Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Reading through the text regarding non-game animals, it would seem that since no reference is given to specific non-game species [as outlined in 67.004(b)], no new regulation is enforceable, in regards to road collecting.

§ 67.001. DEFINITION. In this chapter, "nongame" means
those species of vertebrate and invertebrate wildlife indigenous to
Texas that are not classified as game animals, game birds, game
fish, fur-bearing animals, endangered species, alligators, marine
penaeid shrimp, or oysters.

§ 67.004. ISSUANCE OF REGULATIONS. (a) The commission by
regulation shall 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.
(b) The regulations shall state the name of the species or
subspecies, by common and scientific name, that the department
determines to be in need of management under this chapter.

Acts 1975, 64th Leg., p. 1405, ch. 545, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1975.
Amended by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 1256, § 110, eff. Sept. 1,
1997.

§ 67.001. DEFINITION. In this chapter, "nongame" means those species of vertebrate and invertebrate wildlife indigenous to
Texas

The part of the above that would worry me is that invertebrate wildlife are included in the definition of "nongame." Does this mean that legally they could ticket us for invert hunting too?
-----
"It's our nature to be adversarial and free
Our evolution didn't hinge on passivity
...Raise Your Voice!"

If they are ticketing for snakes, then yes, they cannot use selective enforcement.
My aim was to point out the specific language used in the directive outlining the regulation of non-game species.

67.004(b) clearly states;

The regulations shall state the name of the species or
subspecies, by common and scientific name, that the department
determines to be in need of management under this chapter.

This has not been done.

The parameters of a regulation is defined in 67.004.

The commission by
regulation shall 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.

Without species-specific text, all or none of our non-game species are effected.

In my opinion, the new code cannot apply to non-game species not specifically listed. The trick is getting a judge to share that opinion.

While invertebrates are included in the definition of non-game (after all, it’s an everything else category), invertebrates do not appear to be regulated in the same way as aquatic wildlife, animals (terrestrial vertebrates) and birds. Section 62.0031 does not apply to invertebrates.

R

I respectfully disagree. No differentiation is given in the code (as far as I can find) to animals.

§ 1.011. PROPERTY OF THE STATE. (a) All wild animals,
fur-bearing animals, wild birds, and wild fowl inside the borders
of this state are the property of the people of this state.

(4) "Wild," when used in reference to an animal, means
a species, including each individual of a species, that normally
lives in a state of nature and is not ordinarily domesticated. This
definition does not include exotic livestock defined by Section
161.001(a)(4), Agriculture Code.

Sec. 62.0031. HUNTING FROM PUBLIC ROAD OR RIGHT-OF-WAY
PROHIBITED. (a) Except as provided by Subsection (b), a person may
not hunt a (wild animal) or bird when the person is on a public road or
right-of-way.

I understand completely. Don't look for a solid definition of "animal" in the statutes. I couldn't find one either. There is, however, a parathetical defintion of animal as a terrestrial VERTEBRATE. I can send you the reference if you contact me. You must trust me on this - they are not issuing citations for hunting invertebrates.

R

That becomes a plus for herpers. The issue of safety is no longer viable if not enforced universally.

By TPWD's definition a wild animal or non game animal is any Terrestrial Vertebrate, does not apply to Invertebrates. Clark

That’s one of several (4-5) possible legal challenges. It’s part of a broader assertion that the Legislature exceeded its authority by adding Section 62.0031 because it regulates and manages wildlife resources. However, since competent counsel has not reviewed ANY of the possible legal challenges YET, I (we) can’t comment on it’s viability. Just know at this time – it is on my list.

R