BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1213
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 1213 (Bloom)
As Amended May 24, 2013
Majority vote
WATER, PARKS & WILDLIFE 9-5APPROPRIATIONS 12-5
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Rendon, Blumenfield, |Ayes:|Gatto, Bocanegra, |
| |Bocanegra, Fong, Frazier, | |Bradford, |
| |Gatto, Gomez, Yamada, | |Ian Calderon, Campos, |
| |Bloom | |Eggman, Gomez, Hall, |
| | | |Ammiano, Pan, Quirk, |
| | | |Weber |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Bigelow, Allen, Dahle, |Nays:|Harkey, Bigelow, |
| |Beth Gaines, Patterson | |Donnelly, Linder, Wagner |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Establishes a no-trapping buffer zone around Joshua
Tree National Park in which the trapping of bobcats would be
prohibited, and authorizes the Fish and Game Commission (FGC) by
regulation to establish buffer zones where trapping of bobcats
would be prohibited around other parks or conservation areas the
FGC identifies for protection. Specifically, this bill :
1)Prohibits trapping of bobcats, and the sale of any bobcat
taken in violation of the prohibition, within a defined buffer
area surrounding Joshua Tree National Park. The buffer area
is defined by reference to major roads and highways in
proximity to the park.
2)Requires the FGC at its next regularly scheduled mammal
hunting and trapping rulemaking process, after January 1,
2014, to amend its regulations to prohibit the trapping of
bobcats within, and adjacent to, the boundaries of a national
or state park, monument or preserve, national wildlife refuge,
and other public or private conservation area identified by
the FGC for protection. Requires the FGC to delineate the
boundaries of any prohibited area using readily identifiable
features, such as highways or other major roads.
3)Provides exceptions from the prohibition on trapping in the
AB 1213
Page 2
buffer zone around Joshua Tree National Park, and any other
areas identified by the FGC for protection, for takings by the
Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW), takings in accordance
with a scientific, educational or propagation permit, and
lawful takings of bobcats injuring crops or other property.
4)Makes it unlawful to trap bobcats on any private lands without
the written consent of the property owner. Provides that the
placing or possession of any trap or bobcat on any private
land is prima facie evidence of a violation.
5)Requires the FGC to set trapping license fees at a level
necessary to fully recover all reasonable administrative and
implementation costs associated with bobcat trapping.
6)Clarifies that nothing in this bill limits the ability of the
DFW or the FGC to impose additional restrictions or a
prohibition on the trapping of bobcats.
7)States legislative findings and declarations regarding
bobcats.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Provides that all mammals occurring naturally in California
that are not game mammals, fully protected mammals, or
fur-bearing mammals, are classified as nongame mammals.
Prohibits the take or possession of nongame mammals except as
provided in the Fish and Game Code or regulations adopted by
the FGC.
2)Classifies bobcats as nongame mammals, and prohibits the
taking of a bobcat without first procuring either a trapping
license or a hunting license and bobcat hunting tags. Allows
bobcats taken under a trapping license to be taken statewide
from November 24th through January 31st without any limit as
to number. Limits the number of bobcats that may be taken
under a hunting license and bobcat hunting tags statewide to
five bobcats per season, with the season lasting from October
15th through February 28th.
3)Prohibits pursuit of bobcats with dogs except pursuant to a
depredation permit, for scientific research, or to protect
AB 1213
Page 3
livestock or crops.
4)Requires pelts of bobcats to be affixed with tags, and
prohibits the sale or transport of bobcat pelts without a
shipping tag.
5)Requires everyone who traps fur-bearing mammals or nongame
mammals or sells raw furs of those mammals to obtain a
trapping license, with exceptions for take of mammals that are
injuring crops or property.
6)Prohibits the use of body gripping traps to trap fur-bearing
or nongame mammals. Also prohibits the take of fur-bearing
mammals with saw-toothed or spiked jaw traps.
7)Imposes, by regulation, additional requirements on persons
using non-body gripping traps, including the requirement to
obtain a trapping registration number from DFW for each trap.
Each mammal that is legally trapped must be immediately killed
(shot) or released, and all traps are required to be visited
at least once daily. Placement of traps within 150 yards of
residential structures is prohibited without the consent of
the landowner. Violations of trapping requirements are
punishable by a $300 to $2,000 fine and/or one year in county
jail. All holders of trapping licenses are required to file
annual trapping reports with DFW, with the penalty for failure
to report being potential license suspension.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, cost pressures to DFW of over $500,000.
COMMENTS : This bill establishes a buffer zone, averaging two
miles in width, around Joshua Tree National Park in which
commercial trapping of bobcats would be prohibited. Trapping is
already prohibited within the boundaries of the park. In
addition, this bill would authorize the FGC by regulation to
establish additional trapping-free buffer zones around other
national and state parks, and other conservation areas in the
state identified by the FGC for protection. Trapping of bobcats
on private property without the written consent of the property
owner would be prohibited. The FGC would be required to set
bobcat trapping fees at a level sufficient to fully recover all
AB 1213
Page 4
reasonable administrative and implementation costs for bobcat
trapping.
