Outdoors
Sponsored by

Deer Becoming Private Property in Texas

2,155 Views | 32 Replies | Last: 10 min ago by BoerneGator
CivilEng08
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:46p, 3/11/25
Senator Bob Hall thinks they should be. Big time slippery slope here if this grows legs. Has the potential to completely upend wildlife management.

https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/89R/billtext/pdf/SB02147I.pdf#navpanes=0

Quote:
OWNERSHIP OF BREEDER DEER. (a) Except as provided by Subsection (c), a breeder deer is the personal property of a deer breeder...
Reply Quote
1
2 edits
TAMUallen
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:53p, 3/11/25
AG
Breeder deer
Reply Quote
3
CivilEng08
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TAMUallen • 8:58p, 3/11/25
TAMUallen said:
Breeder deer
All deer are a publicly owned resource.
Reply Quote
6
TAMUallen
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:11p, 3/11/25
AG
If anybody thinks that breeder deer aren't actually private property then you're delusional, regardless of how you feel about breeding operations
Reply Quote
23
SanAntoneAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to CivilEng08 • 9:14p, 3/11/25
AG
CivilEng08 said:
TAMUallen said:
Breeder deer
All deer are a publicly owned resource.


The Texas Supreme Court reaffirmed public ownership in fall of 2020.

I doubt Hall's proposed bill will gain any traction.
Reply Quote
4
fburgtx
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:19p, 3/11/25
Hypothetical: What do y'all think of someone buying some acreage, then throwing up a 10-12 ft fence, effectively "taking ownership" of all the wildlife in there (anything larger than a squirrel is now trapped inside, and "outside" wildlife no longer have access to the area)???
Reply Quote
duddleysdraw88
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:30p, 3/11/25
AG
Bob Hall is a pompous ash hat..... and that is being nice. Most hate him in Austin and in his district as well, yet he continues to get re-elected.

Privitizing deer has got to be the most stupid idea in the history of stupid ideas!

Hunting in Texas has been heading the wrong direction for decades. Not near enough public access to hunting has been available in the state. I understand that the situation is due to the high percentage of private land ownership. But if this moves forward, the breeders will further advance the spread of CWD and the scarcity of access to hunting will exponentially expand.

Don't even get me started on the feckless tpwd higher ups that have turned the other way (and get kickbacks) when it comes to the breeding industry in Texas.

F breeders
F tpwd
F privitizing deer
Reply Quote
13
CivilEng08
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TAMUallen • 9:34p, 3/11/25
This bill doesn't have anything to do with the concept of having breeder deer. It's about establishing a law that a deer can be privately owned at all. Breeders have big plans based on establishing this first: Seasons/Harvest, transport, CWD response

High fence a place, and one generation later, it's full of privately owned breeder deer after meeting a few low bars.
Reply Quote
2
duddleysdraw88
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TAMUallen • 9:56p, 3/11/25
AG
TAMUallen said:
If anybody thinks that breeder deer aren't actually private property then you're delusional, regardless of how you feel about breeding operations
and therein lies the problem. It is a total double standard.

I agree with you, but there seems to be a large grey area that both sides claim they are correct.

If you have a wild deer, it is public property.

If you purchase a deer, it is private property.

If you build a fence around a wild deer does it become private property?

What if I buy a private bred doe and release it in a low fence area and it wanders off and a neighbor shoots it?
Can I claim they shot my private property?

What if a private deer escapes their enclosure and ends up at a neighboring property? Does the private deer become public deer when it leaves it's enclosure?

If it leaves one private high fence and directly enters a neighbor's high fence.... who now owns that deer?


This sounds a little crazy and perposterous....... but you know there will be some court battles over this in the not so near future.


If my bull goes to my neighbor's pasture........ it is still my bull and he can not shoot it.

If my dog goes to my neighbor's backyard, it does not become my neighbor's dog.

If my dog goes to the neighbor's and harrasses their cattle.... they can shoot it?....or can they???

Where does this stupidity end? Probably where a lawyer court case says it ends!
Reply Quote
6
duddleysdraw88
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to CivilEng08 • 10:15p, 3/11/25
AG
CivilEng08 said:
This bill doesn't have anything to do with the concept of having breeder deer. It's about establishing a law that a deer can be privately owned at all. Breeders have big plans based on establishing this first: Seasons/Harvest, transport, CWD response

High fence a place, and one generation later, it's full of privately owned breeder deer after meeting a few low bars.
Bet you a dollar to a donut, they will expand the season or eliminate it all together on "private" deer. Thankfully, deer shed and will allow some relief.

CWD would be spread even faster than the breeders currently are fu king things up across the state(s).

