Texas Wildlife - June 2025

By the time this issue of Texas Wildlife hits your mailbox, the 89th Texas Legislative Session will have come to an end--at least the regular session. Since before the session started in January, your TWA staff and volunteer leaders have been consumed in the legislative process tracking bills of interest, testifying in committee hearings, visiting offices and representing the interests of TWA members. With nearly 9,000 bills being filed in the 89th, it was a team effort staying on top of legislation, both good and bad, that would affect landowners, hunters and the natural resources that are so important to our state.

We are excited to now turn our full attention to our upcoming TWA Convention that will be held July 10-12 at the JW Marriott Hill Country Resort and Spa. This will be a special weekend for TWA as we celebrate the organization’s 40th anniversary with a full agenda of events that will bring members together for fellowship, fundraising, education and reflection on the first 40 years of our organizational impact.

The event will kick off on Thursday with the Private Land Summit focusing on an issue of great importance to our state: renewable energy. Our Friday TWAF luncheon will include a keynote address from Dan Cabela discussing the importance of conservation around the world and how TWA is contributing to that overall effort here at home in a major way. The Texas Big Game Awards statewide banquet will move back to Friday night and will be followed by an impressive auction. On Saturday we will hold our annual TWA Awards luncheon where we will welcome our new president and focus much of the program on the 40th anniversary by hosting a panel discussion, moderated by TWA co-founder Larry Weishuhn, with past presidents providing their insight on the meaningful issues and actions during their terms. As always, we will close out the event with our Grand Auction on Saturday night with many of the special hunts and trips our members expect along with several new additions.

One of my fondest memories from conventions of the past was hearing the Not So Silent Auction bell ringing on Saturday night and seeing our members huddling around the big board in a final effort to secure a hunting trip or special silent auction item as we closed out the evening. I’m excited to tell you that we will be bringing it back again this year.

We look forward to seeing you all in San Antonio in July to celebrate the 40th! Thanks for being a TWA member.

Texas Wildlife Association MISSION STATEMENT

Serving Texas wildlife and its habitat, while protecting property rights, hunting heritage, and the conservation efforts of those who value and steward wildlife resources.

OFFICERS

Jonathan Letz, President, Comfort

Nyle Maxwell, Vice President, Georgetown

Dr. Louis Harveson, Second Vice President for Programs, Alpine Parley Dixon, Treasurer, Austin

For a complete list of TWA Directors, go to www.texas-wildlife.org

PROFESSIONAL STAFF/CONTRACT ASSOCIATES

ADMINISTRATION & OPERATION

Justin Dreibelbis, Chief Executive Officer

TJ Goodpasture, Director of Development & Operations

Denell Jackson, Controller

Becky Alizadeh, Office Manager

OUTREACH & MEMBER SERVICES

Debbie Copeland, Director of Membership

Sean Hoffmann, Director of Communications

Nicole Vonkrosigk, Regional Membership Coordinator

CONSERVATION LEGACY AND HUNTING HERITAGE PROGRAMS

Kassi Scheffer-Geeslin, Director of Youth Education

Andrew Earl, Director of Conservation

Amber Brown, Conservation Education Specialist

Gene Cooper, Conservation Education Specialist

Sarah Hixon Miller, Conservation Education Specialist

Megan Pineda, Conservation Education Specialist

Kay Bell, Conservation Educator

Taylor Cabler, Conservation Educator

Denise Correll, Conservation Educator

Christine Foley, Conservation Educator

Yvonne Keranen, Conservation Educator

Terri McNutt, Conservation Educator

Jeanette Reames, Conservation Educator

Louise Smyth, Conservation Educator

Marla Wolf, Curriculum Specialist

Noelle Brooks, CL Program Assistant

Matthew Hughes, Ph.D. Director of Hunting Heritage

COL(R) Chris Mitchell, Texas Youth Hunting Program Director

Bob Barnette, TYHP Field Operations Coordinator

Taylor Heard, TYHP Field Operations Coordinator

Briana Nicklow, TYHP Field Operations Coordinator

Kim Hodges, TYHP Program Coordinator

Kristin Parma, Hunting Heritage Program Specialist

Jim Wentrcek, Adult Learn to Hunt Program Coordinator

Loryn Calderon, Hunting Heritage Administrative Assistant

TEXAS WILDLIFE ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION

Justin Dreibelbis, Chief Executive Officer

TJ Goodpasture, Director of Development & Operations

Denell Jackson, Development Associate

ADVOCACY

Joey Park, Legislative Program Coordinator

MAGAZINE CORPS

Sean Hoffmann, Managing Editor

Publication Printers Corp., Printing, Denver, CO

Texas Wildlife Association

6644 FM 1102

New Braunfels, TX 78132 (210) 826-2904

FAX (210) 826-4933

(800) 839-9453 (TEX-WILD) www.texas-wildlife.org

Texas Wildlife

JUNE

June 12

New Braunfels Sportsmen’s Celebration & Texas Big Game Awards, 5 p.m., Allen Farmhaus, 2606 FM 758, New Braunfels, 78130.

June 20

Region 6 Texas Big Game Awards, 5 p.m., Pitser Garrison Convention Center, 601 N. 2nd St., Lufkin 75901.

June 25

Wild at Work webinar: Prevalence of cecal and eye worms in northern bobwhite quail. Noon-1 p.m. Register at https://bit.ly/44B7m5c.

JULY

July 10-13

WildLife 2025, TWA’s 40th Annual Convention, J.W. Marriott Hill Country Resort & Spa, San Antonio. Register and book your room today at https://bit.ly/WildLife2025.

July 24

Alpine Sportsmen’s Celebration & Texas Big Game Awards, 5 p.m., Granada Theater, 207 E. Holland Ave., Alpine, 79830.

AUGUST

August 2

Kingsville Sportsmen’s Celebration & Texas Big Game Awards, 5 p.m., Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Center, 1730 W. Corral Ave., Kingsville, 78363.

August 22

Amarillo Sportsmen’s Celebration & Texas Big Game Awards, 5 p.m., Amarillo Civic Center, 401 S. Buchanan St., Amarillo, 79101.

August 29

Victoria Sportsmen’s Celebration & Texas Big Game Awards, 5 p.m., Victoria Community Center Annex, 2905 E. North St., Victoria, 77901

SEPTEMBER

September 12

Bryan/College Station Sportsmen’s Celebration & Texas Big Game Awards, 5 p.m., Ice House on Main, 800 N. Main St., Bryan, 77803.

September 19

Abilene Sportsmen’s Celebration & Texas Big Game Awards, 5 p.m., 201 Mesquite Event Center, 201 Mesquite St., Abilene, 79601.

FOR INFORMATION ON HUNTING SEASONS, call the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department at (800) 792-1112, consult the 2023-2024 Texas Parks and Wildlife Outdoor Annual, or visit the TPWD website at: tpwd.state.tx.us.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

TWA LETTER TO THE EDITOR POLICY: Texas Wildlife Association members are encouraged to provide feedback about issues and topics. The CEO and editor will review letters (maximum 400 words) for possible publication. Email letters to shoffmann@texas-wildlife.org

TWA MEMBER PHOTO CONTEST

TWA Member Photo Contest: Email us your best photos, TWA! We’ll accept them from current members through Oct. 31, 2025 and publish the best ones in upcoming issues to Texas Wildlife Extra. One entry per member per category, must be a current TWA member when photo is entered. Categories are landscape, wildlife, humor and game camera. Also, an open youth division for photographers who are 17 and under. Photos must be taken in Texas! Email your high resolution, unedited and unenhanced picture to TWA@texas-wildlife.org

Where Have All The Snapper Gone?

ARTICLE BY WILL LESCHPER

Texas red snapper fishing has long been a prized pursuit.

The striking fish are highly valued as table fare due to their mild, sweet flavor and flaky texture, making them a favorite in kitchens and restaurants across the Gulf Coast and the entire country.

As a result, red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico have been highly pressured by recreational and commercial anglers alike, leading to contentious debate on how many fish truly

reside offshore and the quotas allowed for differing sectors of the fishing community.

During the past few decades, there has been an increased emphasis on addressing what had been deemed to be declining red snapper stocks. This has led to size and bag limits and more restrictive fishing seasons in federal waters, especially for recreational anglers who mostly hire fishing guides or venture out on “party boats” to target a species that most often is found far offshore.

BY WILL LESCHPER

A significant aspect of red snapper management in Texas involves the previous division of authority between federal and state agencies. Under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, federal waters, defined as waters that are located nine to 200 nautical miles offshore, have been managed by NOAA and the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council.

RED SNAPPER REGULATIONS

Under an agreement between the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), TPWD currently has the ability to establish the opening and closing of the red snapper fishery in federal waters off the Texas coast. The state is charged with closing the federal water fishery when the state’s allotted poundage is reached annually, so TPWD uses catch data to determine the maximum length of a federal season.

Texas attempts to keep state waters (out to nine nautical miles) open for red snapper year-round by allotting enough estimated poundage to cover the fishing from the closure of federal waters until the end of the year. In 2023, TPWD closed red snapper fishing in state waters Nov. 20 due to snapper quotas being met.

Last year’s private recreational angler red snapper season in federal waters off the Texas coast ran from June 1 to Sept. 6. This year’s season in the same waters also began June 1 and will run until its closing date, which is yet to be determined since it is based on how many pounds of snapper have been caught.

To estimate the state’s annual red snapper fishery harvest season, TPWD closely monitors federal red snapper landings through its creel survey program and mobile application. Recreational anglers can continue to report snapper landings in state waters with TPWD’s mobile application, Texas Hunt & Fish.

Regulations for red snapper in federal waters consist of:

• Two fish per person per day with a 16-inch minimum size limit.

• Red snapper caught in federal waters count as part of the state bag limit of four fish.

• No more than two red snapper can be in each angler’s possession while in federal waters.

Regulations for red snapper in state waters are:

• Four fish per person per day with a 15-inch minimum size limit.

• No more than four red snapper can be in possession in state waters while fishing.

As a result, there remains no current consensus on just how many red snapper are out there despite having specific annual quotas...

Red snapper may be taken using pole and line, but it is unlawful to use any kind of hook other than a circle hook when using natural bait. Per the DESCEND Act, all commercial and recreational anglers must have a venting tool or a rigged descending device on their boat while fishing for reef fish in federal waters.

Research shows that properly releasing reef fish such as red snapper helps reduce mortality. These regulations also apply to all anglers fishing in state waters and require the use of a venting tool or rigged descending device for reef fish exhibiting signs of barotrauma.

THE GREAT RED SNAPPER COUNT

The history of red snapper fishing along the Gulf Coast has long been marked by the balancing act that comes with a species targeted by both recreational and commercial anglers. That has brought about numerous discussions among stakeholders on who should manage the prized catch that does inhabit state waters but by and large is found primarily farther offshore.

