November 18, 2025
ALC Game & Fish / State Police
Representative Dwight Tosh Chair sees a quorum. The meeting is called to order. Thank you, committee members. First on today’s agenda– my co chair will be here in just a few minutes. So we’ll welcome her when she gets here. But let’s go ahead and get started with the committee meeting. And first on the agenda today is a report and overview from the Arkansas Game and Fish director Doug Schoenrock. If you would, Schoenrock, if you would please have a seat at the table. And if you would, sir, if you would just identify yourself and your title for the committee, we’d appreciate it. If you would turn your back on, sir.
Doug Shoenrock Hear me now? I got you. My name is Doug Schoenrock. I’m the director of the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission.
Duck Hunting Regulations
St. Francis Sunken Lands
Representative Dwight Tosh Okay, and Director, I appreciate you being here. I know you’ve got some of your administration here with you, and I appreciate y’all being here today to answer some questions. And, of course, you and I have had, we’ve had a few conversations over the last few weeks especially concerning the St. Francis Sunken Lands there on the WMA. And I just think there’s been a lot of misinformation out there concerning with, you know, the duck season approaching. I think here in, what, the next four or five, six days.
Doug Shoenrock Saturday.
Representative Dwight Tosh It’s getting close. So anyways, I thought this would be a great opportunity to have you here, and I appreciate it, to be able to clear up some of the information concerning the rules and regulations and how they’re going to apply this year during the duck season. It’s my understanding, and you correct me if I’m wrong, but during our conversations you have said that there is no change in the rules or the regulations from last year as it affects the St. Francis Sunken Lands or any of our WMAs or waterways. The same rules that were in effect then are going to be in effect this year. Is that correct?
Doug Shoenrock That is correct, sir, other than the fact that we are stepping up enforcement and will not tolerate any hunter harassment.
Representative Dwight Tosh Okay. One follow up question before I let you make your statements regarding this. I know there’s been no change in the rules or the regulations and you’ve just confirmed that and I appreciate it. Over the last several years I guess those same rules have been in effect. I know you’re new at the job and you may not go back, but I’m sure some of your staff members could. Has there been any change at all over the last several years in regards to the rules as they apply to that particular area or anywhere across the state?
Doug Shoenrock No, sir. No significant changes.
Representative Dwight Tosh Has there been any change in the interpretation of those rules? Has it changed from one year to the next as to what maybe the rule actually, the way it was interpreted? Has there been any changes in that area?
Doug Shoenrock You know, interpretation of the rules is subject to the whims of the director, I think, in a lot of cases. There may have been some, sir, but I’m not aware of any.
Representative Dwight Tosh Okay. If you would, would you just kind of lay it out for the committee as to exactly– and I know you’ve been really involved in, and, like I said, I know there’s been a lot of misinformation out there concerning the blinds or the usage of boats, hunting platforms and blinds, especially on the St. Francis Sunken Lands there at the WMA. So could you just kind of lay it out, exactly what we can expect and what the hunters can expect from that situation as it exists now?
Doug Shoenrock Yes, sir, I would. In fact, I will read you four points to the letter that I gave direction to for enforcement and legal. Point number one, all regulations will remain in effect as were in effect last year for the 2024-2025 duck season. Number two, for the 2025-2026 duck season, we will maintain the same position as last year.
We will continue to acknowledge the 208 MSL contour line as the distinction between private lands and the lands of the state of Arkansas, as we did during the 2024-2025 duck season. This recognition includes the 78-acre accretion as private, but does not include the islands that were the subject of the State versus Hatchie Coon Hunting and Fishing Club 372 Arkansas 547 in 2008.
As was true last year, floating blinds on the navigable public waterway of the St. Francis River cannot be left unattended. And number four, hunter harassment will not be tolerated and will be cited.
Representative Dwight Tosh Before I move forward, any questions from committee members at this point? Representative Richardson, you’re recognized for a question.
Representative Scott Richardson Thank you, Mr. Chair, appreciate it. So, you’ve used that term twice, and I’m just kind of curious what your definition of hunter harassment would be.
Doug Shoenrock Hunter harassment is defined, I believe, by our enforcement division by impeding another person’s success and safety in water fowl.
Representative Scott Richardson So let me give you a more specific if can. So from a hunter perspective, and I enjoy all of our state properties and try to take advantage of as many of those as I can during that season, one of the things that often comes up is conversations or heated discussions between various duck hunters over how far away that they’re required to be in order to hunt. Could you help? Would that be part of that conversation?
Doug Shoenrock So we don’t have proximity rules for citing regulations. In my opinion, it is a safe distance. We’re fortunate to have very passionate, impassioned waterfowlers in the state of Arkansas. We welcome comments from all of them because we all share the same passion. When you hunt public land, you’re going to hear other calling, you’re going to hear other noise, you’re going to hear other shots. That’s unavoidable. That could be considered harassment if it’s 300 yards away. In my opinion, our officers will direct hunter harassment as being unsafe, unsafe conditions for humankind, sir.
Representative Scott Richardson Ok. Thank you.
Representative Dwight Tosh Representative Wooldridge, you’re recognized for a question.
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you, Director, for being here. So we’re talking about these, I mean they’re floating blinds, right?
Doug Shoenrock Yes, sir.
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge Okay. So it’s my understanding, and I think Representative Tosh, Chairman Tosh, hit on this originally. So blinds were removed from WMAs and other properties, but now they’re allowed to be there as long as they’re occupied?
