Can someone who breeds birds, rats, mice, or hamsters to sell to pet shops register their delivery vehicle as a 'farm vehicle' for the cheaper Texas plate?

TX AG Opinion GA-0801: Can a pet breeder register a delivery vehicle as a "farm vehicle"?

Plain-English summary

A county attorney asked whether a business that breeds birds (like parakeets), rats, mice, hamsters, and similar animals for sale to pet shops could register the vehicle it uses to deliver those animals as a "farm vehicle" under Transportation Code section 502.163. That registration matters because it costs only half the ordinary commercial-vehicle fee. It is available, though, only when the owner uses the vehicle solely to transport certain things: the owner's own poultry, dairy, livestock, livestock products, timber in its natural state, or farm products, plus a few non-commercial uses the statute lists separately.

The business owner argued that his animals fit the statute because they matched Agriculture Code definitions of "exotic fowl" or "livestock." The Attorney General rejected that approach. Section 502.163 mentions only one kind of bird, "poultry," and the ordinary meaning of poultry is domestic fowl such as chickens, turkeys, ducks, or geese raised for meat or eggs. Texas statutes that define poultry consistently aim at the food supply, and a court had already held that even fighting cocks are not "poultry" in a related agricultural statute. So parakeets and other birds raised to be sold as pets are not poultry.

The "livestock" argument fared no better. The Agriculture Code's general definition of livestock lists cattle, horses, mules, sheep, goats, and similar farm animals, and its definition of "exotic livestock" is limited to certain hoofed mammals. None of those, nor any other Texas legal definition the Attorney General could find, covered the rats, mice, hamsters, or pet birds at issue. A word defined in one act does not necessarily carry the same meaning in a different act on a different subject. Reading the whole list in section 502.163 together (poultry, dairy, livestock, livestock products, timber, farm products), the terms point to agricultural commodities traditionally produced in farming, ranching, or lumbering. The Attorney General concluded the statute does not authorize registering a vehicle used to transport non-poultry birds, rats, mice, hamsters, and similar animals for sale to pet shops as a farm vehicle.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2010. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Texas overhauled its motor-vehicle registration statutes after 2010, and the farm-vehicle registration provisions formerly in Transportation Code section 502.163 have been renumbered and revised. Confirm the current registration statute and fee rules before relying on anything below.

Who this opinion affected (as of 2010)

Pet breeders and pet-supply businesses: The opinion told them they could not claim the half-price farm-vehicle registration for vehicles used to haul pet-trade animals like parakeets, rats, mice, and hamsters to pet shops.

County tax assessor-collectors and the registering authorities: The opinion gave them a basis to deny farm-vehicle registration for such vehicles, since the animals were not poultry, livestock, or farm products within the statute.

Farmers and ranchers: The opinion confirmed the reduced-fee registration stayed tied to traditional agricultural commodities, the use the Legislature had in mind.

Common questions

What is a "farm vehicle" registration?
It was a reduced registration fee, half the normal commercial fee, for a commercial motor vehicle used only to transport the owner's own poultry, dairy, livestock, livestock products, timber in its natural state, or farm products (plus a few listed personal uses), under Transportation Code section 502.163.

Why don't pet birds count as "poultry"?
The opinion explained that "poultry" ordinarily means domestic fowl raised for meat or eggs, like chickens, turkeys, ducks, and geese. Texas statutory definitions of poultry are aimed at the food supply, and birds like parakeets raised to sell to pet shops do not fit that meaning.

The animals matched Agriculture Code definitions. Why didn't that win?
Because a word defined in one statute does not automatically carry the same meaning into a different statute on a different subject. The Transportation Code provision uses its own terms, and read in context those terms describe agricultural commodities, not pet-trade animals.

Did this make pet breeding illegal or unregulated?
No. The opinion only addressed vehicle registration. It said nothing about whether the breeding business itself was lawful; it just held the cheaper farm-vehicle plate was not available for the delivery vehicle.

Background and statutory framework

Transportation Code section 502.163 set the registration fee for a commercial motor vehicle registered as a farm vehicle at 50 percent of the otherwise applicable fee, if the owner would use the vehicle for commercial purposes only to transport the owner's own poultry, dairy, livestock, livestock products, timber in its natural state, or farm products to market or another place for sale or processing, or for the other limited uses the statute listed. Misusing a farm-registered vehicle was a misdemeanor.