Before the management agreement between TPWD and the NMFS, federal officials made the sole decision on when seasons could begin and end, in addition to quotas for the differing angler groups. In 2017, the red snapper season in federal waters off the Texas coast ran only three days in June for recreational anglers, the shortest in history.

PHOTO BY NOAA

Due to the lingering deficit in accurate and current data about snapper abundance, in August 2017, a team of fisheries experts was tasked with estimating the population size of red snapper 2 years of age and older in the Gulf through an unprecedented multi-million-dollar project dubbed the Great Red Snapper Count. This project was funded by Congress in response to widespread frustration from anglers and included the Harte Research Institute at Texas A&M UniversityCorpus Christi, in addition to other highly regarded marine researchers from Alabama, Florida, Louisiana and Mississippi.

After multiple years of research employing cutting-edge science and sampling techniques to create the first true snapper census, the overall count was estimated at 118 million red snapper 2 years and older inhabiting the Gulf Coast region. At the time, that overall estimate was roughly three times higher than what federal data had previously shown. The red snapper estimate showed about 22 million fish in waters off the Texas coast, 18 million in Louisiana and 8 million in Alabama and Mississippi. Florida had the largest population estimate at about 70 million red snapper in its waters.

Despite the extensive efforts by more than 100 researchers from multiple marine science institutes as part of the Great Red Snapper Count, in 2024 federal officials announced that their own Gulf of Mexico red snapper stock assessment was unable to produce a viable population count. Shockingly, the federal stock assessment model contains more than 2,900 parameters, each with its own level of uncertainty and scientific bias.

As a result, there remains no current consensus on just how many red snapper are out there despite having specific annual quotas from which recreational and commercial anglers are allowed to take.

Another project, the South Atlantic Red Snapper Research Program, has been underway since 2020 and is projected to be completed by the fall. It includes many of the same research institutions that took part in the Great Red Snapper Count, in addition to federal agencies and is being conducted using a variety of methods, including sampling efforts through for-hire recreational and commercial fishers.

RED SNAPPER CONSERVATION

While size and bag limits and fishing seasons are the heart of red snapper conservation efforts, there has been a renewed emphasis on adding habitat conducive to the species.

The Texas Artificial Reef program, one of the largest efforts in the country, began in 1990 and features dozens of reef sites, mostly situated in federal waters. Those sites are divided into three categories: decommissioned drilling rigs (Rigs to Reefs Program), highway bridge materials and other types of concrete and heavy-gauge steel (Nearshore Reefing Program) and large marine vessels (Ships to Reefs Program).

Multiple Texas-based projects, including nearshore reefs, have benefited from millions of dollars in funding to help compensate for lost human use of natural resources resulting from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010 in the Gulf. Those projects and others in prime fishing habitat have been aided in restoration led by state and federal Natural Resource Damage Assessment trustees. In addition, a 155-foot former freighter was scuttled in 2014 about 9 miles offshore from Mustang Island and Port Aransas. The Kinta S was the largest ship to be reefed since the 473-foot Texas Clipper was sunk 17 miles off South Padre Island in 2006. The effort helped to enhance an existing site known as the Corpus Christi Nearshore Reef, which was composed of hundreds of concrete pyramids and several thousand tons of concrete culverts that were sunk offshore.

A detailed map of artificial Texas reefs can be found at tpwd.texas.gov/gis/ris/artificialreefs.

The real boon to the overall artificial reefing initiative has been Rigs to Reefs, with multiple rigs donated in recent years by cooperating oil and gas companies. In addition to the physical infrastructure, these companies also have donated to the Texas Artificial Reef Fund some of their realized savings from not having to take the rigs to shore after deconstruction. Those dedicated funds are used to finance research, administration, maintenance, liability coverage and construction of new reefs, providing a win for all parties involved.

The artificial reefing program also has gained valuable scientific partners with researchers closely monitoring fish census and other data measures. Researchers from the Harte Research Institute used a variety of testing methods including diver-based surveys and ROV-based surveys to further describe just how important these structures are to one of the world’s most distinct and valuable ecosystems, especially in terms of red snapper.

The Great Red Snapper Count found that while large numbers of fish occurred over well-known habitat features such as artificial reefs and natural hard bottom, a major finding of the study showed that “uncharacterized bottom” habitat harbored the majority of red snapper. Those findings would underscore the need for further manmade habitat to be introduced to aid in protecting snapper stocks that thrive on those offshore structures.

A Rich History of Partnership Capital Farm Credit + Texas Wildlife Association

ARTICLE & PHOTOS BY KACEE KIRSCHVINK, CAPITAL FARM CREDIT COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR

When it comes to land ownership and wildlife conservation, the missions of Capital Farm Credit (CFC) and the Texas Wildlife Association (TWA) go hand in hand.

For roughly 25 years of TWA’s 40-year history, CFC has been a TWA sponsor, supporting the association through its various events, volunteer activities and memberships to conserve, manage and enhance wildlife on Texas private lands.

“We have a very similar culture,” said CFC Events Director David Harrison. “A lot of their members are also our members, and our goals and values are homogeneous. It’s a great fit.”

Qualified borrowers of Capital Farm Credit receive a free one-year TWA digital membership, which many CFC members renew each year.

“We’re actually one of the biggest drivers of new members for their organization,” Harrison said. “They are landowners, conservationists, and they take care of the resources. They’re wanting the rural lifestyle.”

Historically, TWA has been instrumental in protecting landowners’ rights, which also helps CFC members.

“Over the years, TWA has lobbied for the rural Texas landowner at the Capitol. In fact, they are the driving force,” Harrison said. “The Texas wildlife valuation tax code is in place because of the lobby that TWA provided.”

CFC employees also take an active role in TWA activities.

Josh Rodriguez, a relationship manager in Temple, is in year three as a TWA volunteer, serving as a mentor with the Adult Learn to Hunt Program.

“The partnership between TWA and CFC benefits each other by sharing a commitment to rural values and

lifestyles,” Rodriguez said. “Our members comprise of rural landowners, making this partnership valuable in advocating for the rights we all strive to protect. It has been an incredibly rewarding and humbling experience while representing CFC.”

Jae Thompson, regional vice president of sales in Uvalde, has hosted several TWA Texas Youth Hunting Program (TYHP) hunts for girls on her ranch, and Brett Riff, senior vice president of financial services and alliances, participates with his sons in the TYHP.

Hayden Jay, a senior at Texas A&M University and a senior intern with CFC, has participated in many TWA youth events and programs over the years, which has helped her gain a deep respect for wildlife and the outdoors.

“It’s not just an organization—it’s a community,” Jay said. “It’s the friendships formed, the mentorships gained, and the collective effort to ensure that the beauty of Texas’ wildlife and landscapes continues to flourish for years to come.”

CFC events coordinators are also helping TWA plan eight statewide Texas Big Game Awards banquets and recruiting volunteers to help.

“A lot of our employees have a passion for TWA’s mission,” Harrison said. “Our people are putting their time and efforts into TWA because they believe in the cause.”

Exploring the Effects of Invasive Guinea Grass on

Bobwhite Tracking The Impact

Northern

ARTICLE BY JENNIFER A. SMITH, AARON M. FOLEY and BENJAMIN E. OSWALD

INVASIVE SPECIES

Texas is no stranger to invasive species, species that are non-native to the area in question and whose introduction causes harmful effects on local environments and economies. Zebra mussels, water hyacinth and nutria plague our waterways, while feral hogs destroy crops, damage property and pose health risks. The costs of invasive species are significant; in the United States alone, estimates suggest that, between 2010 and 2020, invasives resulted in economic losses valued at a staggering $21 billion per year.

Invasive species also have devastating impacts on the environment where they are considered as a key driver of biodiversity loss. This is immensely concerning as biodiversity, or the variety of life in a given area, has been linked to important ecosystem services. Ecosystem services can be thought of as the benefits humans derive from ecosystems such as food, medicines, clean water and air, erosion control and nutrient cycling. As biodiversity declines, we begin to lose these important services which are critically important to us on a day-to-day basis.

The impacts of invasive species may be especially notable in the rangelands of South Texas where a suite of invasive grass species occur, many of which have a checkered history. Originally introduced into the New World as forage grasses for livestock or for erosion control, species such as buffelgrass, King Ranch bluestem, Lehmann lovegrass, and Bermudagrass now dominate the landscape and are considered invasive where they occur. Here, they alter natural fire regimes and nutrient cycling, simplify plant communities, reduce structural complexity of local vegetation, reduce habitat for wildlife, and decrease biodiversity.

GUINEA GRASS IN SOUTH TEXAS

If you have spent much time in the rangelands of South Texas, you are also probably acutely aware of guinea grass, a fast-growing bunchgrass native to tropical and subtropical areas in Africa. Historic reports suggest it was originally introduced to the New World in the 17th century via bedding or food for livestock on trans-Atlantic ships. In South Texas, it was initially introduced in the 1950s and began to expand its range in earnest during the 1970s. Since then, it has spread aggressively across the state and is now well established in the lower Rio Grande Valley and areas of the Gulf Coast. It is also well documented in central Texas, occurring as far north as Austin and east to Houston.

In the South Texas rangelands, guinea grass forms large dense stands in open pastures, although it is also commonly observed around mottes—clumps of shrubs or trees in open country. Where it occurs, guinea grass can have a wide range of ecological impacts. For example, its tendency to shade out adjacent vegetation means it can hinder the growth of and outcompete native plants. At the same time, guinea grass produces allelochemicals that inhibit the growth of surrounding plant species. It is perhaps no surprise that guinea grass has serious consequences for the diversity and structure of local plant communities. Its tendency to form large dense stands also means it increases fuel loads and fire risk while its tolerance to fire alters local fire regimes. However, its impacts on the native wildlife of our South Texas rangelands are poorly understood.

NORTHERN BOBWHITE AND GUINEA GRASS

The northern bobwhite (hereafter bobwhite) is an iconic game species of significant economic and cultural importance in South Texas. Here, bobwhite prefer to live in patchy landscapes dominated by open grasslands interspersed with mottes of brush which, collectively, provide plentiful food items, whistling perches, and cover for nesting, brooding, foraging, loafing and roosting. Within this patchy landscape, bobwhite require open ground to facilitate foraging for seeds and insects, and more broadly, movement. They also typically require bunchgrasses in which to nest, although use of other species is known (e.g., prickly pear). Brush dominated mottes, grass and forbs provide important cover from predators and shade during the warmer months. Mottes of brush are also used for loafing or resting. It is important that these mottes have

...our hope is that we will be able to provide equivalent threshold values that can be used by land managers as targets when managing this invasive species.

mottes. Despite these ideas, the effects of guinea grass on bobwhite in South Texas remain largely unknown.