Doug Shoenrock That’s not a rule for at large WMAs, sir. This is a navigable waterway, and that’s why those blinds are allowed to be there because it is a navigable waterway. And it’s been that way, sir, since those blinds were burned in 2012. A pontoon boat started showing up that same fall.
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge So to clarify this– and one more follow up, Mr. Chair– to clarify this, what are the rules surrounding these pontoon boats or floating blinds that are in the navigable waterway now? Do they have to have motors? Do they have to be registered?
Doug Shoenrock We are enforcing registration requirements and occupancy of those floating blinds.
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge So if someone is on an occupied floating blind– so let’s just say for argument’s sake that someone’s being paid or for whatever reason to stay out there so it’s occupied and it’s not actually the person hunting, would hunter harassment laws allow me to join those people and hunt the next morning?
Doug Shoenrock I think that that’s a conversation that hunters have to have amongst themselves. There’s no law that says you have the right to do so. Those floating blinds are private property. And to answer your other question, sir, yes, they need to be occupied, unattended, as is the regulation for any personal equipment on the WMA.
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge Okay. Thank you, sir.
Representative Dwight Tosh Representative Wardlaw, you’re recognized for a question.
Representative Jeff Wardlaw I think my question– I’m over in the corner– I think my question goes behind Representative Woolridge. Is unoccupied definition, because I know in some of the other refuges it’s everything has to be out by noon. And I know that gets real hard when you’re on navigable water because you can’t close it down at noon.
But I am a little worried about how the occupation of those takes place and whether somebody, like he said, is paid to stay there for 12 hours until the next person can show up. And that holds that spot for those people. So on this refuge, and I’m not as familiar with Sunken Lands as I am to others, is there a 4 a.m. rule there?
Doug Shoenrock I don’t believe, sir. I’m going to refer back to Joe. Just give me a head nod. Or Chris. Not in the navigable waterway, sir.
Representative Jeff Wardlaw You may want to bring Colonel to the table.
Doug Shoenrock I’m sorry.
Representative Jeff Wardlaw Mr. Chair, if that’s okay with you.
Representative Dwight Tosh That’s fine with me. Colonel, if you would just come on up, have a seat and identify yourself for the committee, and you’ll be recognized to answer the question.
Joe Williams Lieutenant Colonel Joe Williams, Arkansas Game and Fish.
Representative Dwight Tosh Colonel, do you hear Representative Wardlaw’s question?
Joe Williams Yes, sir.
Representative Dwight Tosh Okay, you are recognized to answer.
Joe Williams Representative Wardlaw, it would be similar to Felsenthal in that you’re leaving the hunted area and you’re going into the navigable stream. And so we’re not affecting the navigable stream portion.
Representative Jeff Wardlaw So like Ouachita River would be off limits?
Joe Williams So, yes.
Representative Jeff Wardlaw So they could have that blind on the river and someone could occupy it all day, all night.
Joe Williams Correct.
Representative Jeff Wardlaw Okay. So, you said when you set out, Mr. Director, that you wasn’t going– Mr. Chair, is this okay?
Representative Dwight Tosh Yes, you’re recognized.
Blocking on WMAs
Representative Jeff Wardlaw You were going to instruct enforcement to strongly discourage hunter harassment. In other said refuges around the state, we’re seeing a lot of blocking. And blocking is a term that I’ll describe the definition to so we understand each other.
Blocking’s where multiple hunters show up to hunt together and they spread out across the refuge to cause themselves to have a larger buffer zone between the next hunter and them. How will your wardens better regulate or stop members of the public from blocking? Because it’s a huge problem in certain refuges, especially smaller ones.
Doug Shoenrock I don’t believe that it’s a problem at this point in time on the area we’re speaking of. I’m not familiar with the area.
Representative Jeff Wardlaw Well, I’ve got you here today, so we’re talking about all of them.
Doug Shoenrock Yes, sir. I believe it’s 100 percent about safety. I’m not sure if blocking is safe or not. But if they’re hunting in a party, I don’t believe there’s a spatial agreement between individuals hunting in a party. But I do believe that if that’s a tactic that’s being used, I’m not familiar with that tactic, but it should be addressed.
Representative Jeff Wardlaw Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Representative Dwight Tosh Like you. Director, let me make sure I understand the position for the Game and Fish on holding those blinds. Someone that goes out there and they hold those blinds and they– I think somebody alluded to this a while ago– that they’ll maybe just have someone spend the night there or whatever the case, do we really think that that gives them to the public an unfair advantage on public land for them to be able to do that, to be able to every single day to be able to take that and be able to secure that spot? Where, say a dad and his son or daughter or whatever wanted to go there that morning and duck hunt, would that not place them at an unfair advantage to allow that?
Doug Shoenrock I believe that’s accurate, sir. I’m simply replicating what’s been done in past years.
Representative Dwight Tosh Okay, so how is enforcement going to take place in regards to that?
Doug Shoenrock I defer to Joe, please.
Pontoon blinds on navigable rivers
Joe Williams Representative Tosh, simply along the lines of this is that we’re kind of in a conflict of we’re in a navigable river. And so if these people are telling us that they’re navigating that river by being on their boat and occupying it, there’s not much that we’ve got as far as enforcement.
You know, there’s nothing we have that restricts them from navigating the river. If the river was a refuge and it wasn’t deemed navigable, then by all means we could block it off, we could shut it off and consider it that. But again, it’s no different than having a highway that goes through a national forest. We can’t stop the flow of traffic per se.
Representative Dwight Tosh And obviously being from up in that area, Colonel, you understand that, and being the chair of this committee, I’ve had several people reach out to me with concerns about already the number of blinds that are being put up there along the the river, along private property, close to private property and public. And those blinds are already going up. Is that allowable according to the law with Game and Fish?