The Attorney General applied ordinary rules of construction: the goal is to give effect to legislative intent (Hernandez v. Ebrom, 289 S.W.3d 316, 318 (Tex. 2009)), starting with the plain and ordinary meaning of the words (City of Marshall v. City of Uncertain, 206 S.W.3d 97, 105 (Tex. 2006)), read in context and according to common usage (Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 311.011(a)). Undefined terms get their ordinary meaning (Garrett v. Borden, 283 S.W.3d 852, 853 (Tex. 2009)), often confirmed by dictionaries (CenterPoint Energy Entex v. R.R. Comm'n of Tex., 208 S.W.3d 608, 619 (Tex. App.—Austin 2006, pet. dism'd)). The Legislature is presumed to choose its words carefully (Kappus v. Kappus, 284 S.W.3d 831, 835 (Tex. 2009)), and a court reviewing Texas poultry definitions had observed that each is aimed at the food supply, holding that fighting cocks are not poultry (Hendrickson v. Swyers, 9 S.W.3d 298, 300 n.1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1999, pet. denied)).

The opinion also relied on the principle that courts need not adopt the broadest dictionary meaning when a narrower one fits the statutory context (In re Hall, 286 S.W.3d 925, 928-29 (Tex. 2009)), and that words grouped in a statutory list are given related meaning (Riverside Nat'l Bank v. Lewis, 603 S.W.2d 169, 174 n.2 (Tex. 1980)). The Agriculture Code's definitions of "livestock" and "exotic livestock" (Tex. Agric. Code Ann. § 1.003(3); § 142.001(4)-(5); § 161.001(a)(4)) did not reach the animals described, and a definition in one act does not necessarily control in another. Reading the section 502.163 list as a whole, the terms described agricultural commodities, so the statute did not authorize farm-vehicle registration for a vehicle used to transport pet-trade animals.

Citations

Statutes:

• Tex. Transp. Code Ann. § 502.163, § 502.163(a)(1) (West 2007)
• Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 311.011(a) (West 2005)
• Tex. Agric. Code Ann. § 1.003(3) (West Supp. 2010); §§ 142.001(4), 142.001(5), 161.001(a)(4) (West 2004)

Cases:

• Hernandez v. Ebrom, 289 S.W.3d 316 (Tex. 2009)
• City of Marshall v. City of Uncertain, 206 S.W.3d 97 (Tex. 2006)
• Garrett v. Borden, 283 S.W.3d 852 (Tex. 2009)
• Kappus v. Kappus, 284 S.W.3d 831 (Tex. 2009)
• Hendrickson v. Swyers, 9 S.W.3d 298 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1999, pet. denied)
• In re Hall, 286 S.W.3d 925 (Tex. 2009)
• Riverside Nat'l Bank v. Lewis, 603 S.W.2d 169 (Tex. 1980)
• CenterPoint Energy Entex v. R.R. Comm'n of Tex., 208 S.W.3d 608 (Tex. App.—Austin 2006, pet. dism'd)

Source

• Landing page: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opinions/greg-abbott/ga-0801
• Original PDF: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/2010/ga0801.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain — the linked PDF is authoritative.

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS

GREG ABBOTT

September 22, 2010

The Honorable Ronald D. Hankins
Somervell County Attorney
204 West Elm Street
Glen Rose, Texas 76043

Opinion No. GA-0801

Re: Whether an individual or company in the business of breeding certain birds, rats, mice, hamsters and similar animals for sale to pet shops may register a vehicle or trailer used to transport the animals as a "farm vehicle" under section 502.163 of the Transportation Code (RQ-0863-GA)

Dear Mr. Hankins:

Under section 502.163 of the Transportation Code, a commercial motor vehicle may be registered for a reduced fee as a "farm vehicle" if the owner will use the vehicle "only" for the purposes specified in the statute. TEX. TRANSP. CODE ANN. § 502.163 (West 2007). You ask whether an individual or company in the business of breeding certain birds, rats, mice, hamsters, and similar animals for sale to pet shops may register a vehicle or trailer used to transport the animals as a "farm vehicle" under section 502.163 of the Transportation Code. [Footnote 1: See Request Letter at 1 (available at http://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov).] Your question requires a construction of section 502.163. [Footnote 2: Section 502.163 provides in full:

(a) The registration fee for a commercial motor vehicle as a farm vehicle is 50 percent of the applicable fee under Section 502.162 if the vehicle's owner will use the vehicle for commercial purposes only to transport:

(1) the person's own poultry, dairy, livestock, livestock products, timber in its natural state, or farm products to market or another place for sale or processing;

(2) laborers from their place of residence to the owner's farm or ranch; or

(3) without charge, materials, tools, equipment, or supplies from the place of purchase or storage to the owner's farm or ranch exclusively for the owner's use or for use on the farm or ranch.