This is a really stupid segue but how far could this go? where would this end?
If I release some quail, ducks, dove, etc out of season, can i shoot them if they were "my birds"? Sorry Mr. Game Warden.....but prove that they were not "mine".

Reply Quote
2
Jtd08
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:07p, 3/11/25
AG
Bob Hall is an absolute jackass
Reply Quote
2
txags92
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to CivilEng08 • 11:11p, 3/11/25
AG
CivilEng08 said:
This bill doesn't have anything to do with the concept of having breeder deer. It's about establishing a law that a deer can be privately owned at all. Breeders have big plans based on establishing this first: Seasons/Harvest, transport, CWD response

High fence a place, and one generation later, it's full of privately owned breeder deer after meeting a few low bars.
There is already a bill filed in the house by Rep Curry to take away TPWD's ability to regulate breeders and another to abolish the Texas Animal Health Commission. The privatization of breeder deer is as much about being able to charge the state full retail price for the deer they kill if they have to depopulate a herd for CWD as anything else. High fence a bunch of deer, introduce CWD, wait a year or so until a few test positive, refuse to agree to anything else TPWD wants to do, then claim they were all trophy deer when TPWD depopulates the herd as a last resort. Profit!
Reply Quote
1
txags92
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to duddleysdraw88 • 11:18p, 3/11/25
AG
They can already do that easily via MLDP.

The ultimate goal of the breeders is to get deer behind high fences established as privately owned livestock and have them regulated only by the department of Agriculture. The have spent the last several years demonizing TPWD for their efforts to slow down CWD spread to get the public on their side in trying to take away TPWD's role in managing the breeder operations. Guys like Dr Deer and Ted Nugent are out there actively undermining TPWD specifically for that reason.
Reply Quote
2
Thunderstormr
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to duddleysdraw88 • 5:12a
AG
duddleysdraw88 said:
Bob Hall is a pompous ash hat..... and that is being nice. Most hate him in Austin and in his district as well, yet he continues to get re-elected.

Privitizing deer has got to be the most stupid idea in the history of stupid ideas!

Hunting in Texas has been heading the wrong direction for decades. Not near enough public access to hunting has been available in the state. I understand that the situation is due to the high percentage of private land ownership. But if this moves forward, the breeders will further advance the spread of CWD and the scarcity of access to hunting will exponentially expand.

Don't even get me started on the feckless tpwd higher ups that have turned the other way (and get kickbacks) when it comes to the breeding industry in Texas.

F breeders
F tpwd
F privitizing deer
Own your own land and manage your own deer population. The state would have to "confiscate" private land to increase public access. Why do we need more public access you leach? Buy or lease land for hunting if hunting deer is your thing but don't expect someone else to provide your recreation for you.
Reply Quote
2
MouthBQ98
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:45a
AG
Once they become formally acknowledged as effectively owned livestock, you open windows for anti-hunting advocates to insert restrictions and regulations. As it becomes a more elitist ectivity practiced by fewer people with more wealth or access or dedication, the supporting voter base will diminish in comparison to oppositional activists, so there is a long term consequence to policies that make hunting less accessible and public.
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
txags92
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Thunderstormr • 7:51a
AG
Thunderstormr said:
duddleysdraw88 said:
Bob Hall is a pompous ash hat..... and that is being nice. Most hate him in Austin and in his district as well, yet he continues to get re-elected.

Privitizing deer has got to be the most stupid idea in the history of stupid ideas!

Hunting in Texas has been heading the wrong direction for decades. Not near enough public access to hunting has been available in the state. I understand that the situation is due to the high percentage of private land ownership. But if this moves forward, the breeders will further advance the spread of CWD and the scarcity of access to hunting will exponentially expand.

Don't even get me started on the feckless tpwd higher ups that have turned the other way (and get kickbacks) when it comes to the breeding industry in Texas.

F breeders
F tpwd
F privitizing deer
Own your own land and manage your own deer population. The state would have to "confiscate" private land to increase public access. Why do we need more public access you leach? Buy or lease land for hunting if hunting deer is your thing but don't expect someone else to provide your recreation for you.
Who says the state has to confiscate land? Most of the recent new state parks have come about either through families donating land to TPWD or the state buying properties that came up for sale.
Reply Quote
3
Furlock Bones
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MouthBQ98 • 11:45a
AG
MouthBQ98 said:
Once they become formally acknowledged as effectively owned livestock, you open windows for anti-hunting advocates to insert restrictions and regulations. As it becomes a more elitist ectivity practiced by fewer people with more wealth or access or dedication, the supporting voter base will diminish in comparison to oppositional activists, so there is a long term consequence to policies that make hunting less accessible and public.


