.
Although Government Code, §2001.0225, Regulatory Analysis of Major Environmental Rules, does not apply to the rules, the department nonetheless has determined that the rule as adopted will result in the best combination of effectiveness in obtaining the desired results and of economic costs not materially greater than the costs of any alternative regulatory method considered. The department finds that there are no small or microbusinesses or other businesses in the state that are engaged in the lawful sale of black carp, silver carp, or crayfish within the family Parastacidae. Therefore, no businesses, including small or microbusinesses, are affected by the rules as adopted. The rules as adopted are the most effective method of obtaining the desired results and since no business entity is in lawful possession of black carp, silver carp, or crayfish within the family Parastacidae, the economic cost to businesses is not materially greater than the costs of any alternative regulatory method considered.
The amendment to §57.112 will function by prohibiting the removal of live grass carp from public waters where grass carp have been placed under a permit issued by the department.
The amendment to §57.113 will function by prohibiting the release into public waters, importation, sale, purchase, transport, propagation, and possession of black carp (Mylopharyngodon piceus), silver carp (Hypopthalmichthys molitrix), and all species of crayfish within the family Parastacidae.
The department received one comment opposing adoption of the proposed rules. The commenter did not offer a specific rationale or reason for opposing adoption. No changes were made as a result of the comment.
The department received 18 comments supporting adoption of the proposed rules.
No groups or associations commented on the proposed rules.
The amendments are adopted under the authority of Parks and Wildlife Code, §66.007, which authorizes the commission to regulate the importation, possession, sale, and placing into the water of this state harmful or potentially harmful exotic fish, shellfish and aquatic plants, and under Agriculture Code, §134.020, which authorizes the commission to regulate the importation, propagation, and sale of harmful or potentially harmful exotic species by an aquaculturist.
This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on May 6, 2008.
TRD-200802378
Ann Bright
General Counsel
Texas Parks and Wildlife Department
Effective date: May 26, 2008
Proposal publication date: February 22, 2008
For further information, please call: (512) 389-4775