Joe Williams According to the law, they need to be occupied as if they’re navigating that river. If they are not occupied, then they need to be removed. And so we’ve had some conversations locally with the prosecutor’s office about does the prosecutor feel like we have the authority to hook onto that boat and drag it off?
And he urged some precaution with reference to civil liability, deeming that a judge could or could not find that person guilty, even though it is a violation of the law. And so what we have prepared is some notices, actually, to place on those blinds. Our officers were out there this morning. We’ve determined that there’s about 10 to 12 blinds. We anticipate probably tomorrow that we’ll have about six that are not currently manned, and we’ll be placing those notices on those.
What these notices entail is simply along the lines that we’re going to consider that blind to be closed. So a person is not going to be able to hunt that, and they need to contact us in order for it to be removed away from the area.
Representative Dwight Tosh Okay, and I missed just a little bit of that. Are you saying that when your enforcement agents, when they went out there this morning, there was how many?
Joe Williams We guess that there’s about 10 to 12 blinds currently out there right now. I know several were occupied. But I think that then some communications that people are moving currently today, moving some of these blinds still. We’ve had these conversations all through last week. I know that several blinds were moving Friday, Saturday.
I know I got an email yesterday referencing several blinds that had not been moved. Our enforcement officers were out there this morning making a patrol of the river. And we’ve identified 10 to 12. And from my understanding, we anticipate about six of those not being manned in the morning when we start placing these notices on these unmanned blinds.
Representative Dwight Tosh Okay, and when you say placing notices, I understand that. So right now you’re just making them aware that they needed to be removed. There’s no enforcement action taken other than notification at this point, is that correct?
Joe Williams There had been a lot of miscommunication about the blinds and the placement of blinds. And so, again, we’re trying to give everybody notice that the blinds cannot be unmanned. If you’re navigating the river, you navigate the river. But for the purpose of setting up a blind to hunt out of it and not occupying it, you will be cited.
Representative Dwight Tosh Okay, and I guess at some point your enforcement officers will go back and revisit this area. And if those blinds are still there, then you’re going to take necessary enforcement action? Or what’s your plan for that?
Joe Williams So our plans are when these notices are placed– tomorrow is the intention to start placing these notices on any unmanned blind. At that point, that blind is going to be considered a rest area, per se. So you’re not going to be allowed to hunt out of it. So if we can’t get a hold of somebody Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, and they show up Saturday morning, their blind is off limits. We have a number on here for them to contact the Game and Fish. An enforcement officer will be in contact to cite them for such violations.
Representative Dwight Tosh Okay, thank you for that answer, Colonel. I appreciate that answer, too. So Senator Sullivan, you’re recognized for questions.
Senator Dan Sullivan Thank you, Mr Chair, and I appreciate you letting me ask a question not on the committee. Just want to make sure I understand. What is determined navigable and non navigable? If you’re saying, if people are navigating the river, then they can set up a blind. If they’re not navigating the river, they can’t. So what is the determination there?
Joe Williams From an enforcement perspective, navigability is a very gray area. Representative Wardlaw would know that on Felsenthal, a guy can’t be out there before 4 a.m. duck hunting. But there are no regulations that prohibits anybody from being on the refuge for the purposes of fishing. So it creates quite the hurdle for an enforcement officer to prove this.
Senator Dan Sullivan Well, that’s what I’m asking. If you’re going to enforce it. Because I think enforcement is the key to this, and I understand it’s hard. So how will you interpret that? If you’re fishing, you’re okay. If you’re hunting, you’re not? How do you interpret whether they’re navigating the river or not?
Joe Williams I would simply say that’s a case by case determination, talking with that person that may be on that vessel. Obviously, one that is not occupied is there for the purposes of duck hunting. And so that’s pretty simple. But again, if a person tells us that he’s out there to spend the night and he plans on navigating, it’s a significant hurdle. So it’s not an easy answer. I don’t have a simple–
Senator Dan Sullivan Well, I would think you, if you have officers out there enforcing it, that there would be some training going on from the agency– this is how you determine if they’re compliant or not compliant. Are you training your officers along those lines?
Joe Williams Not in reference to this situation, but certainly we’ll be glad to do that.
Senator Dan Sullivan I assume that means you’re going to start that very soon?
Joe Williams Yes, sir.
Senator Dan Sullivan I guess, then, follow up question, Mr. Chair, if you’re okay.
Representative Dwight Tosh You’re recognized.
Senator Dan Sullivan The enforcement seems like the key to this. For example, your notice that’s being put on there, did I hear you right that if they put the notice on there, how long will it be before you actually remove the blind?
Joe Williams What the prosecutor has simply said is allow them to contact us and allow them the opportunity to remove it themselves. Now again, once this notice is placed, they can’t hunt out of it. But his concern is in reference to civil liability, damaging some type of equipment. Some of these blinds are not a 14-foot jon boat with a 25 horse.
Some of these things that are placed on pontoons that could be $90,000. And we don’t have a tow company per se that can come and get it. There’s a little bit of water issue right now. The only thing that our enforcement officers have is basically a 35-horsepower mud motor to get up and down that river.
Senator Dan Sullivan Thank you for that answer. Again, I’m just concerned and we hear this in multiple venues that we ask a prosecutor to give their advice. You know, your agency is in charge of doing what you can do. And if your rules say we’re going to ticket someone or fine them or whatever your rule says, then it’s up to the prosecutor to determine whether they prosecute or not.