I've mentioned this several times on this board and been shouted down over the years.
Reply Quote
1
schmellba99
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MouthBQ98 • 12:41p
AG
MouthBQ98 said:
Once they become formally acknowledged as effectively owned livestock, you open windows for anti-hunting advocates to insert restrictions and regulations. As it becomes a more elitist ectivity practiced by fewer people with more wealth or access or dedication, the supporting voter base will diminish in comparison to oppositional activists, so there is a long term consequence to policies that make hunting less accessible and public.
I'm not for this bill, but I think there are way too many "the sky is falling" reactions.

IF (big IF) this were to pass, those deer would be no different than axis, fallow or any other exotic in terms of how they are and can be treated. If the door was that open for anti hunters to come in and willy-nilly put their restrictions in place, they would have done it already with the plethora of exotics that the state hosts. But they haven't done it, because it would take a monumental effort and resources they simply do not have nor ever will have.
Reply Quote
2
Corps_Ag12
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to txags92 • 12:56p
AG
txags92 said:
Thunderstormr said:
duddleysdraw88 said:
Bob Hall is a pompous ash hat..... and that is being nice. Most hate him in Austin and in his district as well, yet he continues to get re-elected.

Privitizing deer has got to be the most stupid idea in the history of stupid ideas!

Hunting in Texas has been heading the wrong direction for decades. Not near enough public access to hunting has been available in the state. I understand that the situation is due to the high percentage of private land ownership. But if this moves forward, the breeders will further advance the spread of CWD and the scarcity of access to hunting will exponentially expand.

Don't even get me started on the feckless tpwd higher ups that have turned the other way (and get kickbacks) when it comes to the breeding industry in Texas.

F breeders
F tpwd
F privitizing deer
Own your own land and manage your own deer population. The state would have to "confiscate" private land to increase public access. Why do we need more public access you leach? Buy or lease land for hunting if hunting deer is your thing but don't expect someone else to provide your recreation for you.
Who says the state has to confiscate land? Most of the recent new state parks have come about either through families donating land to TPWD or the state buying properties that came up for sale.
True but they typically become state parks, not state forests that are then made available during hunting seasons.
Reply Quote
MouthBQ98
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to schmellba99 • 1:56p
AG
They already tried and did this before with endangered exotics being all but banned and prevented from bring bred even though this practice had radically increased numbers and the odds of survival of the species. A big of an outlier, but it can attract attention. The issue is that the native species being bred for stock is then almost always purchased and placed to be bred with state owned native animals. That gives the state, and the public, an interest in the outcome.

I would be fine if high fence places would first legally cull or remove all state owned animals, and then privately owned stock deer were introduced such that no deer inside the wire is public property, and all resulting population inside is clearly privately owned stock. Then I can see all regulations being expempted, fair and square. In that situation, the deer would really just be an introduced privately owned population of a native species, like an exotic population. You could even reasonably simplify this by having an official population survey and the owner wanting to isolate and exempt their herd into the future has to buy the survey estimated native deer from the public at a market rate.
Reply Quote
3
3 edits
BoerneGator
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to CivilEng08 • 2:57p
AG
CivilEng08 said:
TAMUallen said:
Breeder deer
All deer are a publicly owned resource.

This is the statement of an uninformed person.
Reply Quote
Furlock Bones
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BoerneGator • 3:15p
AG
BoerneGator said:
CivilEng08 said:
TAMUallen said:
Breeder deer
All deer are a publicly owned resource.

This is the statement of an uninformed person.
ok. let's hear the "informed person's" opinion.
Reply Quote
2
1 edit
drred4
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:21p
These are some questions or statements that i posed on the other thread on the house bill?

So, a Question/statement about this. If you have a high fence a place and it has big game on it (whitetail deer, Mule deer etc.) that is public owned game correct? So do the High fence places have to drive out all the game? Do they pay the state for what they may have on the property? Does the State sell game to the public to be privately owned? Where do the imported deer come from. If from a different State, I am pretty sure it is considered the property of the citizens in that state right. This is where I just don't understand how deer breeders came about and how high fence places were ever allowed in the first place, except if you only had exotics on the place and it was high fenced. I guess all these state agencies never thought about this happening and had nothing on the books about it. After years of this happening you can hardly stop any of it.
Reply Quote
SGrem
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:28p
The native wildlife belong to the people of the state of Texas.

High fence is a matter of access. The native wildlife still belong to the people but you have no access....tough noogies. AND it is against the law to hunt the animals without landowner consent. That is key here. No matter what fence or population of animals. That is why you can't hunt from a public road or shoot across etc....you DO NOT have landowner permission to do that. So if the native wildlife that belongs to the people is on public roadways.....the state says no. Same as a high fence. Access to hunting.

OR!!!! The private landowner is additionally limiting the access of THEIR property by the native wildlife. That is to say it can be argued he doesn't want wildlife on there and is fencing everything out. Again tough noogies.

