BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1299
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 1299 (Huffman)
As Amended May 27, 2011
Majority vote
WATER, PARKS & WILDLIFE 9-2 APPROPRIATIONS
12-5
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Huffman, Blumenfield, |Ayes:|Fuentes, Blumenfield, |
| |Campos, Fong, Gatto, | |Bradford, Charles |
| |Roger Hernández, Hueso, | |Calderon, Campos, Davis, |
| |Lara, Yamada | |Gatto, Hall, Hill, Lara, |
| | | |Mitchell, Solorio |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Halderman, Olsen |Nays:|Harkey, Donnelly, |
| | | |Nielsen, Norby, Wagner |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Enacts the Forage Species Conservation and Management
Act of 2011 (Act). Specifically, this bill :
1)Establishes a state policy to ensure the conservation,
sustainable use, and where feasible restoration of California's
forage species populations, including their habitats and water
quality, for benefit of the citizens of the state. States the
objective of this policy is to achieve ecosystem-based
management of forage species that recognizes the ecological
services of forage species and the dependence of predator
species on forage species. Establishes a state policy to
promote higher value uses of forage species for human
consumption.
2)Defines "forage species" for purposes of the Act to include
specified fish species, and authorizes the Fish and Game
Commission (FGC) to designate additional species as forage
species if it finds that a species comprises a major component
in the diets of fish, birds, mammals, or turtles, and
contributes disproportionately to ecosystem functions and
resilience due to its role as prey.
3)Requires new Fishery Management Plans (FMPs) for forage species
and amendments to existing FMPs for forage species completed
AB 1299
Page 2
after January 1, 2012, to be consistent with the policies
described in this bill to the extent scientific data is readily
available for that purpose. States that it is the Legislature's
intent not to require reconsideration of regulations or FMPs in
place before January 1, 2012.
4)Requires the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) or the FGC in
determining consistency with the policies in this bill to review
best readily available scientific information to identify
specified elements relating to ecosystem management.
5)Defines ecosystem-based management to mean a management approach
that recognizes the array of interactions within an ecosystem,
including humans, rather than considering single issues,
species, or ecosystem services in isolation.
6)States legislative findings and declarations regarding the
values of forage species to the marine ecosystem and human
health, the lack of baseline data for many forage species, and
the multitude of risks facing forage species. Encourages DFG
and the Ocean Protection Council (OPC) to work together
collaboratively to achieve the policy objectives of this bill,
consistent with DFG's and OPC's existing duties and
responsibilities under the Marine Life Management Act (MLMA) and
the Ocean Protection Act.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Declares it is the policy of the state to encourage the
preservation, conservation, and maintenance of wildlife
resources in order to maintain sufficient populations of all
species and necessary habitat, to provide for beneficial use and
enjoyment of wildlife by the citizens of the state, to
perpetuate wildlife for their intrinsic and ecological values,
to maintain recreational uses, and to provide for economic
contributions to the citizens of the state.
2)Requires, under the MLMA, that marine living resources be
managed sustainably, through adaptive management, on the basis
of best available science and other information. Requires that
FMPs be prepared for all regulated fisheries, and establishes a
process, including public hearings, for review and adoption of
FMPs by the FGC. Requires that each FMP include available
information on species population, habitat, ecosystem role,
AB 1299
Page 3
economic and social factors. Also requires adoption of a master
plan setting priorities for preparation of FMPs.
3)Gives management authority over the market squid fishery to the
FGC and requires FGC to manage the fishery under the guidelines
of the MLMA. Requires FGC to adopt a market squid FMP. A
Market Squid FMP (MSFMP) was adopted by FGC and updated in 2005.
4)Requires that Pacific mackerel and sardines be managed in
conformance with federal fishery regulations. Places certain
geographic and catch limit restrictions on the taking of
anchovies and prohibits commercial fishing for krill in
California waters.
5)Regulates, under federal law known as the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Management and Conservation Act, management of forage
species under the jurisdiction of the National Marine Fisheries
Service. Some forage species, specifically pacific mackerel,
pacific sardines, jack mackerel and northern anchovies, are
regulated under the Coastal Pelagic Species FMP.