And I’m sometimes concerned that we hold up following through with our enforcement rules because the prosecutor says I’m not going to prosecute it. That’s their job. Your job, if they’re due a ticket and they’re not following the law, your job is to give them the ticket, regardless of what the prosecutor says. Would you agree with that?
Joe Williams Yes, sir.
Senator Dan Sullivan Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Representative Dwight Tosh Thank you, Senator. Follow up on the Senator’s question right quick, I hear the terminology navigating, navigating. How does that, if someone has got it tied up, how’s that navigating the river if it’s tied up? I mean, they’re not navigating. It looks like permanent.
Joe Williams Well, at the point if they start mooring to things and attaching to property, that’s a much different issue. We have some leverage there on that deal, but, you know, if a guy is just, again, floating the river or passing through per se or not hooked off to anything, then it presents challenges. But, yes, mooring to trees, mooring to land, very easy to prove that that person is not navigating.
Representative Dwight Tosh Okay. So that falls under a separate statute? Is that what you’re telling me, Colonel, that gives you another leverage of enforcement if they’re tied up and they’re not navigating? Is that an entirely different issue or are we on the same issue here?
Joe Williams I think we’re on the same issues related to this. You know, again, I would point out that if you use somebody along the lines of stopping and spending the overnight on the Buffalo River, there’s no regulations that prohibit them from stopping and tying up all night.
But again, for the purposes of what we’re talking about in relation to how do we determine what this person is doing, I’d go back to, they’re in a blind that’s set up to obviously hunt out of for duck hunting purposes. Do they have gear inside of that for duck hunting purposes? And so, again, building that case and making those layers to determine what that person’s intentions are.
Representative Dwight Tosh Co chair’s here and glad she’s here with me. Thank you. You’re recognized for a question.
Senator Missy Irvin Thank you. Thank you for the report. So, and I could have missed this, but how many miles are we talking about? Or what’s the distance here of the river between the Hatchie Coon private hunting club and the St. Francis Sunken Lands WMA?
Doug Shoenrock The property in question, the separation and distance between the physical boundaries of the wildlife management area across the navigable waterway to the private land ranges from 75 to 300 yards. The length of that property probably is a span, I’m not that familiar, I’m just going to estimate it. And I was there a couple of weeks ago, probably talking about a mile, half mile, three-quarters of a mile to a mile of stretch of that navigable navigable river. Pretty small area.
Senator Missy Irvin Okay, so it’s a pretty small area. But because it’s this definition you’re seeing a lot of–?
Doug Shoenrock It seems to be that there’s an extremely rich heritage of waterfowling in that area, both public and private. The mandate from the Corps of Engineers based on the Oak Donnick Dam is to maintain a 210 MSL level, which we do. We expand that during hunting season to expand water into the St. Francis Sunken Lands, which is a large waterfowl management area.
When that occurs, the public land hunters tend to diffuse into an area that now has water on it. But we also have to be careful that you don’t overflood it because then it starts encroaching on private property as well.
And so it is always controversial early, and it is as picturesque as a water fowling area as you can imagine. It’s huge cypress trees, slow moving water. But it’s too deep to stand and wade in most cases, or the bottom is too. So that’s why there have been pontoon blinds put in there ever since the blinds were burned in 2012.
Senator Missy Irvin And so, but you can anchor? I mean, you can drop an anchor, so to speak, too, and you’re still considered navigating the river, correct? I mean, if I’m fishing on a pontoon boat and I drop an anchor, I mean, I’m still navigating.
Doug Shoenrock That is correct.
Senator Missy Irvin So I just think we have to be really conscientious of enforcing it, but also understand that this is a very, like you said, gray area, so it’s going to be dicey for your law enforcement officers, I think, and how you define that. If you tie up to a rock on the Greers Ferry Lake, I’m still navigating that lake.
So I just think this is going to be super tricky, but I appreciate the attention and the understanding of where we are and what’s happening. I think it’s really critically important to talk about this so that the public understands very clearly what is happening, why it’s happening, and what is permissible and what is not permissible. My last question is, my understanding is, whether or not, if you have a motor, are your law enforcement officers– does the motor have to work or not? Because you can be in a canoe and still navigate without a motor and with paddles.
Joe Williams So, great question. Senator, simply along the lines is if an officer sees someone motoring, that vessel is required, regardless of horsepower restrictions, to have registration. But again, if you’re floating down the White River, if you’re floating down the Buffalo River, and you don’t have your motor active and they’re just floating, then there’s no requirement for that to be registered. There’s an assumption that you may be using it, but the burden of proof would be on the officer to prove that you are in fact utilizing that motor.
Doug Shoenrock And there are signages throughout the area of a paddle trail, a navigable water paddle trail. There are signs posted on trees for that. So at certain times of year, there are a lot of paddlers in that area.
Representative Dwight Tosh Thank you, Co Chair. And I appreciate your comments because that’s why we’re having this meeting today. There’s so much misinformation and it’s good to get it out in the open so everybody understands exactly what to expect as, even before duck season starts, we need to know. But director and colonel, many of these structures that are on these waterways or on public waters, they’re unregistered boats. So your enforcement, how’s that been handled by your agency?
Joe Williams Representative, simply along the lines of what Senator Irvin just said, if an officer witnesses that person motoring or using that, if the boat does not have registration on it or they can’t prove that they just purchased it within the last 30 days, then that person would be issued a warning or a citation for operating a vessel without boat registration.
Representative Dwight Tosh And I know this may be a tough question, would you have any idea how many citations have been issued, especially in that area in the last–?
