Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

R-770 177 OF'FICE OF THE AIYTORNEY GENERAL PRICE DANIEL ~~RNxzY GENERAL Nov. 15, 1947 Hon. James C. Martin Opinion No. V-431 County Attorney NU8C88 county R8: Constitutionality of H.B. Corpus Christi, Texas 380, Acts 50th Legisla- tUr8, R-S., 1947, par- taining to taking and sale of shrimp. Dear Sir: You request a ruling relative to the constitu- tionality Of ROUS8 Bill 380, being Chapter 107, Acts Of th8 50th Legislature, 1947, Regular Session, page 149, clm8LldiQ3 v. P. c., Art. 952 L-11, pertaining to the tak- ing and sale of shrimp. You state: "It is COnt8nd8d by some partics that HOWE Bill No. 380 iS UILoOnstitUtiOna1 in vi8W of tha provisions of said law wh1ch.permit.sto b8 legally Used in Galveston CoUIity,Texas, a board not more than 20" wide, and not more than 60" long, and In other counties of the State, a board not more than 12" wide and not mor8 than l8? long. Those contending the law to bye unconstitutional maintain it violatss the,Texas Constitution In that It Is discriminatory, and is a local or special law." The particular paragraph which you refer to Is found in Vernon's Annotated Penal Code, Article 952 L-11, as amended, and reads as follows: "Sec. 1:. . . . "It shall b8 UUlaWfUl f~Orany person t0 take or assist In the taking of shrimp from the inland waters of this State by the use and operation of a bait trawl towed by a power boat, which said bait trawl shall be more than ten (10) feet at the mouth, as measured along the webbing attaahed to the .cork line, or twenty-five (25) feet in length, or by the us8 and anployment of 178 Hon. James C. Martin, page 2, V-431 doors or Other boards to spread and open said bait trawl which are of greater size or dimension than twelve (12) by eighteen (18) Inches, or to tow or assist in the towing of more than one such bait net or trawl from a power boat, or to tow other boats engaged in taking bait shrimp; and it shall be unlawful for any person opera- ting a bait trawl to have on board any boat any amount of bait shrimp during the clos- ed saason in inland waters as above provid- ed in excess or one hundred and fifty (150.) pounds of shrimp In their natural state with hea.dsattached. Provided that during such closed season in Galveston County it shall be lawful to take shrimp for bait by the use and amployment of doors or boards' of not greater dimension than twenty (20) by sixty (60) inch8S and to possess not , more than two hundred and fiftg~ (250) pounds Of shrimp with heads attached, . .~." The State Is th8 owner of the fish, shrimp and other products of the tidal waters of the Gulf of Mexico within the jurisdiction of this State. Arti&le 4026, V. c. s.; Raymond v. Kibbe, 95 S.W. 727, 729, 730;.Stephen- son v. Wood,.34 s. w; (26.)246, 119,Tex. 964; Tuttle v. Wood. 35 S. W. (2d) 1061. writ refused: Mccreadv v:Vir- gini;, 94 U. S.:391, 24 L. Ed. 248; Geer v. Conhectlout, 161 U. S. 519. Article III, Section 56 of the T8Xas Constitu- tion, aft8r prohibiting the Legislature from passing "any local or special lawn in certain enumeratad instan- ces, oontains th8 following provision: " . . . . provided, ,that nothing herein contained shall be construed to prohibit the' Legislature from passing speaial laws for the preservation of the game and fish of this State in certain localities." In Stephenson v. Wood, Civil Appeals, 35 S. W. (2d) 794, the Galveston Court in construing this provi- sion of the statute said: "It occurs to us that by the 'paragraph last quoted the~~framersof the Constitution meant to declarethat nothing in the Consti- tution should prohibit the Legislature from Hon. Jam8S C. Martin, page 3, V-431 passing laws, 'special or local,( for the preservation of the game and fish of this state, whether made to apply to the Who18 state or to certain localities without no- tic8 required in the passage Of laws rela- tive to the subjects mentioned in sections 56 and 57 of article 3 of the Constitution." It is immaterial that a game law applies to some counties and not to others or that different laws apply to different counties. The counties, as such, have no right to complain that the game laws applicable to it are different from the game laws applicable to certain other counties. For instance, there are very few coun- ties that have the same squirrel laws. Whatever the law is in a particular county, it applies equally and with- out diScriminStion to all persons in the county. The State owns the fish and game, which are ferae naturae, and through its Legislature it may prohibit their tak- ing altogether, or place such restrictions on their tak- ing, as it may se8 fit, either as to the place or th8 means of taking, or both. See authorities cited above. In Tuttle v, Wood, San Antonio Court of Civil Appeals, 1930, 35 S. W. (2d) 1061, the court said: '1. . , . It must be conc8d8d that the state has the inherent power, to be exercis- ed through the Legislature, to regulate the taking of fish and shrimp from its public waters, -and to prohibit from time to time such taking, in order to conserve those natural re- sources for the ultimate benefit of all the peo- ple. So long as that power is reasonably exer- cised by the legislative authority, no other branch of the government may interfere there- with. Ordinarily, the necessity or reasonable- ness of regulation or prohibition in specific cases, for the time being, are left to the dis- cretion of the Legislature, whose determination thereof, in the exercise of a sound discretion, is conclusive upon the courts. . . .v The Legislature of T8XaS is authorized to en- act special laws for the preservation of game and fish without notice required for the passage of "special or looal laws", and it is immaterial that such laws apply to certain localities and not to others, Hon. James ~C. Martin, page 4$ V-431 SUMMARY House Bill No, 380 (Acts 50th Leg, 19klo 'Ch. l&I?,p0 149) amending Art, 952, L-11, V, ?. co, pertaining to the taking end sale ef shrimp, and provfdfng that there may be uaed fn Galveston County, Texas fn a bait trawl for the takfng of shrimp, a board not more than 20" wide and not more than 60" long, and in tihsr oountirs lf the State a board not mor8 than 12" wide nor more than 18" longs,is con- atitutional. Yours very truly XITOIU'IEYGENSML OF TXM -1 David Wuntch .Assirta& ATTORNEY GXhXRAL ' .