RESEARCH AT THE CAESAR KLEBERG WILDLIFE RESEARCH INSTITUTE

In September 2024, our team at The Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute, Texas A&M-Kingsville, led by Drs. Jennifer Smith and Aaron Foley, and graduate student Ben Oswald, began to address this knowledge gap in the South Texas rangelands. Our objective is to assess the effects of guinea grass on the space use and densities of bobwhite. Our working hypothesis is that dense stands of guinea grass will impede the movements of bobwhite, causing them to avoid guinea grass dominated areas, and thus occur at lower densities compared to areas with less guinea grass.

dense canopies yet an open base to permit escape from predators and to allow bobwhite to see in all directions.

Given the known characteristics of invasive guinea grass and the habitat needs of bobwhite, its presence in South Texas rangelands likely raises concerns for those wishing to maintain stable populations of bobwhite on their property. Certainly, not only is guinea grass known to reduce the diversity and structure of plant communities and insect availability, both of which are important for bobwhite, guinea grass likely reduces usable space, especially where it forms dense stands in open areas or at the base of brushy

Loaded with quail traps, Oswald set off to test these ideas with an aim of trapping bobwhite across sites with varying guinea grass density. After some careful trap placement, bobwhite started to appear around our traps and, finally, success! All captured bobwhite, caught by trained and permitted professionals, are fitted with small, numbered metal leg bands that permit unique identification. Recapture of these birds at a later date allows us to estimate population densities. A subset of bobwhite are also fitted with small GPS tracking devices weighing less than 3% of their body weight. These allow us to determine the location of tagged birds approximately every four hours, and thus their movement patterns.

As we move further into the spring, bobwhite begin to whistle and coveys are break up in preparation for the breeding season. The team will continue to monitor tagged birds during this period and into 2026, allowing us to address our research question throughout the breeding season and into the fall and winter. However, such results will only provide one piece of the puzzle. Fully understanding the potential effects of guinea grass on bobwhite space use and density requires knowledge of why guinea grass might have such effects. This is an exciting area of scientific enquiry that we are beginning to explore via remote sensing techniques and drones that permit collection of habitat and other environmental data.

RESEARCH APPLICATIONS

Ultimately, the goal of our research is to generate data that can be used to inform habitat management strategies that minimize the impacts of guinea grass on bobwhite. Previous studies highlight that other invasive grasses negatively affect bobwhite when canopy cover is greater than 20%. By conducting our study across sites with varying guinea grass density, our hope is that we will be able to provide equivalent threshold values that can be used by land managers as targets when managing this invasive species.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research would not be possible without financial support provided by the Hill Country Quail Coalition, Houston Quail Coalition, Park City Quail Coalition and the South Texas Quail Coalition. We would also like to thank the King Ranch for continuous support and for granting access for this project. Finally, we are indebted to Hannah Keyes, Kristen Gibson, Maggie Rector, Abdiel De Hoyos and Leslie Palmar for support during fieldwork.

TWA’s 12 Annual Private Lands Summit th

R a n c h i n g R e n e w a b l e s :

L a n d o w n e r P e r s p e c t i v e s o n

R e n e w a b l e E n e r g y D e v e l o p m e n t

July 10, 9am • San Antonio JW Marriott Hill Country Resort

Join landowners, lawyers, industry insiders and real estate experts in discussing renewable energy leasing, project development and decommissioning, and our Texas energy future.

Speakers Include Texas Solar Sheep • Edwards Plateau Alliance • Solar Proponent • Braun & Gresham, LLP • Texas A&M Real Estate Research Center • Brady & Hamilton, LLP & more!

R

Featuring the 3MT Competition

Dissolved Oxygen Breathing Life Into Your Pond

ARTICLE & PHOTOS BY BRITTANY CHESSER, AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM SPECIALIST, TEXAS A&M AGRILIFE EXTENSION SERVICE and TODD SINK, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR AND AQUACULTURE EXTENSION SPECIALIST, TEXAS A&M AGRILIFE EXTENSION SERVICE

When it comes to a healthy, productive pond, few things are more important—or more overlooked— than dissolved oxygen. Simply put, dissolved oxygen is the amount of oxygen in solution in the water, and it’s the lifeblood of your pond’s ecosystem. Every fish, insect, plant and microscopic organism depends on dissolved oxygen. Without enough oxygen, fish become stressed, stop growing, disease and parasite infestations increase, and if low enough, fish can even die. Ideally, dissolved oxygen levels in your pond should stay above 5 milligrams per liter (mg/L) to support a thriving aquatic community, though survival is possible down to 3 mg/L and some fish species can tolerate even lower for short durations.

Several natural forces and management choices influence how much oxygen is available in your pond. Water temperature is one of the biggest factors. Warm water holds less oxygen, which is why oxygen crashes and fish kills are more common during the hot summer months in Texas, when water temperatures are at their peak. Another major player is photosynthesis. During the day, as they soak up sunlight, aquatic plants and algae produce oxygen through

photosynthesis. But at night, photosynthesis does not occur in the absence of full sunlight, and plants, fish, invertebrates, and microorganisms consume oxygen through respiration, causing levels to drop—often reaching their lowest point just before sunrise.

Another major influence on dissolved oxygen that can tip the scales is the amount of organic matter in the pond. Excess nutrients, uneaten fish feed, livestock waste and decomposing vegetation all contribute to an increased biological oxygen demand. As bacteria break down this organic material, they consume oxygen as part of the decomposition process, which can quickly deplete dissolved oxygen levels and cause stress in fish or trigger fish kills. Pond design and aquatic vegetation coverage also play a role. Ponds that are shallow or those with excessive aquatic vegetation tend to experience more significant oxygen swings. While aquatic plants contribute oxygen during the

day, their respiration at night or during overcast conditions can rapidly reduce oxygen availability. Aquatic vegetation and algal blooms should be managed and never allowed to increase beyond 25% coverage of a pond’s total area to minimize plant respiration-induced low dissolved oxygen fish kills.

Often, the signs of low dissolved oxygen go unnoticed until it’s too late. Fish gasping or gulping at the water’s surface which is also known as “piping”, particularly early in the morning, is a clear warning. Other signs include slow or lethargic fish behavior, sudden fish deaths (especially among larger fish), rapid water color changes, often to a darker color such as brown, or a foul, murky smell, are all red flags that your pond’s oxygen levels were or have become dangerously low.

The good news? Oxygen problems can often be prevented with a few key management strategies. Installing an aeration system is one way to stabilize oxygen levels. Aerators keep water circulating, break up thermal layers, and help oxygen dissolve throughout the pond. Managing nutrients is also critical—limit runoff from fertilized lawns, pastures or livestock areas to prevent algae blooms and excessive organic buildup. Keep aquatic vegetation in check; while plants can provide oxygen and habitat, too much coverage (over 25%) can lead to oxygen crashes at night. Finally, avoid

Often, the signs of low dissolved oxygen go unnoticed until it’s too late.

overstocking fish and make sure to keep up with harvest and harvest records. More fish means more oxygen demand, which can quickly overwhelm a small pond’s natural capacity. Most ponds will require more than 10 pounds of largemouth bass harvest per acre per year and all catfish caught that weigh over two pounds should be harvested to help keep the fish population at a healthy density.

Dissolved oxygen may be invisible, but it’s the driving force behind all life in your pond. By understanding how it works and staying ahead of potential issues, you can maintain a balanced, resilient and productive pond for years to come. It is important to note that dissolved oxygen cannot be determined at a lab as part of a water quality test. Dissolved oxygen can only be determined pondside in real time as microorganisms such as zooplankton and phytoplankton in samples collected for labs continue to consume dissolved oxygen in the sample bottle until it is depleted. Thus, samples that arrive at labs often have a dissolved oxygen concentration of zero or close to it. Dissolved oxygen monitoring can be accomplished by pond owners through either chemical titration test kits or dissolved oxygen meters. It is important for pond owners to always have an emergency aeration plan in place for when they find a low dissolved oxygen event occurring.

When He Roars

ARTICLE BY LARRY WEISHUHN

Once relegated to high fenced ranches, axis deer are now commonplace on free range pastures across much of the Hill Country and other parts of the state. They offer year-around hunting opportunities and their venison is highly sought after.

BY

“Did you hear that?”

I had. It was not an elk, red stag, sika buck or fallow deer. I had heard them bugling, roaring and grunting. The sound was like a cross between a coarse whistle and a roar. I looked over at a smiling Eugene Fuchs pointing in the direction of the roar. Then, we heard a shrill bark. Moments later a gorgeous russet-colored, spotted doe ran out of an oak thicket. She was followed by a spotted, long beam, three-point per side, antlered axis buck. “You just heard your first axis buck roar and the bark of an axis doe,” said Gene as I watched in awe.

We were on the Powderhorn Ranch near Port O’Connor where Gene was doing axis deer research for his master’s thesis. I was there to do necropsies of Axis deer that were to be taken for additional research purposes. This was back in the early 1970s, late June.

I had read all I could about axis deer (Axis axis) called chital in their native India. I knew axis deer had supposedly been introduced to Texas in the 1930s. Bucks within any population or herd could have hardened antlers anytime of the year, not just during the fall months like our native whitetail and mule deer, typical of deer species close to the Equator where seasons seldom change. From Gene I learned bucks roared during the hard antler period. They made scrapes, but in doing so stood on their hind legs to reach up as high as possible to rub their pre-orbital gland on limbs, referred to as preaching. I also learned the largest number of hard-antlered bucks generally occurs in June and July.

native whitetail deer. Whitetails are browsers. While axis deer browse, they also have the luxury of eating grass. They do well on just about any kind of vegetation. The only limiting factor to the arguably most beautiful deer species in the world, as well as best tasting, is extremely cold weather. Particularly when the cold includes moisture for more than a few days. Axis deer have relatively short hair that is not designed to deal with extreme cold and wet weather.

My first “nice” axis buck had 32 inch main beams, long brow tines and long caudal or secondary tines. Most axis bucks seldom have more than 3-points per side: main beams, brow tines and caudal points. My buck also had an uncommon “kicker point” on his left main beam. Any buck with 30-inch main beams is considered huge, although bucks have been taken with main beams 39-inches long and longer.

Fast forward to the early1980s, armed with knowledge learned years earlier from Gene Fuchs and others, I finally had the opportunity to hunt for a big mature axis buck, just west of Camp Verde, on the Camp Verde Ranch, then owned by Bob Parker, Sr. Camp Verde is between Kerrville and Bandera. It was here the U.S. Camel Corps, commanded by Major Henry C. Wayne and later Edward Fitzgerald Beale, was headquartered. The U.S. military experimented using camels to replace horses and mules in arid lands with little vegetation and water. The Camel Corps was disbanded in 1866.

By the latter third of the 20th century axis deer, unlike camels, flourished in the hills and valleys of the Texas Hill Country, behind high fences and free-range. In time axis deer would spread throughout central Texas and many other parts of our State. Their number increased to a point where in some areas they threaten and outcompete our

Back in the late 1970s and early ‘80s, I was a huge .270 Winchester fan. The round was made famous by Jack O’Connor, then with Outdoor Life magazine. With my .270 loaded with Hornady 130-grain bullets, topped with a 3-9x Leupold scope, which I saved for years to acquire, I headed into the June Camp Verde Ranch cedars and oaks.