Joe Williams No sir. I could not give you any information. I’m sorry. I should have come prepared for that. Great question.
Representative Dwight Tosh I’m just curious. Okay. Representative Wooldridge, you’re recognized for a question.
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Director and Colonel, again, for being here. So I kind of wanted to follow up on Senator Sullivan’s question and Senator Irvin’s question about navigable waterways and a boat being navigable. So if some of these structures are being moored or tied up for 60 days, are they navigating this waterway?
Joe Williams Sir, I would say that, no, they’re not navigating the water. A question that comes into this is if you take something, a body of water such as Lake Ouachita, Hamilton, Greers Ferry, they’re pulling into some of these bays and they’re mooring these things off. And so, you know, again, what’s the definition of navigability when it comes to that type of procedure? For the purpose of what we’re talking about today, I feel like the intentions of somebody pulling up there with something that looks like a duck line is simply for the purposes of trying to duck hunt out of it.
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge So I guess I didn’t do a good job of asking my question. What would a consequence be of that? So if you have an officer that responds to one of these structures and then they’re back two weeks later and it’s moored to the same tree, same issue, I mean have they violated the law or not?
Joe Williams I think we need to have an officer following up with them to determine what their intentions are. You know, again, if somebody’s moored to a place and their motor’s broke down and they don’t have a way to get it out of there, obviously, I wouldn’t want a warden writing a ticket for that. But again, if their intention is to hold a spot and they have nobody in it, then I would say, let’s issue a citation.
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge One more follow up. On the paper that we were handed, it talks about a Class 1 violation. What is a Class 1 violation and how severe is that in terms of a punishment?
Joe Williams For Arkansas Game and Fish purposes, each county, that would be a $100 fine. Each county has its own court costs, so I don’t know what Poinsett is, but maybe it’s $120, which is a fairly consistent number. $220 fine altogether, six-point violation against your hunting fishing privileges. Does not put you out of anything, but obviously starts putting you on the path to a suspension if you accumulate 18 points in a five-year period.
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge Thank you, sir.
Representative Dwight Tosh Senator Johnson, you’re recognized for a question.
Senator Blake Johnson Just a matter of jurisdiction, whenever we’re talking about navigable waterways, does the state have jurisdiction on the regular high water marks? And low water below the high water marks, do the feds have jurisdiction? Where does your jurisdiction lie and the feds take over? And will you have people, federal officers, with you whenever you go to this? Because if it’s below the water mark, I think you’ll have to have federal.
Joe Williams So this will get kind of complicated in explaining, but I’ll try to do the best that I can, sir. Along the lines of this is that all the regulations that we enforce on navigable waterways fall under Title 27 state laws. And so we have laws that reciprocate to state waterways, and then we have laws that reciprocate to federal waterways.
So take Greers Ferry Lake, for example, that’s considered a federal waterway. We have statutory authority as law enforcement to go out there and operate under Title 27. When we start talking about deeming something navigable, I think that comes in two ways in Arkansas, mostly through a court case. But the Corps of Engineers is, in my opinion, probably the primary federal agency that can determine federal navigability. Coast Guard, the courts, and things along those lines can get involved as well.
But again, as far as us being able to go out, anything that we would write pertaining to boating law would be under Title 27. A lot of the regulations that we’re talking about today are going to be considered WMA regulations connected to St. Francis Sunken Lands under AGFC authority.
Senator Blake Johnson I was just trying to, while the discussion was happening, trying to go through it, and everything below those regular high water marks is federal jurisdiction from what I could find. Is that correct?
Joe Williams Again, I think that it gets a little bit blurred with the fact that Title 27 allows us to go on these navigable waterways and enforce boating laws. We’re one of the very few state agencies that I say where the Game and Fish operates. A lot of times the state police has a water patrol and they go out and perform safety functions.
Again, we’re trying to get people that are operating recklessly, people that are operating under the influence of alcohol, may have drugs. Here the Game and Fish does that. And again, we’re doing that under the statutory authority of Title 27 that the legislature has provided us.
Representative Dwight Tosh Senator Sullivan, you’re recognized for a question.
Senator Dan Sullivan Thank you, Mr. Chair. My question would be to the chair. Could you ask the gentleman and there’s been a lot of ambiguity, things that are hard to determine, and there was a statement made by the gentleman that they would start training. Could they send you a copy of the– or the committee a copy of the training points they’re going to make before the beginning of hunting season Saturday? Maybe they could send those to you. It seems like a communication thing.
Representative Dwight Tosh Would y’all be able to get that information to us in a timely manner? Okay. If you would.
Senator Dan Sullivan And also, Mr. Chair, a definition of what navigable waters and how that will be enforced. I mean, we can’t expect the local officers to enforce the law until there’s some guidance given from the agency. And maybe also, lastly, the number of citations in the last 30 days.
Representative Dwight Tosh Director, Colonel, did y’all understand that request and is that one you can comply with?
Joe Williams Point of clarification, I’m assuming we’re talking specifically for that body of water?
Senator Dan Sullivan Yes. Correct. Thank you.
Representative Dwight Tosh Okay, and if you would get that information to Zane and he’ll make sure that gets distributed out to each committee member. So thank you for that, Senator. Do you have a follow up? Representative Dalby, you’re recognized for a question.
Representative Carol Dalby Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’m over here far to your right. In regard to the Class 1 violation, I heard your testimony was a $100 fine plus court costs, but has that changed from what a Class 1 that has typically been, which is a $100 to a $1,000 fine and 0 to 30 days in jail. Isn’t that really what the fine is for a Class 1 violation?
