BILL ANALYSIS Ó SB 1249 Page 1 Date of Hearing: June 26, 2012 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON WATER, PARKS AND WILDLIFE Jared Huffman, Chair SB 1249 (Wolk) - As Amended: May 29, 2012 SENATE VOTE : 27-7 SUBJECT : Department of Fish and Game: lands: expenditures SUMMARY : Authorizes the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) to enter into agreements with nonprofit conservation groups for the management and operation of DFG managed lands. Specifically, this bill : 1)Authorizes DFG to enter into agreements for the management and operation of department-managed lands with nonprofit conservation groups or resource conservation districts. 2)Defines department-managed lands for these purposes to include lands or lands and water acquired for public shooting grounds, state marine (estuarine) recreational management areas, ecological reserves, and wildlife management areas. 3)Requires that such agreements be consistent with approved management plans and the purpose for which the lands were acquired and managed by DFG, and requires that any changes to the management plan be subject to public review and comment. 4)Reaffirms existing law providing that multiple recreational use of department-managed lands is desirable and shall be encouraged by the Fish and Game Commission (FGC). Provides that except for hunting and fishing only minimal facilities to permit other forms of multiple recreational uses, such as camping, picnicking, boating, or swimming shall be provided. States that hunting, fishing, wildlife viewing, wildlife photography, conservation education, and fish and wildlife research are the priority uses compatible with department-managed lands. Provides that other public uses may be authorized by FGC by regulation and may be subject to a special use permit. Further provides that fees for any use privileges may be set by the FGC and collected by DFG, and that the FGC may continue to allow free access to a department-managed land if it finds that the best interests of that area would be served by not fixing a fee for use SB 1249 Page 2 privileges. 5)Requires, commencing January 1, 2015, the purchase of an entry permit to access all department-managed lands for uses other than hunting or fishing. Provides that the entry permit shall be purchased through DFG's Automated License Data System (ALDS) or other means as determined by DFG. Requires that the user have the permit in their immediate possession while on department-managed lands. Makes failure to obtain an entry permit an infraction. Persons with a valid hunting license, sport fishing license or trapping license would be exempt from the entry permit requirement. 6)Requires that moneys generated from the use fees or entry permits shall be deposited in the Native Species Conservation and Enhancement Account within the Fish and Game Preservation Fund and available upon appropriation to DFG for management and operation of its lands. If the source of the fee revenue collected can be identified, no less than 35% of the funds generated shall go to the lands from which the fee revenue was collected. 7)Requires that proposed expenditures from a county fish and wildlife propagation fund shall be reviewed first at a meeting of the county board of supervisors or county fish and game commission to ensure compliance with existing law requiring expenditures from propagation funds to be used for specified purposes related to fish and wildlife conservation. EXISTING LAW : 1)Requires DFG to manage and operate lands and waters acquired for public shooting grounds, state marine recreational management areas, or wildlife management areas. 2)Requires DFG to operate its lands on a nonprofit basis and to accommodate multiple uses, including hunting and fishing. 3)Authorizes the FGC to charge fees for any use privilege at these lands and allows DFG to issue annual or per-day wildlife area passes for DFG managed lands. Annual passes are $10. Day passes are $2. Persons with valid hunting, trapping, or fishing licenses are exempt as are school group tours and persons under 16 years of age. SB 1249 Page 3 4)Many fines and forfeitures established in the Fish and Game Code are divided between the state and the county where the fine was collected. Fish and Game fines paid to the counties are required to be deposited in a county fish and wildlife propagation fund and expended for the protection, conservation, propagation and preservation of fish and wildlife. FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations Committee: 1)One-time costs of $200,000 to $300,000 from the Fish and Game Preservation Account (special fund) for the FGC to evaluate all department-managed lands for appropriate entrance fees. 2)Unknown, but potentially tens of thousands of dollars, from the Fish and Game Preservation Account (special fund) for the collection and enforcement of entrance fees. These costs may be fully offset by unknown fee revenues, but potentially up to $7.5 million dollars. 