(b) A commercial motor vehicle may be registered under this section despite its use for transporting without charge the owner or a member of the owner's family:

(1) to attend church or school;

(2) to visit a doctor for medical treatment or supplies; or

(3) for other necessities of the home or family.

(c) Subsection (b) does not permit the use of a vehicle registered under this section in connection with gainful employment other than farming or ranching.

(d) The department shall provide distinguishing license plates for a vehicle registered under this section.

(e) The owner of a commercial motor vehicle registered under this section commits an offense if the person uses or permits to be used the vehicle for a purpose other than one permitted by this section. Each use or permission for use in violation of this section is a separate offense.

(f) An offense under this section is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not less than $25 or more than $200.

TEX. TRANSP. CODE ANN. § 502.163 (West 2007).]

The primary goal of statutory construction is to ascertain and give effect to the Legislature's intent. Hernandez v. Ebrom, 289 S.W.3d 316, 318 (Tex. 2009). Courts construing a statute "look first to the plain and ordinary meaning of the statute's words." City of Marshall v. City of Uncertain, 206 S.W.3d 97, 105 (Tex. 2006). Statutory words and phrases must "be read in context and construed according to the rules of grammar and common usage." TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. § 311.011(a) (West 2005).

You state that the owner of a business that "breeds birds (such as parakeets), rats, mice, hamsters and other similar animals" asserts that he is authorized to register the vehicle he uses to transport the animals for sale to pet shops as a farm vehicle by virtue of section 502.163(a)(1). Request Letter at 1. Section 502.163(a)(1) allows licensing a vehicle as a farm vehicle "if the vehicle's owner will use the vehicle for commercial purposes only to transport: . . . the person's own poultry, dairy, livestock, livestock products, timber in its natural state, or farm products to market or another place for sale or processing." TEX. TRANSP. CODE ANN. § 502.163(a)(1) (West 2007). The Transportation Code does not define pertinent terms in the statute such as "poultry, livestock, livestock products," or "farm products." However, you inform us that the owner contends that the animals he transports meet definitions in the Agricultural Code for such terms as "exotic fowl," "livestock," or "exotic livestock" and reasons that the listing of animals in Transportation Code section 502.163(a)(1) should be similarly construed to include his animals. Request Letter at 1-2 (citing Agriculture Code sections 1.003(3) defining "livestock," and 142.001(4)-(5) defining "exotic livestock" and "exotic fowl").

For undefined terms, "courts generally accept the words used in a statute according to their ordinary meaning." Garrett v. Borden, 283 S.W.3d 852, 853 (Tex. 2009). Texas courts rely on dictionaries to determine the meaning of terms not defined in statute. CenterPoint Energy Entex v. R.R. Comm'n of Tex., 208 S.W.3d 608, 619 (Tex. App.—Austin 2006, pet. dism'd). Also, courts construing a word not defined in one statute may take into consideration its definitions in another act of similar nature, but "[a] word defined in one act does not necessarily determine the word's meaning in another act dealing with a different subject." Brookshire v. Houston Indep. Sch. Dist., 508 S.W.2d 675, 678 (Tex. Civ. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1974, no writ); accord Gen. Elec. Capital Corp. v. ICO, Inc., 230 S.W.3d 702, 707 n.2 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2007, pet. denied); Travis Cent. Appraisal Dist. v. Signature Flight Support Corp., 140 S.W.3d 833, 840 n.4 (Tex. App.—Austin 2004, no pet.).

We first consider the owner's position that section 502.163(a)(1) of the Transportation Code should be construed to apply to the transportation of birds such as parakeets, which, he asserts, meet the definition of "exotic fowl" in the Agriculture Code. See Request Letter at 2; TEX. AGRIC. CODE ANN. § 142.001(5) (West 2004). Whether the owner's birds are exotic fowl under the Agriculture Code is irrelevant because the only reference to a bird of any kind in section 502.163(a)(1) of the Transportation Code is to "poultry." We must "presume the Legislature chose its words carefully and intentionally." Kappus v. Kappus, 284 S.W.3d 831, 835 (Tex. 2009). "Poultry" commonly means "[d]omestic fowls, such as chickens, turkeys, ducks, or geese, raised for meat or eggs." [Footnote 3: AMERICAN HERITAGE DICTIONARY 1375 (4th ed. 2000); see also THE NEW OXFORD AMERICAN DICTIONARY 1336 (2001) ("domestic fowl, such as chickens, turkeys, ducks, and geese"); THE RANDOM HOUSE DICTIONARY OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE 1515 (2nd ed. 1987); WEBSTER'S THIRD NEW INTERNATIONAL DICTIONARY 1777 (2002).] Several Texas statutes define "poultry" consistently with this common meaning. [Footnote 4: See, e.g., TEX. AGRIC. CODE ANN. § 13.034(e)(2) (West 2004); id. § 168.001(5); TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 433.003(20) (West Supp. 2010); TEX. WATER CODE ANN. § 26.301(1) (West 2008) ("'Poultry' means chickens or ducks being raised or kept on any premises in the state for profit.").] As one court reviewing Texas statutory definitions of the word poultry has noted, "each definition [of poultry] is aimed at the state's food supply." See Hendrickson v. Swyers, 9 S.W.3d 298, 300 n.1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1999, pet. denied) (determining that fighting cocks are not "poultry" in a statute concerning the application of nuisance and other law to preexisting agricultural operations). Giving the word its common ordinary meaning, "poultry" in section 502.163(a)(1) does not include birds such as parakeets that are primarily raised to be sold to pet shops.