Steve Warner, primary designer of Bushlan Camo, was at the time the ranch’s wildlife biologist. Steve told me about two impressive Axis bucks he had seen, including the one I was able to take after hunting him nearly for a week. When I finally caught up with him, I spotted him from a high ridge as he courted several does. I watched as he stopped chasing long enough to roar, and also preach, making a scrape. I quickly dropped off the high ridge, got the wind in my favor and headed in his direction.

He continued roaring, allowing me to keep up with him. I soon spotted him in a small clearing. He stopped. I sent a Hornady bullet his way. Hit squarely on his quartering to shoulder, he dropped in his tracks. Moments later, at his side I whispered a prayer of thanks!

His spotted coat was gorgeous as were his wide-spread, massive and tall 3x4 antlers. Unfortunately, a taxidermist “lost” his antlers and cape. But, his delicious venison was truly enjoyed and appreciated!

Maybe it is time for another hunt for his majesty, the axis deer!

A Capitol Trade

ARTICLE BY THE HON. KEN WISE

In 1872, Texas held a constitutionally mandated election to finally settle the permanent location of the capital city. While Austin had been the capitol of the Republic since 1839, the State of Texas put the issue to a vote of the people in 1850 and again in 1872. The voters selected Austin as the permanent capitol, and work began immediately to design and build a new capitol building befitting the largest state in the union.

The existing capitol building had been designed by committee and was described as an “architectural monstrosity.” It was a three-story Greek Revival-style building that was, as capitols go, very plain. Texas doesn’t do plain. There was controversy, however, over whether Texas should undertake to improve the old capitol or build a new, grander building. The constitutional convention of 1875 approved a provision in the proposed constitution

for the sale of up to 3 million acres of public land to finance the construction of a new capitol, which voters approved. Finally, in 1879, the surveying of these public lands and the construction of a new capitol was approved by the legislature.

As architects from around the United States vied for the honor of designing a new capitol, Governor Oran Roberts appointed Nimrod Lindsay Norton to survey the capitol lands, which he completed in 1880. After an open contest, Detroit architect Elijah Myers was selected to design the new building. All that remained was to find the builder.

The State proposed to offer 3,050,000 acres of land, 50,000 of which was to be used to pay for the survey and drawings of the new capitol. The land was located in the far reaches

It made sense that Texas offered so much of this supposedly barren land. The trick would be to find someone who wanted it. Luckily for Texas, people were getting rich in the cattle business. Cattle worth a measly $4 in Texas could bring as much as $40 in northern markets. Businessmen began to take note. Investment in Texas land was seen as a winning proposition. In that vein, Mattheas Schnell from Rock Island, Illinois, submitted the winning bid for the project. Former Illinois Congressman (and later Senator) Charles Farwell heard of the project and somehow convinced Schnell to sell three-quarters of the project to a syndicate consisting of himself, Schnell, his brother John Farwell, as well as two of his political associates named Amos Babcock and Abner Taylor. Groundbreaking for the

of the western panhandle, a mysterious land to virtually all Texans at the time. The earliest European visitors to the area were doubtless Spanish explorers. Coronado likely came through some of the future capitol lands as he searched for the Cibola, or “Seven Cities of Gold,” as well as another rumored paradise called Gran Quivera. Three hundred years later, Spanish Explorer Don Juan de Oñate crossed the area in search of rumored riches. It would be another century before there was any further European travel through the future “capitol lands.” Even then, it was very sparse. Not until 1852, when Captain R.B. Marcy traveled through the area to locate the source of the Red River, did the area receive any significant geographical attention.

new capitol took place in 1882, and the new building was dedicated in 1888.

The northern syndicate quickly began to try and figure out what a 3-million-acre ranch required to operate. Syndicate member Amos Babcock visited the new land in 1882 as the capitol project got underway. The biggest initial concern was water. The syndicate made efforts to locate appropriate sites for windmills and other potential sources of water. The syndicate also tested whether crops might grow in certain parts of the area. But there was a problem: part of the soon-to-be ranch might not have belonged to Texas in the first place.

When Texas became a state, it surrendered, among other lands, those portions of the old Republic that lay in eastern

New Mexico. The United States and Texas agreed that the 103rd meridian would be the western boundary of the new State. However, the boundary wasn’t surveyed until 1858. When it was, surveyor John Clark started from the line’s southern end and went north only part of the way. A year later, he started from the northern border and went south, again only part of the way. By 1882, there were four different points, each purporting to be the actual northwest corner of Texas. In 1891, Congress adopted the John Clark line, but Clark’s line actually lay one-half mile west of the

Ranch Divisions.

agreed-upon 103rd meridian. Also, Clark’s northern and southern lines would not meet should they be extended in their respective directions.

New Mexico pounced and, in its proposed 1910 constitution, declared its border west of the 103rd meridian. It also claimed that the land between the declared border and the meridian belonged to New Mexico. The potential result was the loss by Texas and the capitol syndicate of a strip of land between one-half and three miles wide and approximately 310 miles long. At this point, Farwell took action. It happened that John Farwell had been friends with William Howard Taft during their college days at Yale. Farwell took the matter to the President directly, and Taft engineered a joint resolution in Congress declaring the 103rd meridian the correct border and the New Mexico constitutional provision invalid.

The syndicate also wondered how to mark the boundary of their new paradise. They concluded that the “Glidden wire” (barbed wire) would be the answer, so they set about a fence

Brown, Carolyn. [Escarbada Headquarters (division) of Xit Ranch], photograph, March 1963; (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/ metapth687009/: accessed April 25, 2025), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Texas Historical Commission.

for 3 million acres of land. Beginning with the northern portion, the syndicate hired Bill Metcalf to do the initial fencing. The idea of surveying and staking the fence was normal enough except for one thing: the lack of wood to make survey stakes in the area. They settled for piling little mounds of dirt every 30 feet. The crew slept out in the open and ate what antelope they could harvest. Cow chips fueled the campfires. Despite all the hardships, they managed to survey the first fence by the spring of 1885.

The wire for that first bit of fence was delivered to Trinidad, Colorado, and freighted in wagons to the ranch. The wood for the posts was cut in the breaks of the Canadian River. By the end of 1885, the workers had built 162 miles of fence. By the end of 1886, the project was finished, and the ranch consisted of 94 pastures surrounded by over 1,500 miles of barbed wire attached to over 100,000 fence posts. One estimate contends that if all the wire on the ranch fence was stretched in a single strand, it would have run over 6,000 miles. That’s enough wire to cross the continental United States over two times! The ranch ordered an entire railroad carload of gate hinges and a whole railroad carload of fence staples. When complete, the XIT was by far the largest ranch under one fence in the United States, if not the entire world.

To stock the ranch, the syndicate turned to two wellknown quantities—English capital and Texas cattle. Cattle cost money, and the syndicate’s connections in England had it. Farwell formed an English company, the Capitol Freehold Land & Investment Company, Limited, in 1885. By 1888, twothirds of its $15 million allowed capital was subscribed. The company leased the ranch back to the syndicate to manage. This arrangement gave rise to a popular misunderstanding that the ranch was an exclusively English endeavor.

The first herd arrived under the direction of cattleman Ab Blocker in 1885. Thousands of head would follow. The ranch needed a brand, and Ab Blocker is credited with designing a brand that could be applied with one straight branding iron but would be hard for cattle rustlers to alter. He came up with the initials XIT. With that, the largest cattle ranch in Texas history was in business.

It’s impossible to know how many cattle were on the 3-million-acre ranch over the years. Ranch records show contracts for over 110,000 head by late 1886. It’s commonly

“Scandalous” John McCandless is among these XIT Ranch cowboys in this 1897 photograph. A cowboy who later became a Texas Ranger and the sheriff of Dallam County, McCandless also led the ranch’s last big cattle drive. The Texas Panhandle ranch, at its peak, employed 150 cowboys and herded 160,000 cattle.

BY

thought that the realistic carrying capacity of the ranch was 125,000 to 150,000 head. Attending to that large a herd required about 150 cowboys and up to 1,000 horses. Hundreds of windmills watered the herd behind the world’s biggest barbed wire fence.

As the syndicate built the XIT, settlement started to progress westward, spurred by the building of railroads across the panhandle. It turned out that the XIT was a much better real estate play than a ranch, and the syndicate began to sell land. Two significant lawsuits hampered the process.

The heirs of original shareholder Amos Babcock brought a derivative suit on behalf of the minority shareholders and actually had the ranch put into receivership for a time. After that, the State brought suit to recover “excess acreage” that almost always existed as the original surveyors dodged Indians, weather, and other hardships of their frontier trade. The final cattle sale took place on November 1, 1912. By 1950, the original “Capitol Reservation Lands” had been sold, though some of the land owned by the XIT remained with the Farwell family.

The Texas Capitol building is the largest in the United States. Its dome rises 14 feet higher than the United States Capitol. It’s fitting that to build it, the State helped create the largest ranch under one fence in the world, the XIT.

The Art of Capturing The Moment

Elevating Our Performance Standards

ARTICLE

&

PHOTOS BY GREG SIMONS

In the timeless classic, The Old Man and the Boy, Robert Ruark observed, “The best part of hunting and fishing was the thinking about going and the talking about it after you get back.” Indeed, the allure of hunting extends beyond the pursuit itself—it encompasses the anticipation beforehand and the storytelling afterward. This principle applies especially to hunters evaluating their next expedition through websites, brochures and social media.

As the saying goes, “A picture is worth a thousand words.” Outfitters who master the art of quality harvest photography gain a distinct marketing advantage. With social media’s amplifying effect, our hunting community must share only those harvest images that preserve the animal’s dignity while portraying hunting in a respectful light—outcomes that require intentional planning and skilled execution.

THE CURRENT STATE OF HARVEST PHOTOGRAPHY

A decade ago, I observed a promising trend toward higherquality harvest photography. Recently, however, we’ve regressed—largely due to the ubiquity of smartphone cameras. When we relied on dedicated cameras, the act of photography was deliberate. Now, with cameras perpetually at our fingertips, we’ve exchanged thoughtful composition for convenience: snap, snap, snap and we move on, images casually stored in our devices.

Nevertheless, these photographs circulate widely. For hunting operations looking to leverage these images to market their services and strengthen their brand, strategic planning should underpin their photographic efforts. Fortunately, implementing a few straightforward techniques can dramatically improve harvest photography quality.

ESSENTIAL TOOLS

Camera Equipment: Today’s market offers countless quality cameras at accessible price points. While digital SLR cameras provide versatility through interchangeable lenses, quality compact cameras shouldn’t be overlooked. Look for devices with at least 20+ megapixel resolution and adequate flash capabilities. Though smartphone cameras have improved substantially, they still lack the versatility of dedicated equipment, particularly in challenging conditions like low light or backlighting, and these smartphone cameras generally offer inferior resolution.