Joe Williams Yes, ma’am, and I apologize. As an enforcement officer out in the field, the perspective that I used there, I’m sorry I didn’t give the range of that. But that would be correct, that a minimum fine would be $100. All of our officers in 99 percent of the cases are instructed to write a minimum fine outside of some exigent circumstance.
Representative Carol Dalby But that goes before the district court, correct? And so really whether your officer writes a $100 fine, the court could say a $1,000 fine and sentence them to thirty days in jail. So we’re not talking about just a little slap on the wrist, correct, for a Class 1?
Joe Williams Correct.
Representative Carol Dalby Okay, thank you.
Overall safety in WMAs
Representative Dwight Tosh Seeing no further questions from committee members, appreciate y’all being here. Let me close with this one final question. I’m just curious, what is your big picture as far as your thoughts on conservation and safety, not only for the St. Francis Sunken Lands, but also for all of our WMAs around the state? Just kind of give me your big picture on what you plan to do as far as the safety and conservation of those areas.
Doug Shoenrock Yes, sir. Number one, for all WMAs, safety is our top concern. Number two is providing opportunity to public and private in a safe manner and making sure that the habitat is there for them to have some degree of success.
Representative Dwight Tosh Okay, thank you director. And I appreciate y’all being here today. Thank you for hopefully clearing up some of the misinformation that’s been out there. And I’m sure y’all are going to address how that misinformation got out there, but it’s kind of this is what it’s led to. So I thank you for your attention to this matter. And, yes, my co-chair here– do you have a comment? Yes, ma’am, you’re recognized.
Senator Missy Irvin I think it’s really, really also very, very important that hunters do not take these matters into their own hands. I mean, you can get into a serious situation. And I think back to what Representative Wardlaw was talking about with the blocking and things like that. I mean, we have to communicate about these things very clearly so that we do preserve the ability for the public to hunt these important lands that taxpayers pay a lot of money to cultivate.
And so I get real concerned whenever we start talking about, and I see videos, that go viral of people running over each other in boats and rushing to get out to their spots. So I think, at some point, I mean, everybody is a passionate duck hunter. I am too, but we’ve got to make sure that the message is very clear, not to take these matters into your own hands and try to destroy something that’s not yours, whether it’s supposed to be there or not supposed to be there. I just want to make sure we say that clearly for the public.
Representative Dwight Tosh Thank you, co-chair. Also following up on that, and we’ll close with this, what are your enforcement plans? I know you said you were going to beef up enforcement for that area. You know it’s kind of a hot button topic up there in that area right now, and you’ve said you’re going to increase your enforcement. So kind of lay that out. I mean, are you going to send more officers in or what are your plans as far as helping control that situation?
Joe Williams Representative Tosh, the intentions are tomorrow morning to again identify what blinds are left at this moment that are unattended, get those things labeled, get them put out there. Our officers obviously want to have a larger presence going into the weekend. Again, increasing officers’ presence for Friday and Saturday morning specifically related to these things. I think once these blinds are labeled, I think the phone calls will pick up. I think there will be some movement related to that. But again, the last thing that we want is somebody having a fight out there Saturday morning.
Firearm laws in state parks
Representative Dwight Tosh Thank both of you. Thank you for your answers today. Thank you for your attention to this matter and appreciate you being here. You’re excused. Committee members, next on today’s agenda is we have the Arkansas State Department of Parks and Heritage and Tourism here and the Attorney General’s office to discuss our state parks. And the question I think we’re looking for today to hopefully get an answer to is whether or not firearms can be carried on our state parks. So if you would, gentlemen and ladies, just have a seat at the table.
Senator Missy Irvin Members of the committee, as they are coming to the table, I just need to be able to read this statement. The Washington County Circuit Court issued a gag order on August 28, 2025, prohibiting certain law enforcement agencies, including Arkansas Department of Parks, Heritage and Tourism, from making any public statements regarding anything that touches on the evidence concerning the incident at Devil’s Den State Park.
Representative Dwight Tosh Thank you, Co-chair. And we understand that. We know you can’t really discuss any of that. That’s what we told Colonel Hagar when he was here with the state police going over that situation. We know we’re not privy to some of that information, parts of that investigation, and this committee understands and we appreciate that. But today, if you would just go ahead and identify yourself for the committee and then we’ll get started.
Marty Ryall Marty Ryall. I’m the Director of Legislative Affairs for the Department of Parks, Heritage and Tourism.
Mike Wilson Mike Wilson, Assistant Director of Arkansas State Parks.
Kelly Summerside Kelly Summerside, Deputy Attorney General for the Opinions and FOIA division at the AG’s office.
Justin Hughes Justin Hughes, Assistant Attorney General at the Opinions and FOIA division of the Attorney General’s office.
Justin Brasher Justin Brasher, senior assistant A G with the Intergovernmental Affairs Division of the AG’s office.
Representative Dwight Tosh Okay, thank you for being here today. And we appreciate you taking the time to appear before this committee. And the question at hand is simply this. You know, we heard from Colonel Hagar some time ago in regards to the situation and we’re not going to bring that up today.
But what the inquiries have been and what the answers we’re looking for is whether or not in our state parks an individual can carry a firearm. Is there signage? Is it prohibited? Is it allowed? I think we need to have a discussion about that, and that’s what we’re fixing to have. So if you would, ever who wants to go from that question and start answering.
Mike Wilson Yes, sir. I appreciate the opportunity to speak to this group. Currently, as it relates to carrying a firearm or handgun on Arkansas State Parks, we follow the current Arkansas statute with concealed and also enhanced carry. We follow that direction, sir.
