BILL ANALYSIS Ó
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1148|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 1148
Author: Pavley (D)
Amended: 5/29/12
Vote: 21
SENATE NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER COMM. : 5-3, 4/10/12
AYES: Pavley, Kehoe, Padilla, Simitian, Wolk
NOES: La Malfa, Cannella, Fuller
NO VOTE RECORDED: Evans
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 5-2, 5/24/12
AYES: Kehoe, Alquist, Lieu, Price, Steinberg
NOES: Walters, Dutton
SUBJECT : Fish and Game Commission: Department of Fish
and Game
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill grants authorization for the
Department of Fish and Game (DFG) to administer a program
for conservation and mitigation banks, requires the Fish
and Game Commission (FGC) to establish base fees for
numerous licenses which are currently set in statute, and
explicitly requires trustee agencies to participate in the
preparation of the State Environmental Goals and Policy
Report.
ANALYSIS : The DFG has numerous statutory functions and
the FGC has both statutory and constitutional functions
CONTINUED
SB 1148
Page
2
related to management of the state's wildlife and
protection of habitat. These two units of government have
specific and occasionally overlapping roles. Key
provisions relate to hunting and fishing and to limiting
catch or take of species, to protect wildlife and its
habitat, to conserve endangered and threatened species, to
operate hatcheries for various fisheries, to discourage the
importation or spread of invasive species, to protect
streambeds from harmful activities, and to provide access
to lands managed for hunting and fishing and public access,
among many other responsibilities. DFG also has a
responsibility under the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) to provide comments on proposed actions that
require permits from other agencies that have been
determined to affect any of the statutory responsibilities
assigned to DFG.
This bill makes various changes to the responsibilities of
DFG and the FGC in three areas. Specifically, this bill:
1. Authorizes DFG to approve conservation and mitigation
banks.
A. Defines a "conservation bank" as land that can
provide mitigation for species.
B. Defines a "mitigation bank" as lands that can be
used to mitigate wetland losses.
C. Requires DFG to create and maintain information
about mitigation and conservation banks on its Web
site.
D. Allows DFG to establish a fee on an entity
applying to DFG to establish a conservation or
mitigation bank, in an amount necessary to pay costs
incurred by DFG in providing program services
including review, approval, establishment,
monitoring, and oversight. These fees would be
deposited into a separate unspecified dedicated
account within the Fish and Game Preservation
Account.
2. Eliminates statutorily determined base fees for various
CONTINUED
SB 1148
Page
3
hunting and fishing licenses and enhancement stamps and
instead direct the FGC to establish the base fee in an
amount sufficient to recover all reasonable
administrative and implementation costs of the license.
The FGC would be required to adjust fees for any
license, stamp, permit, tag, or other entitlement issued
by the FGC for inflation.
3. Explicitly requires trustee agencies, as defined by CEQA
(such as DFG) to be included in the development of the
Office of Planning and Research's Environmental Goals
and Policy Report.
4. Authorizes DFG to charge existing banks a fee for
ongoing monitoring and oversight.
Background
For many years, DFG has been hampered by budgetary
constraints which were driven both by widely variable
General Fund appropriations (in some years partially offset
by bond funds) but also by an increase in statutory
responsibilities. For example, DFG's General Fund
appropriations in the past ten years included four years
when it received approximately $35 million, one year when
it received about $50 million, one year when it received
$115 million, and two years in the low $80 million range.
The last two years have seen General Fund appropriations in
the low to mid-$60 million range.
For decades, various stakeholder organizations (who include
hunters, sport and commercial fishers, recreational users
of DFG lands, regulatory permit applicants, and
conservation advocates) have struggled with the appropriate
funding mix for DFG and the appropriate allocation of the
workload to DFG. Hunting and fishing groups are concerned
that their license fees are not spent on providing greater
access to fish or prey. Conservation groups worry that not
enough effort is spent on scientific research, field work,
or activities to conserve important natural habitats. They
are also concerned that some decisions reflect political
and not scientific priorities. Permit applicants (such as
developers, farmers and ranchers, and renewable energy
companies) are concerned that, in their view, permit
CONTINUED
SB 1148
Page
4
decisions are sometimes too slow or that the required
mitigation is sometimes too much.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Ongoing costs of $75,000 from the Fish and Game
Preservation Account (special fund) to establish and
maintain conservation bank database from 2013 to 2015.
These costs are expected to be fully offset by fees.
One-time costs of at least $50,000 from the Fish and Game
Preservation Account (special fund) to develop and adopt
regulations for the collection of a fee from conservation
and mitigation bank applicants.
One-time costs of approximately $50,000 from the Fish and
Game Preservation Account (special fund) for outside
consulting needed by the FGC to establish base fees for
specified licenses and stamps.
SUPPORT : (Verified 5/29/12)
Defenders of Wildlife
The Nature Conservancy
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : The Nature Conservancy supports
the bill both because of the fee provisions and because of
the importance of mitigation banking in the Delta and
elsewhere.
Defenders of Wildlife is in support of the conservation and
mitigation banking provision.
CTW:mw 5/29/12 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED
SB 1148
Page
5
CONTINUED