BILL ANALYSIS Ó ------------------------------------------------------------ |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1249| |Office of Senate Floor Analyses | | |1020 N Street, Suite 524 | | |(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | | |327-4478 | | ------------------------------------------------------------ UNFINISHED BUSINESS Bill No: SB 1249 Author: Wolk (D) Amended: 8/24/12 Vote: 21 SENATE NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER COMM : 5-0, 4/10/12 AYES: Pavley, Cannella, Kehoe, Padilla, Wolk NO VOTE RECORDED: La Malfa, Evans, Fuller, Simitian SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 5-2, 5/24/12 AYES: Kehoe, Alquist, Lieu, Price, Steinberg NOES: Walters, Dutton SENATE FLOOR : 27-7, 5/30/12 AYES: Alquist, Berryhill, Cannella, Corbett, Correa, De León, DeSaulnier, Evans, Hancock, Harman, Hernandez, Kehoe, Leno, Lieu, Liu, Lowenthal, Negrete McLeod, Padilla, Pavley, Price, Rubio, Simitian, Steinberg, Vargas, Wolk, Wright, Yee NOES: Anderson, Blakeslee, Dutton, Gaines, La Malfa, Walters, Wyland NO VOTE RECORDED: Calderon, Emmerson, Fuller, Huff, Runner, Strickland ASSEMBLY FLOOR : Not available SUBJECT : Department of Fish and Game: lands: expenditures SOURCE : Author CONTINUED SB 1249 Page 2 DIGEST : This bill allows the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) to enter into contracts with nonprofit conservation groups for the management and operation of DFG-managed lands starting January 1, 2015, require that a fee be collected for the use of DFG-managed lands, and requires that the county's expenditures of Fish and Game penalty revenues be expended for fish and wildlife purposes. Assembly Amendments make clarifying changes and require the fee in the Senate version to start on January 1, 2015. ANALYSIS : Existing law: 1.DFG may accept donations of land or may otherwise acquire lands or non-marine waters for several purposes including wildlife management areas, public shooting grounds, ecological reserves, and others. 2.DFG is required to operate its lands on a nonprofit basis and to accommodate multiple uses, including hunting and fishing. Section 1528 mentions camping, picnicking, boating, or swimming as possible other activities. 3.The California Fish and Game Commission (FGC) may charge fees for any use privilege at these lands. 4.A separate provision allows DFG to issue annual or per-day wildlife area passes. 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. 5.Many fines and forfeitures established in the Fish and Game Code are evenly divided between the state and the county where the fine was collected. 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. SB 1249 Page 3 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, except for ecological reserves where uses shall be considered on an individual basis. 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. 5.Requires, commencing January 1, 2015, DFG to require the purchase of an entry permit for nonconsumptive uses of department-managed lands if DFG finds it is practical and cost-effective to collect entry permit fees. Defines nonconsumptive uses to mean compatible uses other than hunting and fishing. Allows DFG to require the purchase of an entry permit for nonconsumptive uses only if a sign providing notice of the requirement has been posted at the land. Requires DFG, to the extent feasible, to allow nonconsumptive users to purchase an entry permit onsite, and requires DFG to use DFG's online Automated License Data System (ALDS) to sell the permits. 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 SB 1249 Page 4 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. Background DFG manages 711 properties throughout California, encompassing more than one million acres, including 408 wildlife areas, ecological reserves, hatcheries, and public access lands. Entrance fees are only charged at 19 of these areas which result in approximately $2.5M in use revenue annually. DFG is significantly underfunded for the management of its lands with some areas receiving very minimal management attention. Except for the 19 areas which currently charge an entrance fee, management costs are largely supported by hunting and licensing fees, despite the fact that the lands are also used by non-consumptive users (e.g. birdwatchers, hikers, campers). Revenues from entrance fees are collected and deposited into the Native Species Conservation Enhancement Account and used to supplement the costs of wildlife management programs. According to DFG, 100 percent of the entrance fees collected are returned to the property at which they were collected for management of that property. Entrance fees which are collected under the authority granted to DFG under §1764 and 1765 of the Fish and Game Code cannot be collected until that property has a management plan. SB 1249 Page 5 Counties currently receive a portion of all fines and penalties generated from violations of the Fish and Game Code. A county is required to deposit these funds into a county fish and wildlife propagation fund and may only expend these monies for the protection, conservation, propagation, and preservation of fish and wildlife as specified in Section 13103 of the Fish and Game Code. According to the author, in one county, it was found that the revenues were being used to supplement salaries in its sheriff's office, which is not consistent with Section 13103. FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: Yes Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: Yes According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee: One-time costs of approximately $200,000 to DFG to modify its ALDS to allow issuance of site-specific non-consumptive use access passes (Fish and Game Preservation Fund). The costs would not be covered by access pass fee revenue since the access pass fee cannot be collected until the ALDS is modified. Annual revenue, beginning in 2014-15, of an unknown but significant amount from the sale of access passes. DFG estimates revenues ranging between $550,000 and $2.2 million, based on a compliance rate ranging between 5% and 20% and assuming no drop in visitation at DFG-managed lands as a result of imposition of the access pass fee. Potential minor cost, possibly in the tens of thousands of dollars, to the extent the Commission on State Mandates determines the review requirement on expenditures from a county fish and wildlife propagation fund to be a reimbursable state mandate. Because the bill requires the reviews to be conducted during regularly scheduled meetings, costs should be insignificant, reimbursable or not. SUPPORT : (Verified 8/29/12) California Outdoor Heritage Alliance California Waterfowl Association SB 1249 Page 6 OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/29/12) Paw Pac Public Interest Coalition ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : 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 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 cited 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. SB 1249 Page 7 This bill also clarifies that with regard to ecological reserves, where hunting is generally not allowed, uses shall be considered on an individual basis. 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 ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : Opponents object to allowing private contracts for management of DFG lands and assert penalties for non-consumptive users who access DFG lands without an entry permit should be higher. CTW:n 8/29/12 Senate Floor Analyses SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE **** END ****