I side with the landowners here....as will the state.

The wildlife access argument is circular.
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
Bird93
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:42p
AG
The native wildlife belong to the People of the State of Texas and are held in Trust by the State.

Allowing privately owned wildlife opens Pandora's Box. There would be limitless unintended consequences, on top of the many intended ones.
Reply Quote
1 edit
BoerneGator
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:44p
AG
One does not lose their private property rights (including the right to exclude trespassers) simply because white tailed deer MAY be present there on. Nor is the property owner obligated to allow those same deer to remain, nor provide for their needs. Most do, gladly, but it is most certainly optional. Some may choose to remove all native deer after constructing a fence to restrict access, and then restock their property with exotic species or even whitetail deer legally purchased from out of state. They invariably mark these deer with ear tags, ear tattoos, and even brands. It's simply another form of free enterprise, and need not incur the ire of the uninformed.

Some seem to believe "their deer" should be allowed to roam unfettered; not unlike the very Game Wardens entrusted with their welfare. But no, private property rights eschew this notion.

The "public" does well to enjoy the uninterrupted voluntary cooperation of their farming and ranching neighbors when it comes to the symbiotic relationship existing between them and the natural resource that are the wild game of Texas.
Reply Quote
schmellba99
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MouthBQ98 • 3:45p
AG
MouthBQ98 said:
They already tried and did this before with endangered exotics being all but banned and prevented from bring bred even though this practice had radically increased numbers and the odds of survival of the species. A big of an outlier, but it can attract attention. The issue is that the native species being bred for stock is then almost always purchased and placed to be bred with state owned native animals. That gives the state, and the public, an interest in the outcome.

I would be fine if high fence places would first legally cull or remove all state owned animals, and then privately owned stock deer were introduced such that no deer inside the wire is public property, and all resulting population inside is clearly privately owned stock. Then I can see all regulations being expempted, fair and square. In that situation, the deer would really just be an introduced privately owned population of a native species, like an exotic population. You could even reasonably simplify this by having an official population survey and the owner wanting to isolate and exempt their herd into the future has to buy the survey estimated native deer from the public at a market rate.
Yes, there was a half hearted effort on some specific exotics that was shot down hard. That was, what - 15 years ago now? Nothing of substance sense then. The mentality that we are somehow granted a privilege by the anti hunters who can take it at any time is just a chicken little mentality.

Breeder deer intermix with native deer already. I guess I just don't see where there is some horrible outcome if breeder deer are suddenly classified as livestock. Honestly, that is exactly what they are anyway. I don't particularly want to see it, but I don't see some end of times coming if it happens either. Not when you look at that specific possibility in a vacuum. Mixed with other potential outcomes and its a different story most likely.

I agree with the high fence comment and have been making the same argument for a while now. Not really on the cull part, but the survey and buying them from the state part for sure.
Reply Quote
BoerneGator
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Bird93 • 3:49p
AG
Bird93 said:
The native wildlife belong to the People of the State of Texas and are held in Trust by the State.

Allowing privately owned wildlife opens Pandora's Box. There would be limitless unintended consequences, on top of the many intended ones.
Farmers and ranchers are "People of the State of Texas" too! They invest their own $$$ providing habitat, food and water for that same native wildlife. Never lose sight of that (and be grateful for it too).
Reply Quote
schmellba99
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BoerneGator • 3:51p
AG
There is nothing symbiotic about high fencing 50 or 100 acres and caging native wildlife and restricting their ability to do what they are designed to do.

Let's say you have you place that is bordered by a NWR, state park, protected area, etc. - state owned land. And you put your high fence up trapping deer on your place that would ordinarily roam into the state owned land, onto your neighbor's land, etc. You have effectively taken a state resource at that point - the state has no effective access to that resource any longer.

Super symbiotic.
Reply Quote
S.A. Aggie
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:54p
AG
Bob Hall can go jump off a pier.
Reply Quote
Bird93
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BoerneGator • 3:56p
AG
I agree 100% Boerne. I take no exception to breeders or breeder deer. I just think there will be those who look to exploit any such law. It could be subverted with very carefully crafted language, but I think it would be difficult.

ETA - I do appreciate the efforts of farmers, ranchers, and other hunters to create and maintain good habitat. But let's also not pretend we aren't receiving substantial compensation from the State in the way of tax exemptions. I know those exemptions rarely (if ever) cover the costs, but they are real and tangible.
Reply Quote
1 edit
BoerneGator
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to schmellba99 • 3:57p
AG
Are you expecting me to argue against your straw man? Because I won't.
Reply Quote
BoerneGator
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Bird93 • 3:59p
AG
Individuals will always misuse and abuse every opportunity made available. That is human nature. But avoid throwing out the baby with the bath water.
Reply Quote
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.