The bobcat, (Lynx rufus) is a North American mammal of the cat
family Felidae. The bobcat is native throughout California and
typically inhabits brushy stages of deciduous and conifer
forests or chaparral, often in rocky, brushy terrain adjacent to
patches of riparian habitat and denser forests. They are
carnivorous and feed primarily on rabbits, other rodents, small
mammals and birds, but also eat vegetation such as fruits and
grasses. Bobcats usually breed in the winter, with litters of
one to six kittens born in spring. The bobcat gets its common
name from its short bobbed tail.
The author introduced this bill in response to an increase in
commercial trapping of bobcats in California, which is believed
to be driven by a significant rise in the demand and wholesale
prices being paid for bobcat pelts in China and other foreign
countries. The number of bobcats trapped and killed in the
2011-12 season rose by nearly 51% over the previous season, and
the number of trappers reporting bobcats trapped more than
doubled over that same time period. Recent news reports quoting
trappers indicate that the price paid for bobcat pelts on the
international market increased from an average of $78 per pelt
in 2009 to an average of $700 per pelt in 2011.
The author indicates he first became aware of the issue when
commercial trappers killed numerous bobcats just outside the
Joshua Tree National Park boundaries, where some traps were
illegally set on private lands bordering the park. Local
residents and tourists who had observed, photographed, and
appreciated the bobcats in the area for many years objected to
the killings. Joshua Tree National Park is a 640,000 acre park
in the desert region of southern California. Bobcats are
protected inside the park boundaries, as are other native
wildlife species. The most recent survey of bobcats in the park
was conducted in 1979.
In the 2011-2012 season, the most recent season for which data
is available, DFW indicates 1,813 bobcats were killed in
California by trappers and hunters. Of these, 1,499 were taken
by trappers and only 255 by hunters. The U.S. Department of
Agriculture's Wildlife Services also killed 59.
AB 1213
Page 5
This bill as passed by the policy committee was significantly
broader than the present version. In addition to the current
provisions on park buffer zones, this bill as approved by the
policy committee would also have required the DFW to develop a
management plan for bobcats based on updated population studies,
and would have imposed a statewide ban on all commercial
trapping of bobcats if the management plan was not completed and
approved by the FGC by a specified date. As amended in the
Assembly Appropriations Committee, the requirements for the
development of the management plan, the updated populations
studies, and the potential statewide ban on bobcat trapping have
been deleted.
The previous version of this bill also would have required the
management plan developed by DFW to include a prohibition on
bobcat trapping within two miles of the boundaries of national
and state parks and other conservation areas identified by DFW
or the FGC. As amended, this bill now instead requires the FGC
when it updates its mammal hunting and trapping rulemaking
process to amend its regulations to prohibit trapping within and
adjacent to the boundaries of parks and other conservation areas
identified by the FGC for protection. The bill does not specify
the size of the buffer zones, or specify which parks or
conservation areas should have designated buffer zones, but
provides that the FGC shall delineate the boundaries of any
prohibited areas identified by the FGC for protection using
readily identifiable features such as highways or other major
roads, such as those delineated for the Joshua Tree National
Park. The defined boundaries specified in this bill for the
Joshua Tree buffer zone establish a no-trapping zone that ranges
from one to 12 miles in width around the park, with the average
width of the buffer zone being two miles.
Supporters of this bill assert the increase in trapping being
driven by increased foreign demand for furs, if left unabated,
could deplete local bobcat populations and lead to viability
concerns for the species in certain parts of the state. They
particularly object to the practice of some trappers who place
traps around the boundaries of national parks and on private
property without consent. They also assert these animals play
an integral role in the natural ecosystem, and are of greater
value to the state as a living component of California's
wildlife heritage, than being taken for the private profit of a
few international fur traders. They also note that bobcats,
AB 1213
Page 6
like other native wildlife, are a significant draw for
Californians and other out of state tourists whose visitation
contributes to the state's economy and those of local
communities.
Opponents argue that since the bobcat is not endangered and DFW
monitors the annual harvest, additional restrictions on bobcat
trapping are unnecessary. They also asset there is adequate
protected habitat currently in California for bobcats where
trapping is not allowed, and that current harvest levels are
significantly less than historic harvest levels of the 1970s and
1980s. They also argue that restrictions on bobcat harvesting
may have a negative economic impact on those who trap bobcats,
on companies that manufacture and sell trapping equipment, and
on the fur industry.
Analysis Prepared by : Diane Colborn / W., P. & W. / (916)
319-2096
FN: 0000900