Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

June 14, 1951. Hon. Ramle H. Griff’la Crlmlnal Dlstrlct Attorney Jefferson County Beaumont, Texas Oplnlon Ro. v-1191 Be; Legality of fishing with seines or nets wlthla dne mile of the jetty Dear Sir; at Sablae Pass, Texas. Your recent request for an opi~idn ask8 whether Article 941, V.P.C., prohibiting the use o? certain 1arSe seines, net@, and other devices for catching fish Itor on Sablne Pass or the waters within one mile thereof, applies to the waters within one mile from’any polnt on the Sablne Jetty. Your question arises from the fact that applloatlonof Artlole 941 to the jetties at San Lulo Pass commonly known a8 Galveston Pass, has been question&, and, the oondltloas’therebeing similar to those at Sabine Pas8, you desire a clarliioatiodan to applioationof the statutes. Spe~lfloallgyou ask two questions,whloh are: (1) Does House Bill 952, Speolal Laws, 46th Leg., R.S. 1939, oh. 84, p. 839, modify Artlole 941, V.P.C.* and govern the situation at Sablne Pas80 (2) Xi not, Is the prohlblted area under Ar- tlole 441, V.P.C., to be measured from any point on Sablne ‘Jetty7 Raoh question depends on certain faotual mat- ter which has been furnlohed by you and by personnel o? the (tame,Fl8h and Oyster Coana~ssion, the oWreOtneE8 of which wB shall assume for purposes of this OplnlOn. Artlole 941, V.P.C., provides: P . . Hon. Raw&e H. Griffin, Page 2, (V-1191) “It shall be unlawful for,any person to place, aet. use or drag any seine, net or other device for catching fish d h other than the ordinary Dole and IEe?&% lng rod and reel, artlflklal bait, trot line, set line, 0~ cast net or minnow aelne of not more than twenty feet la length for catching bait, or have in his possession any seine, net or trawl without a permit Issued Game, Plsh and Oyster Conrmlssloners misslog OP by his authorized deputy . . . within or on the waters of . . . Sablne Pass, from Sablne Lake to the Gulf of Mex- ;ggy an Luls Pass, leading from Galveston We& Say to the Gulf of Mexico: . . . or in or on the w&&s within one mlie of the p&es herein mentioned, connecting th b d tidal waters of this State wltheth?&? of tdexlooor in qr on or within a mile of any other such pa&ses, or within the waters of any pass, stream or canal leading from one body of Texas bay or coastal waters Into an- other body of such waters; q . .” (Emphasis added throughout.) House ~111 952, Special Laws, 46th Leg., R.S. 1939, ch. 84, P. 839, provides: “Section I. -It ~shall-beunlawfulfor any person to use, operate, sail, anchor, tie, or moor to the bank any boat, sailboat, motorboat, skiff, barge, raft, or other floating devioe, or to place any post, pll- lng, obstruction,wire, rope, cable, net Hon. Ramie I?.Griffin, Page 3, (V-1191) As to your first question, obviously the ap- plication of House Bill 952 to any situationdepends on whether the Game, Fish and Oyster Commissionhas functioned or Is functioning In Improving the pass con- cerned. You have advised that the Commissiondoes not so function at Sablne Pass or Sablne Jetty. Such be- ing true, Rouse Bill 952 has no application. The anawer to your second question depends on the extent to which Sablne Jetty and the waters adjacent thereto constitutea part of Sablne Pass and the correct determinationof the points from which to measure the prohibited area. As we understand the factual situation,the Sablne Jetty was formed by the erection of two parallel walls or breakwatersextending some three miles out ln- to the Gulf from each side of the natural mouth of Sablne Pass. It, In effect, extends the pass the length of the jetty Into the Gulf. We are further advised that fish tend to ap- proach the pass for entrance therein from the sides of the jetty, and, upon meeting the obstruction,tend to turn and congregate in one or more spots on the outer side of the jetty where they become peculiarly vulner- able to netting and seining at the location of such "traps." If "Sablne Pass.,"referred to In Artidle.941, does not Include the artlflclallyextended channel, the jetty may be Ignored in determining the prohibited area. If It includes the extension, the question arises as to what area in addition to the new channel is included In the prohibition. These questions may be determined by reference to Gibson v. Sterrett, 144 S.W. 1189 (Tex. Clv. App. d Gavlna v. State, 65 Tex. Grim. 572, 145 S.W. $$!i$g).? case It was urged that a as used in Am 941, was a restricted area lylng'lmmedlatelybetween the islands forming the strait entering Corpus Christ1 Ray. However, the Court said: "The evidence shows clearly that the water from and to the Gulf flows through a defined channel extending from the strait between the Islands to Corpus Christ1 Ray; 420 Hon. Rsmle H. Griffin, Page 4, (V-1191) and It Is therefore as much a part of the pass leading from such coast water to the Gulf as the strait Itself. The construc- tion of the word 'pass' insisted on by ap- pellant would defeat the evident purpose of the statute. The purpose the Legisla- ture had In view was to enable fish to have free access to and from the coast waters, and if they are allowed to be interceptedin or near the channel afore- said th purpose would be defeated. In arrivlni at the sense of the Legislature In the use of the term 'all passes', the purpose It.had in view must be consulted." Similarly, the Court In the Gavlna case said: " the pass intended by the legis- lative'act'wascertainly the entire length of the channel from the bay to the gulf. About this I think there can be no question. This question was recently passed on ad- versely to appellant'scontention in the case gf Gibson v. Sterrett, 144 S.W. 1189 . . . These cases clearly Indicate that the Leglsla- ture Intended to protect the free passage of the fish In or'near the channel. It recognized the natural prbpen- sltles of the fish and endeavored to protect themeat points at which they might be Interceptedwhen seeking entrance to the pass. The natural approach to the pass Is apparently the concentrationpoint to which the fish go for entrance. ;icY;;ld appear to be within the area Intended to be pro- Since the jetty Is designed to function as a part oi the pass, and since it appears to definitely ln- fluence the movement of the fish and to create conditions which gave rise to Article 941, we conclude that an area Ut+&-h 'UIP, db Qt-Snsgw+, Qf tJIp-Qts QW%X 4c ti jetty Is within the area prohibited by Article 941. SUMMARY R .S. tit;;":;" f$';,.SE;;;ia:~;;il::k% '* the water: of any natural'or artificial pass Hon. Ramle 33.Griffin, Page 5, (V-1191) maintained by the Game, Fish and Oyster Commission as a fish pass, and Is not, therefore,presently applicableto Sablne Pass or Sabine Jetty. Sy the provlslons of Article 941, V.P.C., it Is Illegal to seine with the equipment thereln forbidden within one mile of any point on the orig- inal Sabine Pass or the Sablne Jetty. APPROVED: Yours very truly, Red McDaniel PRICE DARIRL State Affairs Division Attoruey General Jesse P. Luton, Jr. Reviewing Assistant Charles D. Mathews First Assistant VPT:jmc