Cleaning Supplies:

• 409 Spray Cleaner: This product excels at removing fresh blood. Use the standard formula without bleach. Apply to bloody areas around the animal’s face and neck, wipe with paper towels, and repeat until clean.

• Comb: Essential for grooming hair and removing dried blood. Before applying 409, use the comb to flake away dried blood and dirt, then follow with cleaner for final preparation.

• Paper Towels: Keep abundant supplies for cleaning soiled areas. Comb, spray, wipe, and repeat, over and over until desired outcome is obtained.

Enhancement Tools:

• Taxidermy Eyes: After several hours, big-game animals’ eyes begin to recess. Installing glass taxidermy eyes restores lifelike appearance to the animal.

• Modeling Clay: Excellent for repairing broken tines on deer antlers. While perhaps impractical for larger species like elk or moose, this technique works wonderfully for mule deer and whitetails. Available at most arts and crafts retailers.

Photography Accessories:

• Tripod: Invaluable for solo photographers capturing their own harvest. Used with your camera’s self-timer, this allows you to alternate between photographer

and subject. I’ve relied on this setup for most of my personal harvest photos in recent years.

• Props: Ensure hunters wear appropriate field attire. Including relevant gear—firearms, ammunition casings, optics, spotting scopes, day packs—adds visual interest and contextual authenticity.

PROFESSIONAL TECHNIQUES

Lighting Management: Proper lighting forms the foundation of exceptional photography. Unless shooting during the golden hour (first and last hour of daylight), always use flash—even if manual settings are required to override the camera’s automatic functions. Flash minimizes harsh shadows and enhances color quality during overcast conditions. Nighttime flash photography of antlered or horned game often creates dramatic silhouetting effects that showcase these distinctive features.

Subject Positioning: For big-game animals, position the subject at approximately 45 degrees toward the camera, rather than directly facing or perpendicular to the lens. The animal’s head should always be positioned in front of the hunter. For deer and pronghorn, angle the animal’s chin slightly downward to properly display antlers or horns relative to the camera. Ensure the background remains natural and uncluttered, avoiding structures or vehicles in the frame. Capture variety by shooting from multiple angles—low positions, slight downward angles, and various head orientations including frontal views, profiles and quartering poses.

Lens Selection: Generally, employ a wide-angle lens for harvest photography, with an equivalent focal length of 30-35mm. With zoom-equipped cameras, avoid telephoto settings above 50mm, as these diminish the apparent size of foreground subjects—effectively “shrinking” antler or horn size. For compact point-and-shoot cameras, default to the widest available lens setting.

Composition Fundamentals: With wide-angle lenses, position yourself within 4-5 feet of your subject. Except for species with elongated horns, such as elk, gemsbok, or scimitar-horned oryx, vertical framing often better accommodates both animal and hunter. However, capturing a variety of orientations provides valuable options.

Post-Processing of Photos: While purists might disagree, modern editing software offers valuable tools for enhancing harvest images. These applications allow removal of blood, protruding tongues, and other potentially unsightly elements that might offend viewers. Additionally, they enable adjustment of lighting, color balance, and overall image quality.

A MATTER OF RESPONSIBILITY

As hunting’s advocates and primary conservationists, we bear the responsibility of practicing and promoting an ethical approach that includes how we visually represent our pursuits to a discerning public. Quality harvest photography serves as a fundamental tool in this crucial public relations effort.

Greg Simons co-owns a company providing consultation to private landowners on commercial hunting operations and wildlife management programs. For more information, visit www. wildlifesystems.com

New Braunfels June 12

Lufkin June 20

Alpine July 24

Kingsville Aug 2

Amarillo Aug. 22

Victoria Aug. 29

Bryan/College Station Sept 12

Abilene Sept. 19

A Legal Guide to Rural Land Acquisition in Texas Navigating The Lone Star Landscape

ARTICLE & PHOTO BY BRAUN & GRESHAM ATTORNEYS AT LAW

As real estate attorneys specializing in rural Texas land, we understand the unique blend of opportunity and complexity that comes with acquiring property in this vast state. From the rolling hills of the Hill Country to the expansive plains of West Texas, each region presents its own set of legal considerations. We’re here to guide you through the process, ensuring a smooth and legally sound transaction.

DUE DILIGENCE – LAYING THE LEGAL FOUNDATION

Our initial focus is on due diligence. This goes beyond a simple title search. We delve into the property’s history, examining all recorded documents for potential encumbrances, easements and liens. We also verify compliance with local zoning ordinances and regulations, ensuring your intended use of the land is permissible.

CONTRACT NEGOTIATION AND DRAFTING –PROTECTING YOUR INTERESTS

The purchase agreement is the cornerstone of the transaction. We draft or review contracts with attention to detail, ensuring they accurately reflect the agreed-upon terms and protect your interests. We negotiate clauses related to contingencies, financing and closing procedures. We address potential issues such as survey discrepancies, title defects and environmental concerns.

SURVEY AND BOUNDARY DISPUTES –ESTABLISHING CERTAINTY

A professional survey is indispensable. We work closely with surveyors to ensure accurate boundary delineation and identify any potential encroachments or boundary disputes. We

address any ambiguities in legal descriptions and ensure the survey complies with Texas General Land Office standards.

CLOSING AND TITLE INSURANCE –SECURING YOUR INVESTMENT

The closing process involves a multitude of legal documents, including deeds, affidavits and settlement statements. We review all documents to ensure accuracy and completeness.

POST-CLOSING CONSIDERATIONS –ONGOING LEGAL GUIDANCE

Our services extend beyond closing. We provide ongoing legal guidance to landowners on issues like property taxes, easements and potential disputes. We assist with any necessary permits or approvals for development or agricultural activities.

THE BRAUN & GRESHAM DIFFERENCE

Whether you are buying, selling, leasing, or facing property disputes, we are here to help you. When it comes to real estate, our team is the advantage you need on your side. We are proactive, focused on your goals, and you can trust us to navigate the complexities of real estate transactions and negotiations with confidence and peace of mind. Let us be your trusted legal partner in realizing your real estate goals and safeguarding your investments.

For more information or to speak with an attorney, please contact Braun & Gresham at (512) 894-5426 or visit our website at www.braungresham.com

Texas Wildlife Association Foundation Update

Kelly Thompson, 2025 Texas Outdoorsman of the Year

ARTICLE BY SEAN HOFFMANN, TWA COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR

The Texas Wildlife Association Foundation (TWAF) is proud to announce that Westover Hills resident Kelly Thompson has been selected as the 2025 Texas Outdoorsman of the Year, one of the highest honors in Texas conservation and outdoor heritage.

Thompson was recognized during a sold-out gala on May 8 at the Fort Worth Zoo, an evening that celebrated his enduring impact on Texas’ wild places and the people who steward them.

The event—co-chaired by past honorees Richard Hill, Carter Smith and Dan Allen Hughes, Jr.—was instrumental in bringing family, friends and conservation champions together to toast Thompson’s contributions. Guests were able to feed giraffes before enjoying dinner, a formal awards presentation, and live music from Fort Worth’s own Johnny Reno.

“He is a rancher, a sportsman and a conservationist and it’s rare you get all three with the depth of commitment

that Kelly has to each of those arenas,” said Ralph Duggins, former Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission chairman.

A respected investor, conservation advocate and civic leader, Thompson manages a family office focused on a range of public and private investments, from energy and real estate to agriculture. A former principal of Crates Thompson Capital, he has also held leadership roles in banking and served on the boards of companies across multiple industries.

Thompson’s impact, however, extends far beyond the business world. He is Chairman Emeritus of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Foundation, Chair of the Upland Game Bird Advisory Committee for the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department and an Advisory Board Member for the Borderlands Research Institute. He also currently serves as Mayor of Westover Hills.

According to Lee Bass, “Kelly’s involvement with the Parks & Wildlife Foundation came along about the time it was entering its third decade. It was really a fortuitous time—the foundation had its feet under it and was ready for its next step of growth. Kelly provided great leadership and focus at that time.”

“Kelly has been one of my most trusted advisors, having served on the board for 15 years or so. He is a combination of land steward, financial wizard and political strategist. The vision he has brought in his leadership position has influenced all of Texas, not just TPWD, but all of the conservation organizations that have been lifted up because of his philosophy of helping everyone do the right thing for conservation. And the Borderlands Research Institute is certainly one of those benefactors,” said Louis Harveson, director of Borderlands Research Institute.

A graduate of the University of Texas at Austin with a B.B.A. in Finance, Thompson has long championed land stewardship, wildlife conservation and outdoor education in Texas. The award recognizes his lasting legacy and continued leadership in conserving the state’s natural resources.

“Boy there’s a lot still to do. And that’s what makes it so attractive—to be part of something that causes the greater good to be so much better. I don’t see a finish line,” Thompson said.

Where Have All The Cowboys Gone?

ARTICLE BY CHARLIE MCTEE

The following article was authored by Charlie McTee and originally published in the August 1992 edition of Texas Wildlife Magazine. We are reprinting it due to its timeliness as New World screwworm outbreaks continue to move northward through Mexico since first being detected in November of 2024. As of the date of publication, Mexico has confirmed over 1,200 cases in livestock, prompting U.S. authorities to close the southern border to livestock imports until strengthened surveillance protocols are adopted on both sides of the border.

In addition to livestock, TWA is gravely concerned with the risk that these developments pose to native Texas wildlife in the years to come. The below article is part of a continuing effort to educate landowners and lawmakers alike on the ecological and economic threat at hand. Keep an eye out here and in other TWA programs for more information as the screwworm continues its unfortunate migration northward.

Half of all Texans have never seen a screwworm; the other half will never forget having seen one.

It’s hard to pick up a paper or magazine, or turn on the TV, without seeing something about the environment, the latest threat to it, or how much it’s going to cost to “save” it. A curious thing is that these stories never, ever, mention the most effective and cost-effective ecological program ever undertaken within Texas. The program’s a little over 30 years old now and was started while most of today’s environmental reporters were still taking their nourishment through a nipple. The program was, of course, the eradication of the screwworm. The success of the screwworm program has changed forever the Texas range, the way of life on it, and the wildlife which lives there.

For those who have not seen one, we’ll risk biasing your judgment by saying that a screwworm infestation is the most

horrible thing imaginable. The process is simple enough: a fly lays its eggs on an open wound in an animal—a wire scratch, antler gouge, navel sore or even a tick bite. The eggs hatch into larvae, which then sustain themselves by feeding on the flesh around the wound. In effect, consuming their host while it is still alive. Since the wound stays open, more flies can lay their eggs and the process continues. As the larvae mature, they pupate, fall to the ground, and hatch out into still more flies, and the process is repeated until eventually the animal dies and is consumed.