Representative Dwight Tosh Okay, so is the answer to that my question, is that a yes?
Mike Wilson It is a yes, with an exception to federal property or leases on Corps of Engineer properties, which doesn’t allow the carry of a firearm without a permit from the Corps of Engineers.
Representative Dwight Tosh Yes, there’s a difference in state and in federal. So, but on our state property?
Mike Wilson Yes.
Representative Dwight Tosh There’s no signage up or anything that says ‘Firearms Prohibited’ or is there?
Mike Wilson Only as it relates to enhanced carry entering certain buildings on state property, as identified in the law, sir.
Justin Brasher Yeah, Mr. Hughes can clarify that.
Justin Hughes Our office issued an opinion on Friday, opinion number 2025-031. That opinion deals with municipal parks, but there is significant overlap with state parks. And so the answer to the question whether you can carry a firearm in state parks is yes. We agree with state parks that, absent carrying a firearm on federal land like US Corps of Engineers land, you are allowed to carry.
Representative Dwight Tosh I’m sorry, let me make sure I understand. You’re saying on federal land? Say that again.
Justin Hughes No, no, no, excuse me, let me clarify. For state parks, you are allowed to carry either openly or concealed within the park. And as state parks has indicated, there is a prohibition on carrying within state buildings. You cannot do that with a normal concealed carry license, but you can with an enhanced license.
Representative Dwight Tosh Okay. And on federal parks, make sure we all are clear on it. You said something about federal parks. So it’s prohibited under federal law, is that correct?
Justin Hughes So Arkansas law prohibits carrying of a firearm anywhere where it is prohibited by federal law. So for example, with US Army Corps of Engineers property, you would not be able to carry on that property even if it is within a state park.
Marty Ryall Just to clarify. Just to clarify, we have five state parks that are on US Corps of Engineer lands. They are Bull Shoals, Lake Ouachita, De Gray Lake Resort State Park, Lake Dardanelle State Park, and Millwood State Park. All of those fall under the US Corps lands. All the other state parks out there, the 47 other state parks are state lands.
Representative Dwight Tosh Okay, just to help me understand, so the 47 state parks, it’s not prohibited. But are you saying under the five that’s under the Corps, there’s a different set of rules for that because it’s federal? Is that correct? Representative Gonzales, you’re recognized.
Representative Justin Gonzales Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Director, you mentioned that you follow the concealed carry law when allowing to carry in a state park. We’re a constitutional carry state. So what about someone who is carrying without that permit? Are they still allowed in those state parks? I understand the buildings and federal and all that’s different. I’m talking about the others, other state parks.
Mike Wilson Yes, sir. We are allowing that carry, sir, with the exception of those federal, as long as the intent, and there’s no crime associated with it.
Representative Dwight Tosh Excuse me, Senator Rice, you’re recognized.
Senator Terry Rice Thank you, Mr Chair. Thank you all for being here today. The attorney general’s staff, a minute ago you mentioned municipal, except municipal. Could you define what you were stating there?
Justin Hughes Thank you for that question. I was stating that the opinion that our office issued on Friday dealt with municipal parks. In that opinion, it states that you can also carry in those parks. Specifically, you can open carry in those parks. You can conceal carry both with a regular license and an enhanced license, with the exception of athletic events. And I’m happy to get into that exception. But in terms of municipal parks, that’s what I was referring to.
Senator Terry Rice And just for clarity, Mr. Chair, and for public consumption, I have not read that that you put out Friday. I checked with our staff today and the agenda for the meeting, which it does, agenda changes, the meeting notice was put out November 6 for this meeting today. Agenda was put out, he said roughly midday Thursday the 13th.
And if, for our citizens who like to participate sometimes in these discussions, if you’ve already left home Thursday and the agenda’s posted and you don’t know about it until Thursday night, you can’t go into your employer on Friday morning and say, I’m going to take off Monday, I need to be down in Little Rock.
This is what concerns me sometimes to have citizens input if we could do a little better job, at least if the agenda’s going to change, put out something that the public knows what we’re going to be discussing. And sometimes they can change their daily routine or maybe get off. So I appreciate your answers. And I’ll be glad to listen. And thank you to the chairs for recognizing me.
Representative Dwight Tosh Senator Johnson, Mark Johnson, you’re recognized for a question.
Senator Mark Johnson Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In the immortal words of one of our late governors opens up a whole box of Pandoras. I’m just not sure how to sort all this out, but first let me, if I could, go to our friends with the AG’s office about the recent opinion, which I haven’t had a chance to read. My understanding of what you said is that any municipal restriction on carrying in a park has been struck down, or the opinion of the AG is that it’s not applicable based on both state statutes and the constitutional carry requirement. Am I hearing that correctly?
Justin Hughes Essentially, Senator, what the opinion states is that in 2021, as you’re probably well aware, there were several amendments to ACA 570-3-122 that removed state– or municipal parks from their definition of facility. After those were removed, open carry is allowed in municipal parks.
However, there’s still a prohibition in 570-3-306 regarding those with a concealed carry license from having a concealed carry weapon if they have the regular concealed carry license at an athletic event. However, with an enhanced carry license, you are allowed to carry at an athletic event. So this opinion dealt specifically with the ability to carry at municipal parks during athletic events.
And there was another question about whether you could carry in a building in a municipal park, and that has not changed. You cannot carry within a building in a municipal park unless you have the enhanced license.