You state that the owner also contends that the other animals he transports are "livestock" under section 502.163(a)(1) of the Transportation Code. See Request Letter at 2. The Agriculture Code defines "livestock" generally as "cattle, horses, mules, asses, sheep, goats, llamas, alpacas, exotic livestock, including elk and elk hybrids, and hogs, unless otherwise defined." TEX. AGRIC. CODE ANN. § 1.003(3) (West Supp. 2010). The Agricultural Code defines the term "exotic livestock" in two statutes, both of which limit the term to "single-hooved or cloven-hooved mammals that are not indigenous to this state and are known as ungulates." Id. §§ 142.001(4) (West 2004) (concerning estrays), 161.001(a)(4) (concerning disease control). Neither these nor any other definition of livestock in a Texas statute, judicial opinion, or other law of which we are aware includes the animals you describe. [Footnote 5: See, e.g., TEX. AGRIC. CODE ANN. § 167.001(4) (West 2004); id. § 188.001(3); TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 87.001(6) (West 2005); TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 433.003(11) (West Supp. 2010); TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 826.002(12) (West 2003); TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 42.09(b)(5) (West Supp. 2010).]

In common parlance, the word "livestock" pertains especially to horses, cattle, and similar farm animals, although some dictionaries also provide definitions that could include a wider range of animals. [Footnote 6: See, e.g., AMERICAN HERITAGE DICTIONARY 1024 (4th ed. 2000) ("Domestic animals, such as cattle or horses, raised for home use or for profit, especially on a farm."); THE NEW OXFORD AMERICAN DICTIONARY 998 (2001) ("farm animals regarded as an asset"); THE RANDOM HOUSE DICTIONARY OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE 1123 (2nd ed. 1987); WEBSTER'S THIRD NEW INTERNATIONAL DICTIONARY 1324 (2002).] However, the rules for giving undefined terms their ordinary meaning do not require choosing the broadest meaning in the dictionary "if a different, more limited, or precise definition is apparent from the term's use in the context of the statute." In re Hall, 286 S.W.3d 925, 928-29 (Tex. 2009). Generally, words in a statutory list are given related meaning. Riverside Nat'l Bank v. Lewis, 603 S.W.2d 169, 174 n.2 (Tex. 1980). When the words "poultry, dairy, livestock, livestock products, timber in its natural state, or farm products" are considered together and in the context of the statute as a whole, they suggest items in the nature of an agricultural commodity or similar items traditionally produced in farming, ranching, or lumbering. See TEX. TRANSP. CODE ANN. § 502.163 (West 2007). [Footnote 7: Cf. TEX. AGRIC. CODE ANN. § 41.002(1) (West 2004); 37 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 4.11(b)(7) (2010) (Tex. Dep't Pub. Safety, General Applicability and Definitions).] Considering the common meaning of the terms used in section 502.163 of the Transportation Code and reading them in context, we conclude that the statute does not authorize the owner of a vehicle used to transport non-poultry birds, rats, mice, hamsters and similar animals for sale to pet shops to register the vehicle as a "farm vehicle."

SUMMARY

Section 502.163 of the Transportation Code does not authorize the owner of a vehicle used to transport non-poultry birds, rats, mice, hamsters, and similar animals for sale to pet shops to register the vehicle as a "farm vehicle" under the statute.

Very truly yours,

GREG ABBOTT
Attorney General of Texas

DANIEL T. HODGE
First Assistant Attorney General

DAVID J. SCHENCK
Deputy Attorney General for Legal Counsel

NANCY S. FULLER
Chair, Opinion Committee

William A. Hill
Assistant Attorney General, Opinion Committee