Most commonly, the wounded animals chosen as egg-laying sites were pets, livestock or wildlife—especially deer. Any animal larger than a cottontail rabbit could support screwworms long enough for the larvae to mature. As additional evidence that flies don’t discriminate, however, news reports a couple of years ago told of a soldier returning from Panama with screwworms in a head wound. Records from the Texas frontier tell of many human deaths from screwworms, when the fly would lay its eggs in the nostril of a sick person, or someone asleep in the shade. The resulting infestation was often rapidly and painfully fatal. The last recorded human death from screwworms in Texas was in 1972, of an invalid from south of San Antonio, infected under similar circumstances.

The possibility of screwworm infestations in livestock put special requirements on ranchers, who had to visually inspect every single head of stock on the ranch at least twice a week during fly season. Harvey Goff, the dean of guides at the YO Ranch, says, “When we had to check stock for screwworm all the time, there were a lot of real good horses in this country, and cowboys to ride them, too. We rode a lot, and many of us used trained dogs, especially in the sheep and goat country. I had a dog who could smell an infected goat from 100 yards away when the wind was right.”

Uvalde rancher, banker, former governor and TWA Director Dolph Briscoe, Jr. was exposed to the problem early. As he says, “When I came back from the Army, and my dad turned our sheep and goat operation over to me, I was right in the middle of the screwworm problem. Sheep and goats were

worse risks for flies than cattle anyhow, and we sure had a lot of them to rope and treat. We used to work a pasture every morning while it was cool, separate out the ‘wormies,’ doctor them in the middle of the day, and repeat the process in another pasture that afternoon.”

Briscoe went on, “In the hot months, the goats would eat a lot of prickly pear apples, and get sores on their chins from the thorns. The screwworm flies would then lay their eggs in the sores, and we had another goat to treat.” He reflects, “You can’t find wormy goats from a helicopter, either.”

Rainy years were also great years for screwworm flies. According to Dr. O.H. Graham, during the summer of 1957 after the drouth of the 1950s broke, the Callaghan ranch near Encinal had 1900 head of worminfested stock at one time in their “hospital trap.” That year, the Callaghan was using one cowboy per pasture, riding 6 days a week, to check for screwworms in livestock.

Multiply these efforts by the hundreds of ranches in Texas, and the amount of daily work needed to keep the screwworms under control is much easier to understand. Farms likewise were not immune, because almost every farm had a few milk cows. An especially vivid experience of my own farm childhood was helping my dad treat a screwworm infestation on a milk cow. The wound, behind the cow’s ear, was small, but the sheer number of worms writhing and twisting deep inside it was staggering. Again, it is a sight which can’t be forgotten.

Screwworm infestations in wildlife helped to keep the fly population high and wildlife populations low. Deer were obviously impossible to check, catch, and treat as pets and livestock were, so that the wildlife populations served as a constant source of flies for continuing the infection. Most screwworms which actually matured were believed to have done so in wildlife hosts, sustaining the outbreaks.

Does and fawns were especially susceptible, since fawns were dropped during fly season; but any fence cut or antler wound during fly time meant certain but slow death for the wounded animal. Deer populations were thus sharply

limited by the screwworm fly. Estimates range between 25 and 100 percent loss of fawns to screwworms, depending on the area and how bad the flies were that year. Common points of screwworm fly attack were the fawn’s navel, and under the tail of a doe.

Fly season annually began in the earliest part of spring as the weather warmed, and the flies began moving north from the Rio Grande, sometimes to surprising distances. An 1825 U.S. Army report from Fort Atkinson, Nebraska—near the present site of Omaha—describes a screwworm infestation of the Army’s horse herd there. The rate of movement was surprisingly rapid; researcher Billy Hightower released marked sterile flies, and trapped one of them11 days later 180 miles from the point of release.

The screwworm danger continued through the warm days of spring, summer, and fall, until winter frosts killed off the adult flies; but the next spring brought a reinfestation and the same long hours of checking and treatment once again. Pupae could live only 60 days--if it was then too cold to hatch, the pupa simply died. Dr. Graham estimates the northward line for overwintering survival of the screwworm pupae at about Highway 90, with about half the pupae surviving the winter below that line. Joe Finley, Jr., of the Callaghan Ranch north of Laredo, told Dr. Graham that there were nearly always a few screwworms even in the wintertime on the ranch. Further south, around Hebbronville in Jim Hogg County, cases of worms were more common year-round. Rains and wet years intensified the fly problem.

Since it was a major and formidable agricultural pest, naturally a great many research hours and dollars were spent on the investigation of the screwworm, in both the larvae and the adult fly stage. Much of the early work, in 1937-39, was done at the USDA laboratory in Menard where Dr. R.C. Bushland had developed a technique for artificially raising screwworm flies, for the initial purpose of testing medications. Dr. E.F. Knibling, also stationed in Menard, had noticed that there seemed to be relatively few screwworm flies in nature. Another curious observation was that the female screwworm fly, the egg-layer, seemed to breed only once. Winter, of course brought cold temperatures that killed off the wild flies.

The twin peculiarities of not being able to stand the cold, and of breeding only once, were the seeds of an idea. If the female bred with a sterile male, then the eggs would not hatch, and there would be no larval infestation. The effort would require millions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of hours to spread sterile male flies over millions of acres of farm and ranch land. Where and how would you get billions of sterile screwworm flies, not to mention the money? Even from a perspective of nearly 40 years later, the idea still seems crackpot, more like the ravings of a bunch of mad scientists. Some have described this insight of Dr. Knibling’s as “the most innovative idea in entomology in the last 100 years.”

World War II intervened, taking Bushland and Knibling from Menard to other jobs elsewhere; but it also introduced atomic radiation to the public at large. After the war, Dr. A. W. Lindquist happened across a scientific paper which described radiation producing sterility in flies. This news excited Drs. Knibling and Bushland, and reminded them of their pre-war ideas. Now relocated to a new laboratory at Kerrville, Dr. Bushland began a series of experiments to

validate the concept of using sterile flies to exterminate a wild population. With borrowed time on an X-ray machine at Brooke Army Hospital, Fort Sam Houston, he found that radiation dosages of 5,000 Roentgens or more would sterilize screwworm fly pupae, and that sterile flies could successfully mate with wild flies.

Preliminary testing on Sanibel Island, off the coast of Florida, indicated that the sterile fly technique would work in the field. A later full-scale test, in cooperation with the Dutch government, on the island of Curacao, was successful in completely eradicating the screwworm fly in 14 months of full-strength fly drops (400 flies per square mile.) The Florida Cattlemen’s Association then supported an eradication program on the Florida peninsula, where screwworms accidentally introduced from Texas in the 1930s were costing cattlemen over $20 million per year. With a full-scale fly-release program, the screwworm threat in Florida and the southeastern states was reduced to essentially zero in just two years. A quarantine line was established along the Mississippi to keep southwestern cattle from bringing a fresh infestation to the southeast.

Texas events of 1961-62 show plainly how serious a pest the screwworm fly really was to farmers and ranchers. Recognizing that any eradication effort would have to be pushed from the producer level, ranchers organized the Southwest Animal Health Research Foundation. Committees were organized in every county of the state to be the local voice of the screwworm program and, more importantly, to raise funds.

The first important money, over $3 million in 1961 dollars, was gathered in voluntary contributions from Texas farmers and ranchers; 50 cents for a cow or horse, 10 cents per sheep, goat, or pig. The Sportsman’s Clubs of Texas, under the leadership of Harry Jersig, was instrumental in raising money from sportsmen’s groups to support the new and revolutionary program. The late Gamer Fuller, at that time employed as a wildlife biologist by Jersig’s Lone Star Brewing Company (and later TWA secretary), was also a key participant in early fund-raising efforts. Over $1.5 million was raised in the first 60 days of solicitations.

Governor Briscoe says, “Dr. R.C. Bushland was the real key person in this effort. ‘Bush’ went all over the state to the meetings of county committees, really selling ‘pie in the sky.’ The experts at USDA said the screwworm program, although it had been successful in Florida, could never work in Texas because of the constant reinfestation by flies from Mexico. Bush was just so persuasive in the meetings that he really got the livestock producers to bet on the technique.”

The fate of the program at this early stage was totally dependent on the ability of a scientist like Dr. Bushland to explain a complicated process in simple terms which laymen could readily understand, and he did a magnificent job of this. Not every rancher was convinced; Dr. Graham tells of one hard-bitten old rancher in the Hill Country who said, “Not no, but hell, no! I’m not putting any of my money into any such crackpot scheme; but I’ll tell you what. If this crazy idea does work, I’ll give you double next year.” The following year, the Foundation received his check for exactly twice the amount originally requested.

Lt. Gov. Preston Smith, later to be governor of Texas, appointed a committee of the 1963 Texas Senate to deal with the need for funds, while Byron Tunnell, Speaker of the

House, named a similar committee of House members. The first federal money for the screwworm program was arranged by Lyndon B. Johnson, at the time vice president, who was successful in getting a $200,000 appropriation through the Senate as the first Washington contribution.

Johnson, after succeeding to the Presidency, insured the continuance of the screwworm program with instructions to the USDA to quit saying “It won’t work in Texas,” and to make it work. Federal support was said to be much more evident after this instruction.

With $650,000 of the first producer contributions, a plant was built in Mission, in far South Texas, for the sole purpose of raising and sterilizing screwworm flies. (Brown and Root constructed the plant in six months for just $1 over costs!) Locating the plant in the Rio Grande Valley took advantage of the annual spread of the flies north from Mexico in the spring. By concentrating on preventing fly reproduction in a wide band along the Rio Grande, the flies could be kept from ever advancing to Central and North Texas. To

raise the tens of billions of flies necessary, workers seeded trays of ground meat with fly eggs. The earliest attempt at mass raising of screwworms, during the Florida effort, used ground horsemeat; when that became too expensive, a changeover was made to whale meat. The Mission plant began operations with whale meat, later changing to the meat of nutria—an aquatic rodent similar to the beaver. A still-later advance used a customized hydroponic mixture, whose major component was blood, to culture the flies. (The plant must have been an awful place to work for anyone with a sense of smell, although Dr. Meadows says, “You got used to it.” Gov. Smith says, “Nothing ever stunk so bad as the Mission fly plant.”)

The flies, 200 million of them a week, were then sterilized by radiation, placed into cardboard boxes which held as many as 2,000 flies, and air-dropped to systematically cover Texas and northern Mexico. Dr. Bushland says that screwworm drop aircraft were allowed much freer access to Mexican airspace than those of any previous operation.

Empty fly boxes were a common sight on Texas ranges. On one occasion, I saw an aircraft dropping flies over our Webb County deer lease. Every half mile or so, another box would be ejected from the rear of the plane, tumbling down to the brushland below with its cargo of sterile flies. Scientists had found that the sterile flies, although not so strong as those raised in the wild, were still capable of breeding with the wild females. Sterilized flies also lived a slightly shorter time—13-14 days, compared to 16 days for a wild fly.

Special drops were made in areas with heavy screwworm infestation, or where worms were found in new areas. Pure statistics then took over; with hundreds of thousands of sterile flies in the area, the mathematical probability was very high that the wild breeding female would become romantically involved with a sterile fly, thus laying infertile eggs which could not hatch into screwworm larvae.