Senator Mark Johnson Okay, and I’m not trying to go down a rat hole here. But I think you’ll follow where I’m going. There is a city which we just happen to be sitting in right now, and it has a zoo. And when you pass the zoo there is a sign that prohibits carrying any firearm. And it ends it by saying ‘By order of the city manager.’ And I have always taken offense to that because I didn’t realize that city managers were able to promulgate laws.
But in any event, that’s what the sign says at the Little Rock Zoo. Now, if you go to the zoo and you’re carrying and you don’t go in any of the buildings, you just walk around the outside exhibits and look at the animals, would you be in violation of any statute? What would be the status of an individual that was doing that?
Justin Hughes Senator, one, I would say I’m not sure of the status of how the Little Rock Zoo is–
Senator Mark Johnson It’s in War Memorial Park. If that helps clarify it and it may not. But just in case, I wanted to add that.
Justin Hughes Thank you, Senator. We want to stick to the bounds of our opinion. We haven’t looked specifically at the zoo itself. And if there’s an opinion request to look at the zoo we’d be happy to do that.
Senator Mark Johnson I could consider doing that. Okay. Thank you. And one, if I could, Mr. Chairman, I have for our parks people and for Mr. Ryall, I have one further question. Marty, you mentioned, and I’m going to use De Gray as a good example.
It’s a federal lake that Arkansas State Parks has a facility there. And there are different exceptions to that. But if I, for example, had a houseboat in the marina at De Gray, would I lose my Second Amendment rights because I was on a federally funded lake? Or what would that be since I’m staying on my own boat at the De Gray Lake State Park?
Marty Ryall I cannot answer that. But Mike, do you know the answer to that?
Mike Wilson Yes, sir. We don’t manage the lake as far as on, you know, the houseboats. That would be the Corps of Engineers and Federal navigable waterway.
Senator Mark Johnson So it’d be up to the Corps and not– I’m not talking about being in the lodge. The lodge is different. It’s a building, and I kind if get that. But when you’re on your own boat or in your own car and in your own home, so to speak.
And in many cases, some of these boats are bigger than a house and qualify as a second home under a lot of federal laws. I’m just trying to say where do my rights, where are my rights abrogated, was my question. And I think your answer is you’re not sure, and I’m certainly not sure either. So tell me if we’re not hearing that correctly.
Mike Wilson Yes, sir. It’d be at the discretion of the Corps. Our boundary ends at the watermark, where our lease stops.
Senator Mark Johnson Okay. All right. That part I do understand. Thank you. Thank you, Mr Chairman.
Representative Dwight Tosh Representative Richardson, Scott, you’re recognized for a question.
Representative Scott Richardson Thank you, Mr. Chair. So this probably runs back to our friends from the AG’s office. And if you could indulge me just for a second, you’ve used the term multiple times, especially when we’re talking about the municipal parks, you’ve specifically referenced the permit carry. I want to know if the opinion approaches unpermitted carriers in any way and if there is any specific approach to how they would be regulated in that particular environment. Can they, can they not carry, according to the AG, in a municipal park?
Justin Hughes Yes, the opinion does touch on that. And unpermitted carriers, whether they’re carrying openly or concealed, are permitted to carry in a municipal park, according to this opinion.
Representative Scott Richardson Okay, thank you.
Senator Missy Irvin I think that what they were saying about the permits is within buildings. So I just want to make sure we understand, that’s within buildings. So could you just restate that? We’re not talking about an open air park, we’re talking about a state building is where the permits come into play, correct?
Justin Hughes So for that clarification, no, you are not permitted to carry in a state building unless you have an enhanced concealed carry license.
Senator Missy Irvin Right. But, whether you have a permit or not, you can carry in a state park as long as it’s not inside of a building.
Justin Hughes That is correct.
Representative Dwight Tosh Thank you, senator. Representative Rye, you’re recognized for a question.
Representative Johnny Rye Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Question for you. Mark Twain Forest, it’s either in Arkansas just a little bit or not. But if it is, is that federal property?
Mike Wilson It’s not Arkansas State Park property, sir, so I’m not sure whose property that is.
Representative Dwight Tosh It’s close, isn’t it.
Mike Wilson Yes, sir, it’s close, but it’s not part of us.
Representative Dwight Tosh Senator Rice, did you have a question?
Senator Terry Rice Do either one of you know, let’s do parks first, are there exceptions where people can ask permission to be able to carry within a state owned building without enhanced?
Marty Ryall I’m not aware of any.
Justin Hughes Was this question in reference to a municipal park or a state park?
Senator Terry Rice Could be, yes. I’m just asking a general question. Is there an exception if somebody asks from an authority over that facility if they can carry.
Justin Hughes The statute does not contain an exception.
Mike Wilson Yes, sir. We have had visitors come to our overnight accommodations, and we just, we appreciate them approaching us with that. And we try to make accommodations with the weapon locked and unloaded, sir.
Senator Terry Rice I mean,the reason I’m asking, you do have people that are traveling and they stop and spend money in our parks. They’re not going to travel, if they believe in the Second Amendment and protection, they’re going to have it with them, and they’d rather not leave it in their car or automobile. And to be able to do that. And to me it makes sense if they can ask, can we do this and it’s done in a responsible way. So there are some reasons for some exceptions. And, again, like you said, you appreciate people being open about that.
Mike Wilson Yes, sir. We make every attempt to make accommodations.
Senator Terry Rice Thank you.
Representative Dwight Tosh Seeing no further questions from committee members, co-chair, do you have any closing comments? Thank y’all for being here today. Seeing no further business before this committee, this committee meeting is adjourned.
