Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Aquaculture Rulemaking topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
TPWD staff proposes tightly constrained permit path for commercial dotted‑duckweed cultivation; commissioners ask for more risk analysis
Summary
Staff recommended publishing rule changes to allow commercial aquaculture of dotted duckweed in enclosed, biosecure facilities under permit with strict site exclusions; commissioners raised concerns about escape, flood risk, and insufficient historical evidence and asked staff for a fuller risk profile before posting.
TPWD staff presented a petition‑driven rulemaking proposal on Aug. 20 to allow commercial cultivation of dotted duckweed (a small, fast‑growing floating aquatic plant) in specifically permitted, biosecure aquaculture facilities.
Michael Tennant, regulations and policy manager in Inland Fisheries, said a company (Plantable Foods) petitioned TPWD to authorize commercial production under an exotic species aquaculture facility permit and that staff’s site visit and analysis indicated the petition could be managed with strict facility and biosecurity requirements. Proposed measures include greenhouse or enclosed cultivation to prevent waterfowl access; mandatory facility elevation at least one foot above the 100‑year floodplain; species‑specific drain and maceration requirements that reduce plant material to particles no larger than 100 micrometers before discharge; herbicide or other treatment to render plant material nonviable before draining; restricted siting (no facilities in certain coastal or flood‑prone eastern areas); and TCEQ compliance for any discharges.
Commissioners pressed staff on risks. Several commissioners said dotted duckweed’s rapid growth and small seeds—and the potential for spread by waterfowl or floodwaters—merit extra caution. Commissioner John McCall and others noted the species’ potential to damage springs and private wells in East Texas if broad groundwater or surface‑water pathways are affected. Some commissioners and several public commenters urged additional study of geographic exclusions, redundancy in flood protections and clarifications of inspection and enforcement frequency.
Chairman Foster and Vice Chairman Bell suggested staff perform additional analysis and provide tighter sideboards before seeking publication in the Texas Register; TPWD agreed to return with a fuller risk profile and examples of how other states have handled similar petitions. The commission did not place the proposed rule on the formal agenda and asked for more information before moving forward.