For years the captive breeding, sterilization, and dropping of flies over Texas and northern Mexico continued, and the rate of screwworm infestations drastically declined. Special drops continued to effectively target outbreaks, and the

problem declined until in 1976 the Mission plant was closed. A new facility, with a capacity of 500 million flies per week, has now been opened further south in Tuxtla Gutierrez, Chiapas, Mexico.

Operations continued there, and finally in February 1991, it was announced that Mexico as well as the U.S. was screwwormfree. The announcement may have been slightly premature; approximately 50 cases of screwworms have been reported from Mexico in 1992. These are being treated just as earlier instances in Texas: with immediate highdensity drops of sterile flies. Dr. O.B. Oliver, currently at the USDA Mission facility, says that the majority of the fly samples currently received for identification at the Mission office are of fly species other than the screwworm.

The focus of present activities is shifting even further south in Central America, with a new fly plant scheduled to open in Panama in 1996, once the fly has been eradicated north of there.

Annual savings to U.S. livestock producers are estimated at $400 million, with expected total benefits to the U.S. and

Where Have

Mexico over $3 billion. No mere total on a cash register tape can ever accurately reflect the savings in suffering by the animals who were involuntary screwworm hosts, nor the hard, long work to treat and reduce that suffering.

The disappearance of the screwworm fly took away the necessity for twicea-week looks at all livestock, as well as the need for many of the horses, dogs, and cowboys who had to do the looking. A breeder of quarterhorses told Dr. Bushland, “The success of your screwworm program has ruined my business. People just don’t need as many head of horses anymore.”

As a result of the lessened need for ranch hands to work livestock, the rural face of Texas began to change permanently, as fewer people made their livings in the rangelands. Deer populations exploded; TWA’s David Langford says, “There was a dramatic change on the Esperanza Ranch in La Salle county. In 1958, we used to hunt all day and rarely see a deer. Just south of the house, there was a 2,000 acre barley field, and you’d never see more than a few deer on it.

Then in 1965 when I came back to the Esperanza, there were deer everywhere, and you could see hundreds of deer in that same barley field.” These high deer populations were one result of reduced losses to screwworms and introduced the problem of wildlife management to Texas landowners. Prior to the elimination of screwworm predation, there was no need to worry about keeping the wildlife population down to carrying capacity. Screwworms often eliminated nearly all fawns, and many of the does which gave birth to them. San Antonian Bill Scheidt, who hunted near Carrizo Springs in the 1920s, says, “We would hunt for a week, and maybe see only one or two deer. They would probably be pretty good ones, but there just weren’t many deer.”

Environmental groups and television programs tend to get all teary-eyed about wolves, lions and other predators, but the most important predator in the long history of Texas wildlife was the ugly, hungry offspring of the screwworm fly. The elimination of the fly went unnoticed by most Texas residents but was noted by relief by thousands of the rest. As David Langford says, “Just think about how it would be if the screwworms came back—what a change it would make in our lives.” The change of lifestyle might be more substantial than we think; Dr. Bushland says that all of the medicines and smears formerly used to treat screwworms would be illegal under presentday EPA regulations.

The present situation, without the constant threat of screwworm infection to keep landowners alert and on guard, is labeled as “a potential time bomb” by some of the former researchers, now retired. With the prevalence of non-resident landowners, and today’s weekend farmers/ranchers, a screwworm-infested animal could easily go undetected for weeks or until after death—time enough to hatch thousands of deadly flies. With the Mission plant now closed, federal and state funding for screwworm detection/treatment at zero levels, and even formerly-used medicines now unavailable, a return of screwworms could be a full-fledged disaster. Dr. Graham says flatly, “South of Highway 90, ranching as we now know it would be impossible if screwworms came back.” Livestock and wildlife professionals must be

constantly alert to any sign of fly danger, and notify their county agents and livestock producer groups immediately.

Unfortunately, the demise of the screwworm now seems to be only a minor bit of history, forgotten and neglected by the people who produce television shows and write for newspapers and magazines. The screwworm program, however, continues to serve as a model for effective international cooperation between producers and governments, and remains as the single most effective ecological program ever undertaken in Texas. Without the energy and contributions of Texas Iivestock producers and sportsmen, however, there would never have been a screwworm program, and Texas today would be a different place.

Someday, we may be able to say the screwworm is gone from Mexico; and, in some future year, from all of Central America. When the screwworm is finally gone, it is not likely to be forgotten; but neither will it be missed.

Thanks are owed to many who provided information for this article, to fill the many gaps in the author’s knowledge and experience. In no particular order, we wish to thank Dr. Obie Oliver, Dr. R.C. Bushland, Gov. Dolph Briscoe, Jr., Dr. M.E. Meadows, Dr. O.H. Graham, Gov. Preston Smith, Mr. David Langford, and Mr. Andy Vestal. Also infinitely helpful, and an invaluable source for anyone wishing more information on the screwworm program, is The Peaceful Atom and the Deadly Fly, a book by Charles G. Scruggs, published by the Pemberton Press, Austin, 1975. Mr. Scruggs, a former editor of the Texas Farmer Stockman, was acting chairman of the Southwest Animal Health Research Foundation at its inception, and his book is an authoritative presentation of the history of the program.

Dr. Meadows helped immeasurably with photos, pamphlets and clippings from his collection, as well as his remembrances of the screwworm campaigns in Florida, Texas, and Mexico.

A valuable later publication, detailing more specifically the scientific aspects of the program, is Proceedings of a Symposium on Eradication of the Screwworm from the United States and Mexico, O.H. Graham, editor, published by the Entomological Society of America as publication MPEAAL 62:1-68(1985). The illustrations in this article were provided by the USDA, courtesy of Dr. Obie Oliver, and by Dr. M.E. Meadows.

T h e T e x a s W i l d l i f e A s s o c i a t i o n p r e s e n t s

A o u d a d P r e p a r a t i o n

B e y o n d t h e P u r s u i t

A n o p p o r t u n i t y t o l e a r n a o u d a d p r o c e s s i n g a n d p r e p a r a t i o n f r o m t h e b e s t .

4 - 6 p m , S a t u r d a y J u l y 1 2

F r e e w i t h

S a t u r d a y R e g i s t r a t i o n Featuring

T W A C o n v e n t i o n

Hunting With Cameras

ARTICLE & PHOTOS BY DAVE RICHARDS

Minutes passed as he stood alert in the shadows. His ears turned to various angles, listening. His eyes shifted to the slightest movement, and his nostrils flared trying to evaluate any scent of friend or foe. Suddenly, a green jay flew between us and landed on a perch just feet from me, raucously calling which brought more green jays and his immediate piercing gaze. At 20 yards I felt like this mature buck was looking through me and I didn’t dare twitch a muscle to give away my hide. As the excited green jays flew down to the ground to feed, the buck

began to take a few steps but suddenly stopped short. He was again fully alert with ears erect and staring intently at something in the distance. I didn’t have a view in that direction since only the front window was open but seeing his hair erect on his entire body and his ears turned rearward confirmed another buck was approaching. I glanced at my settings to see if my shutter speed was high enough to freeze the action if a fight occurred and made a quick adjustment.

Blending into the surroundings as quietly and motion free as possible is key to capturing natural images of a variety of wildlife.

Hunting with Cameras

As the second buck came into view it became clear he wasn’t looking for a fight as his head was lowered and ears were pointed forward. He quickly started to feed, and the mature buck’s hair flattened as he relaxed. Seconds passed and the mature buck finally stepped forward into the early morning light and I touched my shutter button to capture the image I had been hoping would materialize.

I realized in my youth that I love being in the woods and on the water exploring wild places and interacting with wildlife, in awe of God’s creation. Capturing these golden lit moments in nature has been a passion of mine for most of my life and is just as thrilling as it was when I began hunting wildlife with a camera almost 50 years ago. Part of the lure is that every situation in nature is fresh and unpredictable, especially when wildlife is the subject matter. Lighting, weather and seasons add to the uniqueness of outdoor photography. And no two photo shoots are ever the same.

Wildlife photography offers me the opportunity to hunt for 12 months a year in places where I would not have had access to hunt with a firearm or bow. It allows me to learn, gain a deeper understanding and a new appreciation for the species I pursue. While on a hunt I seldom pull a trigger as soon as a shot presents itself and end whatever wildlife behavior is unfolding. I keep observing to see what happens next so I can capture additional wildlife behaviors and interactions on film. While mature whitetails are my favorite subjects to photograph, my interest has grown to photograph a variety of birds, reptiles, amphibians, insects and fish. Wildlife photography opens an entire natural world as subject matter and the unique environments where wildlife thrives becomes the playground to explore and document.

The skills I acquired as a youth hunting deer, squirrels, dove and waterfowl are extremely helpful. The wildlife pho-

Wildlife photography opens the opportunity to enjoy a variety of Texas birds and experience them in spectacular ways like this scissor-tail flycatcher feeding its young. Canon EOS 5D Mark IV f/ 6.3 1/3200 sec ISO-800 RF 100-400 f/ 4.5- 5.6L.

For some the cost of a traditional hunting trip can be a door closer. Consider hunting with cameras! It opens the world and hundreds of thousands of species like Cape buffalo in Africa to learn about and experience the people and culture where they thrive at a substantially lower cost. Canon EOS 5D f/4.5 1/320 sec ISO-640 300mm f/4L.

Hunting desert bighorns with a long lens allows one to experience hiking, hunting and stalking to get close to one of Texas’ most majestic mammals. When it all comes together, the images are treasures that will last a lifetime. Canon EOS 5D f/7.1 1/800 sec. ISO 250 Canon 300mm f/4L.

Sometimes wildlife photography opens amazingly rare wildlife experiences. We never know if our images are just for enjoyment or if they can inspire others to care enough to help an endangered species like these lesser prairie chickens, so they continue booming and dancing for future generations in the Texas Panhandle. We hope they do!

Each spring Texas enjoys the migration of painted buntings and numerous beautiful songbirds. These jewels of nature provide challenging photography opportunities with big payoffs of striking images. Canon EOS 5D Mark IV f/5.6 1/320 sec ISO-500 EF100-400mm f4.5-5.6L.

tographer must be within mere inches of some species or within 20 yards of most big game animals to capture quality images. It is imperative to remain unheard and unseen in the woods to maximize wildlife sightings and successfully capture natural images. The ability to move stealthily in the woods is critical.

Consistent success requires knowledge, experience and preparedness. One of a hunter’s greatest assets is knowledge of the prey. What is the animal’s preferred habitat and why? What do they eat at different times of the year? How often do they water? What are their natural defenses? The more you know about your subject and how it lives and survives, the better prepared you will be to capture natural images during its daily routine.