6)Creates the OPC and directs the OPC, among other things, to
support state agencies' use and sharing of scientific
information, to assess the needs of state agencies for
information relevant to ecosystem-based management, to work to
increase baseline scientific information needed for such
management, and to support agencies' collaborative management
and use of scientific information relative to ecosystem-based
management.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, potential ongoing annual costs in the hundreds of
thousands of dollars to DFG to consider scientific information
when developing or revising FMPs for forage species.
COMMENTS : The purpose of this bill is to provide additional
protection for the foundation of California's ocean food web and
important coastal fisheries by encouraging ecosystem-based
management of forage species. Forage species, such as squid,
anchovies, herring, smelt, and sardines, are small schooling
pelagic fish that play a crucial role in marine ecosystems and
serve as a primary food source for many other marine species. In
order to provide for healthy, productive and resilient ocean
ecosystems, the author and sponsors introduced this bill to
AB 1299
Page 4
establish a state policy to protect forage species and the role
they play in the marine ecosystem. Background information
provided by the author and sponsors notes that scientists
recognize the critical role forage species play in the ecosystem
as food for other fish, seabirds and mammals. Healthy and abundant
forage populations are critical to the sustainability of the
ecosystem and the recovery of other fisheries dependent on forage
species for food. Forage species transfer energy from the bottom
of the food web to higher levels. For example, krill and sardines
eat microscopic plankton, and krill and sardines are then eaten by
salmon, seabirds and whales. The sponsors are concerned about the
potential impacts of over-fishing of forage species on marine
mammals and seabirds, and on the productivity of other commercial
fisheries. They also note healthy abundance of forage species may
be impacted negatively by global warming and other changing ocean
conditions. The sponsors assert current fisheries management
practices do not explicitly consider the need to maintain
sufficient populations of forage fish for ecosystem needs.
The ecosystem-based management policies set forth in this bill are
similar to existing state policies for ecosystem-based management
of marine fisheries generally, as reflected in the MLMA and the
Ocean Protection Act, but add additional specificity with regard
to management of forage species.
The scientific literature notes that abundance of forage fish is
impacted by environmental factors and fluctuations in the oceans,
but that intense fishing pressure can also have an impact,
depleting the food base for seabirds and marine mammals. The
sensitivity of forage fish to changing oceanographic conditions,
and increasing concern over forage fish sustainability, including
the impacts of fishing on marine ecosystems, has led some fishery
scientists to call for a precautionary ecosystem-based approach to
management. At the federal level, fishery management in the
California Current Region, which extends the length of the West
Coast from Baja, California to British Colombia, is primarily
based on single species stock assessments using stock synthesis
models. A federal California Current Ecosystem FMP is currently
under development but the anticipated date of completion is
unknown.
Supporters of this bill emphasize the critical role of forage
species in maintaining the health of the entire marine ecosystem,
the importance of forage species to recovery of economically
AB 1299
Page 5
important commercial and recreational fisheries such as salmon and
halibut, and the nutritional values of forage fish for human
consumption. Supporters note that insufficient food supply in
the oceans has been linked to declines in Sacramento River fall
Chinook salmon, major bird reproductive failures and population
declines, and marine mammal mortality events over the last decade.
They emphasize the need for a state policy specifically
recognizing the importance of sustainable ecosystem-based
management of forage species.
Opponents of this bill assert this bill is unnecessary and
duplicates or overrides existing fishery management requirements,
creates new unfunded mandates on DFG, and requires a scientific
consensus or proof of a negative before a fishery for forage
species can be expanded. Opponents further claim this bill will
prohibit expansion of fishery harvests without proof such
expansion would cause harm, assert there is no evidence forage
species are being over fished, and fear this bill would require
the fishing industry to fund expensive research and studies.
They assert this bill will put fishermen and processors out of
work and eliminate jobs. Opponents also argue forage fish should
be managed at the federal level, and point to a proposed federal
FMP which has been under development for several years. The
amendments taken in the Appropriations Committee deleted many of
the provisions objected to by the opposition, however, it is
unclear to what extent the amendments have removed the opposition.
Analysis Prepared by : Diane Colborn / W., P. & W. / (916)
319-2096 FN: 0000914