EDITORIAL: FCSA Hunt Revenue Gutted

  For over a decade, Fort Clark Springs Association has banked on its commercial operations to support the expenses of the homeowners association. On countless occasions, FCSA has been warned that each of these commercial programs are at risk in their own way. We have seen what a lack of water has done to the motel and swim park income over the past few years. Now it appears that the highest margin operation, the hunt program, is in danger of evaporating as well. 

  In December of 2024, the FCSA Board of Directors voted to acquire land held by the Kinney County Appraisal District for up to $12,000. This has spurred conversation around the county because this purchase must be approved by each of the taxing entities with an interest in the properties. FCSA decided to pull their bid for the property, but another local citizen has made a $15,000 offer to acquire the land. The transaction has yet to be completed.

  In the last few weeks, the Kinney County Appraisal District has started to mark the 134 lots held in trust. Unfortunately, many of these properties are located in the areas used by FCSA to sell hunts to members and the public. There are also many other private property parcels in these areas that FCSA does not own. It seems as though we have at least a couple of issues here: Texas Parks and Wildlife Code § 62.0121 – Hunting Without Landowner Consent, Texas Penal Code § 30.05 – Criminal Trespass, Texas Parks and Wildlife Code § 62.0125 – Discharge Across Property Line. 

  During the February Fort Clark MUD meeting, FCSA stated the property in question is key to the viability of the hunt program. Last year the Fort Clark Springs Gun Club allowed FCSA access to the property leased for club activities in return for a cut of the profits. To my knowledge no such offer has been made to land owners or the KCAD. It’s unclear at this point if that is in the cards, but it would certainly be an uphill battle to acquire and maintain access to the hundreds of lots in and around the current hunting area. 

  The question of proper access is one concern, but the larger liability question looms over this necessary revenue program. Does FCSA have the appropriate insurance coverage to hunt land without landowner consent, to criminally trespass, and to discharge a firearm across property lines? I highly doubt such a policy exists, but I’m not an insurance expert. While the revenue, $70k-$100k annually, is needed, are we gambling or just hoping there will not be an issue? 

  Thankfully FCSA has a few options, but action needs to be taken before there is an incident. In the past, the association has contracted with trappers to produce revenue without having to close large portions of land to members. There is also the option to acquire access through leases, but that seems like more of an administrative headache than it would be worth. There is a solution to maintain the critical FCSA revenue stream, but FCSA will have to address these issues head on. Let’s hope they don’t stick their head in the sand and use their typical Vale [sic] of silence tactic while they hope this issue just goes away.