Wildlife photographers must know their camera equipment and how to use it quickly, efficiently, quietly and as motion-free as possible. Successful photographers constantly learn and try new techniques to improve their craft. Examples include:

• Choosing the proper ISO setting under constantly changing conditions

• Knowing when to shoot in aperture priority to make backgrounds sharp or blurred

• Increasing shutter speed in shutter priority mode to freeze action or decrease it to make the subject appear to have motion

• Shooting in manual mode to have total control and creativity of how an image ultimately appears

The key is to keep trying new things. You’ll enjoy success but also make mistakes along the way which is okay— this is how you gain experience and learn what works and what doesn’t. Shoot, adjust and keep shooting until you get the results you desire.

Take time to familiarize yourself with the property you’re hunting and properly scout to locate the target species by reading tracks and scat and observing feeding and bedding areas. Find and interpret clues that animals leave behind like a buck scrape, a squirrel’s chewed pinecone, or a gobbler’s strut marks in the dirt. These signs reveal that animals have been in the area and help unlock where you need to be waiting when they return. Once a favorable location is deter-

Wildlife photographers combine art, science and technology to create great images. Decisions regarding composition and lighting, knowledge of the brown bear and salmon run, and what camera settings would expose the bear correctly while freezing the leaping fish were just some of the decisions behind this photograph. Canon 5D Mark IV f/5.6 1/8000 sec ISO 1250.

mined, setting up to photograph a particular mammal or bird can vary greatly depending on the species. One must consider the timing of early morning and evening light to make certain the subject is bathed in it when it arrives. When setting up to photograph whitetail deer it’s extremely important to consider wind direction as a deer’s nose is its greatest defense. Camouflaging ground blinds is important in order to appear as natural as possible on a buck’s home turf. Camouflaging blinds, gear and photographers is even more critical when photographing wild turkeys and waterfowl because of their keen eyesight and ability to notice the slightest movement. Fortunately, scent control doesn’t come into play when photographing birds.

Animal and bird activity peaks in the early morning and late evening light so stabilizing one’s camera is key to taking sharp images. I grew up shooting Kodachrome 64 and Fuji 50 Velvia slide film, so I had to learn to shoot at low ISOs and stabilize my camera and myself. With today’s digital cameras one can run incredibly higher ISO’s but images tend to be busy and less appealing. Editing is always an option but I prefer to maximize my time photographing in the field. Image stabilizing lenses are a game changer and allow me to hand hold under most conditions but as the shadows appear

and

Wildlife quickly become accustomed to photography blinds that blend into the natural landscape. Wildlife should not see you or your lens as you sit back in the darkness of the blind. If deer are the subject, wind direction and scent control are first priorities, then comes timing. Early and late light are best.

I will employ a sandbag, shooting stick, monopod or tripod with a gimbal mount.

My intent is for my images to move others to learn about wildlife, appreciate its role in our lives and realize how incredible God’s creations are. Inspiring others to experience wild places to see whitetails, bears, bighorn sheep and elk in their unique environments is rewarding. People who experience the outdoors are more likely to become good wildlife stewards and positively impact future generations. While hunting is and always will be an important wildlife management tool, hunting with a camera allows valuable resources like whitetails, turkeys, waterfowl and songbirds to be enjoyed by many more people year around and provides additional income opportunities for property owners.

Wildlife photography fosters many great friendships for our family and serves as a bond for my own family and our faith. As a result, we offer learning opportunities for others through wildlife photography workshops on the incredible, wildlife-rich Hindes Ranch. Participants learn how to improve their skills while forging new friendships and sharing photography experiences around a campfire or over home cooked meals. They also get to experience a working hunting ranch and meet the families that run it. Even if they never hunt with a gun, the photographers gain an understanding and respect for the people who do as well as the importance of stewarding wildlife. Over my lifetime I’ve found that hunting with cameras is extremely rewarding and opens minds, gates and hearts to the importance of our wildlife resources and the habitats that support them while building strong interpersonal relationships with all who enjoy these treasured resources.

PRESENTING SPONSOR

SPONSORS

TEXAS WILDLIFE ASSOCIATION

PLATINUM SPONSOR

GOLD SPONSORS

SILVER SPONSORS

BRONZE SPONSORS

FRIENDS OF TEXAS WILDLIFE SPONSORS

YOUR COMPANY HERE

To find out how you can advertise in Texas Wildlife magazine, contact Sean Hoffmann at (800) 839-9453 for more information.

Texas Wildlife Association Foundation Dan Cabela presents

TWA 40 Anniversary WildLife 2025 Convention th Friday, July 11, 2025 12-1:30 p.m.

JW Marriott San Antonio Hill Country Resor t & Spa

We are honored to host keynote speaker Dan Cabela for our TWAF Luncheon Dan is a leader in global conservation and a passionate advocate for sustainable wildlife management. Hear Dan’s story during this very special opportunity at WildLife 2025.

Register by Friday, July 4, 11:59 p.m.

Skillful, Ingenious and Ruthless

BY STEVE NELLE

“A person is an ecologist if he is skillful in seeing facts, ingenious in formulating hypotheses, and ruthless in discarding them when they don’t fit.”

ALDO LEOPOLD, 1948

This description of an ecologist is taken from Leopold’s class notes from which he taught a wildlife ecology class at the University of Wisconsin just a short while before his death. At this time in the evolution of wildlife management, the concepts of habitat management and ecology were just being discovered and applied. Leopold was teaching pioneer principles during the early days of his profession. Landowners may not think of themselves as ecologists, but every landowner and manager is, in fact, a practicing ecologist. Ecology is about the relationships between all parts of the land including humans. Every landowner is involved in making decisions that affect the soil, water cycle, plants, crops, livestock, wildlife, fish and other parts of the land. The landowner studies these components and considers what manipulations are needed to produce a crop, reduce erosion, raise livestock and wildlife or a dozen other aspects of land management.

The landowner need not have formal academic training in order to practice ecology. He or she practices ecology every time decisions are made that affect the land. Leopold describes three essential qualities of the ecologist—they must be skillful, ingenious and ruthless with their ideas and theories about the land.

The first requirement of the ecologist is to be skillful in seeing facts. It is harder than it seems. Curiosity and observation are mandatory skills of the ecologist. Skill in seeing facts means that we don’t just see what we want to see, or what we have been programmed to see. We all fall victim to the cruel truth of confirmation bias, which prevents us from seeing new things clearly. We are so apt to confirm what we already believe that too often we simply will not or cannot see anything new or different. Observation of facts must be brutally honest and the willingness to see things we really don’t want to see.

The second requirement is to be ingenious in formulating hypotheses or theories. This means we must constantly be

thinking critically about what we see on the land and asking why. A hypothesis is a proposed but untested theory or idea that might explain what is being observed. Ingenuity means we are willing to entertain ideas and possibilities that no one else has thought of and which go against conventional thinking. It means enduring the ridicule of others who may insist that the idea is foolish. It includes the realization that your hypothesis may be wrong, but you forge ahead in testing it.

We don’t test our theories in order to prove them; we test and try them to see if they really work. Most of the time our new ideas do not work out as we hope, but if even a few ideas prove to be valid, we have done ourselves and others a great service.

The last requirement of the practicing ecologist is the hardest—to ruthlessly discard our theories when they do not prove out. This goes against human nature to conclude and admit that your ideas were wrong. But any good scientist will tell you that the disproving of theories is just as important as proving them. We need to know what does not work just as much as we need to discover what does work.

Wildlife science used to believe that 80% of quail will die anyway over the winter, so hunters may as well harvest the “doomed surplus.” That long held hypothesis has now been disproven. Likewise, the best and brightest deer managers once held the belief that spikes and other less developed whitetail bucks should be culled in order to enhance future antler genetics. That notion has been soundly refuted, yet some deer managers still hold fast to the old beliefs. The list could go on and on of hypotheses and theories that were dearly held but which have been proven false and should be discarded.

The best land managers are ecologically minded, constantly observing the land, proposing and testing new ideas with skill, ingenuity and ruthlessness.

Breakfast of Champions Wild Boar

ARTICLE AND PHOTO BY KRISTIN PARMA

Wild boar is an incredibly versatile and flavorful protein that brings a rich, game-forward twist to savory breakfast dishes. Its lean yet bold flavor pairs especially well with hearty vegetables like sweet potatoes and Brussels sprouts, making it a standout in breakfast hashes, scrambles or tacos. While often overlooked, ground wild boar is an excellent alternative to traditional breakfast sausage—adding depth to frittatas or served alongside eggs and toast for a rustic, satisfying start to the day. Its natural richness is complemented by aromatic herbs and spices such as sage, rosemary and smoked paprika, and it really shines when balanced with a hint of acidity or sweetness. Whether you’re cooking over a campfire or in your home kitchen, wild boar brings a deliciously untamed edge to the morning meal.

SAVORY WILD BOAR HASH YIELD 6-8 SERVINGS

1. In a large cast iron skillet over medium heat or open flame, cook chopped bacon until crispy. Remove bacon with a slotted spoon and set aside, leaving the rendered fat in the pan.

2. In the same skillet, add ground wild boar. Break it up with a spatula and cook until browned well (this may take longer than you think). Season lightly with salt and pepper. Remove and set aside.

3. If needed, add a little olive oil to the skillet (or use remaining bacon fat). Add diced sweet potatoes and cook for 8–10 minutes, stirring occasionally, until tender and crispy.

4. Stir in the diced onion and shaved Brussels sprouts. Cook for another 5–7 minutes until softened and starting to caramelize.

5. Lastly, add minced garlic and chopped kale. Cook for 2–3 minutes until garlic is fragrant and kale has wilted.

6. Return the cooked bacon and wild boar to the skillet. Stir everything together and let it crisp up for another 1–2 minutes.

7. Taste and season with additional salt, pepper, red pepper flakes, or smoked paprika. A splash of balsamic vinegar is a nice touch for brightness.

8. Serve with a fried or poached egg and your favorite chili crisp, if desired. Serve hot!

INGREDIENTS

5 strips thick-cut bacon, chopped

1 lb. ground wild boar (or substitute ground pork)

16 oz. sweet potato, peeled and diced

20 oz. Brussels sprouts, shaved thin

2 cups chopped kale (stems removed)

1/2 small onion, diced

2 cloves garlic, minced

2 tablespoons olive oil or bacon grease (as needed)

Salt and pepper to taste

Optional: red pepper flakes, smoked paprika, splash of balsamic vinegar

Optional toppings: fried or poached egg, avocado, hot sauce, chili crisp

Need more wild boar cooking inspiration? Check out The Hog Book by my friend and mentor Jesse Griffiths at www.thewildbooks.com. It’s an incredible resource packed with practical butchering tips, wild game recipes and thoughtful insights on utilizing every part of the pig—perfect for anyone looking to deepen their connection to the hunt and the plate.

This land can satisfy many ambitions. Whether you need it to expand your farm or ranch operation, for recreational purposes or as a future homesite, we can help you make it yours. For more than 100 years, we’ve been in the business of helping Texans get the loans they need for land like this. That’s because no one knows rural Texas better than us. After all, that’s our purpose.