Case Information

*1 February 14, 1975 Opinion No. H- 528 Executive Director

Texas Parks & Wildlife Department Re: May the Parks and Wildlife John H. Reagan Bldg. Department lease land to pro- vide feed for white-winged Austin, Texas 78701

doves under article879a-6, Laws. Dear Mr. Garrison:

You have asked our opinion on two questions concerning the Depart- ment’s authority to expend funds under a program designed to protect the dove. One question asks whether certain expenditures are proper “for acquisition of white-winged dove habitat” and the other asks whether similar expenditures may legally be made “for research management of white-winged doves. ”

Article 879a-6, Penal Auxiliary Laws, authorizes the Parks and Wildlife Department to sell white-winged dove stamps and prohibits Section 4(c) of that article states hunting the doves without a stamp.

that:

The Commission shall deposit the proceeds from the sale of stamps in the state treasury in Special Game and Fish Fund No. 9. One-half of these proceeds may be expended only for research of white-winged dove and the other one-half of these proceeds may only be expended ior the acquisition dove habitat in the state.

1n, an earlier opinion, Attorney General Opinion M-1084 (1972), this office concluded that despite article 879a-6, the Parks and Wildlife Department could not expend any funds for the acquisition *2 The Honorable Cisyton T. Garrison page 2 W- 528)

dove habitat because the Legislature had failed to appropriate any funds for thal purpose. The problem was partially solved with the passage of the Genera! Appropriation Bill for the biennium beginning Sept. 1, 1973. It c-ontains an appropriation of $37, 500 for 1974 and a like amount for 1975 “to be expended dove habitat. ” Acts i973, 63rd Leg., ch. 659, p. 2005. But no appropriation has been made for “research and management of white wing dove. ”

It is apparent that the Legislature which enacted article 879a-6, section 4(c) had two distinct activities in mind because it earmarked portions of stamp-sale income which could be used for one of the purposes, but not for the other.

Since the Legislature has seen fit to appropriate funds for only one of the two authorized programs, the Department is not permitted to expend funds for the other. Thus, there are no appropriated funds for research of the white-winged dove, and it is unnecessary to consider your specific questions about expenditures for that purpose.

Your other question asks:

1. Is the ‘Department authorized to expend a portion ol the one-half proceeds dedicated by article 879a-6 Laws, “for acquisition dove habitat” to

a) lease land for the purpose of growing grain crops or to lease land with standing grain crops to provide feed for white-winged doves?

b) purchase farmland for the express purpose of grnwlng grain crops

c) purchase farmland for the express purpose of growing brush (reforestation) to provide nesting and roosting habiiat~ for white-winged doves’? *3 page 3 (H- 528)

d) buy equipment and pay salaries and operating expenses for the purposes of growing brush (reforesta- tion) to provide nesting and roosting habitat and to grow crops

The four general types of activities you mention appear to be related to the acquisition of habitat for the white-winged dove, and to the extent that they, in fact, constitute such acquisition, you are authorized by articl,e 879a-6 and by the Appropriations Act to expend funds for those purposes. We do not believe that the fact that land may be leased rather than purchased will pre- vent its being acquired for the purposes of the statute. Whether any specific activity qualifies as a part of a program of habitat in- volves fact questions which we are not authorized to answer.

SUMMARY

The Legislature has appropriated no funds for

research of the white-tinged dove. Funds are appropriated may be spent for acquisition of habitat for the dove. Very truly yours, u Attorney General of Texas C. ROBERT HEATH, Chairman

Opinion Committee