3)Unknown, but likely minor and absorbable costs from the Fish and Game Preservation Account for reimbursement of board of supervisor meetings required to review proposed expenditures of penalty revenues. COMMENTS : The author has introduced this bill to improve DFG's ability to manage its more than one million acres of lands, including wildlife management areas, under its jurisdiction. This bill would accomplish this in three ways: 1) by requiring all users of DFG lands to pay a fee to access these lands; 2) by authorizing DFG to enter into agreements with nonprofit wildlife conservation groups and resource conservation districts to assist with management and operation of DFG lands; and 3) by clarifying priority, compatible uses for DFG lands. DFG manages over one million acres of fish and wildlife habitat throughout the state. Currently, hunters and fishers pay license, tag and stamp fees that contribute to the costs of managing department lands. However, other recreational users are currently only required to purchase a pass to access seven wildlife management areas and ecological reserves but can access most department-managed lands that are open to public access for free. Hunters and fishermen also contribute to wildlife habitat conservation through payment of federal taxes on hunting and SB 1249 Page 4 fishing equipment. The need for the costs of wildlife habitat management to be born more broadly by all recreational users of DFG lands was raised and discussed in the stakeholder advisory group for the DFG Strategic Vision process without opposition. While it may be appropriate that consumptive users like hunters and fishers pay a higher proportional cost, the concept that all users should contribute toward the costs of habitat management appears to be broadly accepted. The author's office also notes that the six activities sited in this bill as priority compatible uses for department-managed lands - hunting, fishing, wildlife viewing, wildlife photography, conservation education and research - are also the six priority public uses identified in federal law for the National Wildlife Refuge System. Arguments in Support : Supporters note this bill will enhance operation, maintenance and funding of DFG managed lands; provide consistency between public use regulations on state and federal wildlife refuges; help prevent public uses incompatible with wildlife conservation objectives on DFG lands; authorize cooperative agreements to assist in DFG lands management; provide additional funding for land management in a manner accessible and convenient to the public; and ensure greater accountability in expenditure of county fish and wildlife propagation funds. Suggested Amendments : Committee staff suggests three clarifying amendments as follows: While online access to purchase an entry permit is a preferred option for some users, online access is not necessarily an accessible and convenient option for all persons, particularly if that is the only option available. Visitors to state and federal wildlife refuges may not know in advance that they need to have purchased an entry permit online before they can access a wildlife refuge, particularly if they are following signs on a highway directing motorists to an area for wildlife viewing. Committee staff suggests the following amendment be added on page 4, after line 29: "Where, in the determination of the department, it is feasible and cost effective, the department shall make entry permits SB 1249 Page 5 available for purchase onsite, and shall also modify its online processes for purchase of entry permits to make these systems compatible for nonconsumptive users. As used in this section, "nonconsumptive uses" means compatible uses other than hunting and fishing." Committee staff also suggests an amendment to clarify that subdivision (e)(2) applies to the entire section, including the entry passes required by subdivision (f). This would clarify that the commission or department may continue to allow free access to a department-managed land without purchase of an entry permit if the commission finds that the best interests of that area would be served by not charging the fee. This can be accomplished by moving subdivision (e)(2) to a new (h) and clarifying that it applies to the department and the commission. Finally, subdivision (B) on page 3 refers to management plans approved pursuant to Section 1764, but Section 1764 is not the only place in the code where management plans are referenced. Committee staff suggests that subdivision (B) therefore be reworded to read as follow: "(B) The contracts or other agreements authorized pursuant to this paragraph shall adher to the goals and objectives included in an approved management planapproved pursuant to Section 1764and shall be consistent with the purpose for which the lands were acquired and managed by the department. Any changes to the management plan shall be subject to public review and comment." REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION : Support Opposition California Waterfowl Association Paw Pac California Outdoor Heritage AlliancePublic Interest Coalition Analysis Prepared by : Diane Colbor*n / W., P. & W. / (916) 319-2096