Texas Register, Volume 37, Number 40, Pages 7815-8094, October 5, 2012 Page: 7,958

                                
portions of Culberson, El Paso, and Hudspeth counties in West
Texas (where CWD has been discovered and additional CWD
detection is probable). Additional CZs may be added elsewhere
in the state if necessary, and existing CZs may be modified.
Proposed new 65.81(2) sets forth the restrictions that apply
within the CZ to holders of permits issued pursuant to Parks and
Wildlife Code, Chapter 43, Subchapters C, E, L, R, and R-1.
Proposed new 65.81(2)(A) would prohibit any person within a
CZ from conducting any activity involving the movement of a sus-
ceptible species under a permit issued pursuant to Parks and
Wildlife Code, Chapter 43, Subchapters C, E, L, R, or R-1 within
a CZ. For instance, Triple T permits authorize the trapping of
deer for transplantation elsewhere. In a CZ, where the proba-
bility of CWD is highest, allowing the trapping and movement of
deer to other areas of the state could result in the further spread
of CWD. Similarly, allowing the release of Triple T deer or reha-
bilitated deer or allowing the concentration of wild deer in close
confinement as a result of DMP activities also carries elevated
risks.
Proposed new 65.81(2)(B) would stipulate that if the depart-
ment receives an application for a DBP for a new facility that is
to be located within an area designated as a CZ, the department
will issue the permit but will not authorize the possession of deer
within the facility so long as the CZ designation exists. Parks
and Wildlife Code, 43.352, requires the department to issue
a DBP to an applicant who meets the statutory and regulatory
requirements for permit issuance; however, the commission's
rulemaking authority under Parks and Wildlife Code, 43.357(b)
authorizes the promulgation of rules governing the possession
of breeder deer. The department recognizes that the likelihood
that a person will desire to locate a new DBP facility in an area
where CWD has been confirmed is remote; however, the possi-
bility must be addressed. CWD is transmitted not only by direct
contact but also indirectly through environmental contamination.
Thus, the area within a CZ must itself be treated as if it were a
vehicle for transmission of CWD. It follows that if a deer breeder
facility were to be built in a CZ, any deer introduced into the facil-
ity would become potential reservoirs for CWD, a situation that
should be avoided.
Proposed new 65.81(2)(C) would prohibit the recapture of
breeder deer that escape from a DBP facility located within a
CZ. Under current rule (31 TAC 65.602) a DBP holder may
recapture deer that have escaped from a DBP facility. However,
within a CZ the possibility that an escaped deer could come into
contact with CWD-infected deer or contaminated environmental
media is probable. An escaped deer that is recaptured and
returned to a DBP facility could transmit CWD to deer within the
DBP facility, making the DBP facility a CWD reservoir; therefore,
the department has determined that it is prudent to prohibit the
recapture of escaped breeder deer with a CZ.
Proposed new 65.82, concerning High Risk Zones; Restric-
tions, would establish the physical boundaries of the initial HRZ
and articulate the specific requirements regarding activities of
permit holders within an HRZ. Proposed new 65.82(1) would
create an initial HRZ in portions of Culberson, Hudspeth, Jeff
Davis, and Reeves counties. HRZs may be added or modified
as necessary. The HRZ created by the proposed new section
comprises an area that surrounds the CZ. The department, us-
ing the best available science and data, has determined that the
presence of CWD could reasonably be expected within the HRZ.

Proposed new 65.82(2) would set forth the restrictions that ap-
ply within the HRZ to holders of permits issued pursuant to Parks
and Wildlife Code, Chapter 43, Subchapters C, E, L, R, and
R-1. Following the recommendation of the CWD Task Force
and in concurrence with the TAHC, proposed new 65.82(2)(A)
would prohibit any activity involving movement of a susceptible
species under a permit issued pursuant to Parks and Wildlife
Code, Chapter 43, Subchapter C, E, L, R, or R-1 within an HRZ,
except as provided in subparagraph (B), which addresses DBPs
specifically. The reasons for this restriction are as set forth in the
discussion of proposed new 65.81(2)(A). Except for certain ac-
tivities conducted pursuant to a DBP, described in 65.82(2)(B),
the restrictions in the HRZ are the same as those in the CZ re-
garding the permits issued pursuant to Chapter 43, Subchapter
C, E, L, R, or R-1.
With respect to DBP activities in the HRZ, proposed new
65.82(2)(B)(i) would prohibit any person from introducing,
removing, authorizing the introduction or removal, or causing
the introduction or removal of a live breeder deer into or from
a facility permitted under Parks and Wildlife Code, Chapter 43,
Subchapter L, that is located within an HRZ unless the facility
has a record of test results of "not detected" for all eligible mor-
talities within the facility in the immediately preceding five-year
period, the facility holds at least a Level C herd status with
the TAHC, and the department has confirmed that the herd
inventory maintained by the department is accurate. As noted
earlier in the discussion of CZs, allowing deer held under a DBP
at a facility within an HRZ to be moved outside of the HRZ cre-
ates a potential for spreading CWD. However, the department
recognizes that a DBP facility that has tested 100% of eligible
mortalities with results of "not detected," has achieved a Level
C status from TAHC, and for which the department is able to
verify the physical presence of each animal recorded on the
inventory is, from an epidemiological point of view, not a likely
reservoir for CWD. TAHC designates Level C status for herds
that have a minimum of four years of test results indicating
the absence of CWD, which is less stringent than the standard
established in proposed new 65.82(2)(B)(i), which requires five
years of test results, but requires an inventory verification to be
performed annually by an accredited veterinarian and stipulates
that additions of animals from lower herd-certification statuses
causes an equivalent lowering for the receiving herd. Therefore,
the effect of the proposed new provisions is to ensure that for
a deer to be moved from a DBP facility within an HRZ, the
department will have sufficient confidence that no deer within
the facility have been infected with CWD. Such facilities would
therefore be authorized to conduct normal activities under the
DBP except for transport of a deer to a location other than a
permitted deer breeder facility, which essentially prohibits the
liberation from a deer breeder facility to the wild within the
HRZ. Proposed new 65.82(2)(C) would expressly prohibit the
liberation of deer held under any permit into the wild within an
HRZ, which is necessary to avoid creating additional disease
reservoirs.
Proposed new 65.82(2)(D) would prohibit the recapture of
breeder deer that escape from a DBP facility located within an
HRZ. Under current rule (31 TAC 65.602) a DBP holder may
recapture deer that have escaped from a DBP facility. However,
within an HRZ there is the possibility that an escaped deer could
come into contact with CWD-infected cervids or contaminated
environmental media, which could then be transmitted to deer
within the DBP facility and possibly to other DBP facilities (as
deer are transferred among deer breeders); therefore, the

37 TexReg 7958  October 5, 2012  Texas Register