BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1434|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 1434
Author: Wolk (D)
Amended: 4/22/14
Vote: 21
SENATE NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER COMMITTEE : 9-0, 4/29/14
AYES: Pavley, Cannella, Evans, Fuller, Hueso, Jackson, Lara,
Monning, Wolk
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : Senate Rule 28.8
SUBJECT : Funding of fish and wildlife programs: State Duck
Stamp Account advisory committee
SOURCE : California Waterfowl Association
DIGEST : This bill requires the expenditure of all federal
grant monies made available to the state under the Federal Aid
in Wildlife Restoration Act of 1937 (commonly known as
Pittman-Robertson Act or PR Act) to be consistent with that Act.
Requires that the monies expended under the PR Act fulfill one
or more specified purposes.
ANALYSIS :
Existing law:
1.Establishes, under the PR Act, an 11% excise tax on sporting
arms and ammunition. Monies collected are deposited in the
Wildlife Restoration Account and are used for administrative
CONTINUED
SB 1434
Page
2
costs, the Multistate Conservation Grant Program, and hunter
education programs. The remaining PR funds are appropriated
to the Secretary of the Interior and apportioned to states
through the Wildlife Restoration Program using a formula based
on the area of the state and its number of licensed hunters.
These monies may fund up to 75% of projects relating to the
acquisition and improvement of wildlife habitat, the
introduction of wildlife into habitat, research, public access
facilities, and hunter education programs (a minimum 25% state
cost share is required). The PR Act allows its funds to be
used for any species of wild bird or mammal, whether game or
non-game.
2.Establishes the Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW) and
allows the DFW to acquire and operate real property as
wildlife management areas. These areas include waterfowl
management areas, deer ranges, upland game bird management
areas, and public shooting grounds.
3.Establishes the State Duck Stamp Account (SDS Account) and
requires that:
Monies from the SDS Account be used for projects related
to waterfowl preservation, habitat restoration,
assessments, and research.
The Fish and Game Commission must analyze each project
using these funds.
Any lands acquired in California with funds allocated
for certain migrating waterfowl be open to waterfowl
hunting.
This bill:
1.Requires that the expenditure of PR monies be consistent with
uses allowable under the PR Act.
2.Requires that the expenditure of PR monies fulfill at least
one of the following purposes:
A. Management of the DFW's wildlife areas and/or other
lands open to public hunting or non-game wildlife-related
recreation, education, and research.
CONTINUED
SB 1434
Page
3
B. Conservation and scientific research of wildlife.
C. Support of hunting-related programs such as hunter
education, public access, and target shooting.
3.Establishes the SDS Account advisory committee.
4.Requires the DFW to:
A. Post on its Internet Web site a description and budget
for projects receiving PR funds.
B. Consult with the Upland Game Bird Account, SDS Account,
and Big Game Management Account advisory committees
regarding relevant programs receiving PR funds.
Background
Recently, sales of guns and ammunition have soared. In 2012 and
2013, California was eligible to receive an estimated total of
$12.5 million in PR funds, about 82% of which was categorized as
wildlife funds and 18% of which was allocated for hunter
education. In 2014, California is eligible to receive
approximately
$25 million in PR funds.
The federal Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) states that many
PR-funded projects benefit non-hunting activities including
birdwatching, nature photography, and painting. Approximately
26% of PR funding to states is used for surveys and research.
Moreover, FWS reports that recent estimates indicate about 70%
of people using wildlife management areas are not hunting. In
some localities, this ratio may reach 95%.
As repeatedly noted during the process that culminated in the
release of the California Fish and Wildlife Strategic Vision in
April 2012, the DFW has repeatedly experienced difficulty
fulfilling its mandates due to a lack of resources. In 2006,
for example, the Legislature declared that a lack of funding to
the DFW conservation activities other than sport and commercial
fishing and hunting activities has resulted in inadequate
wildlife and habitat conservation and wildlife protection
programs.
CONTINUED
SB 1434
Page
4
The Legislature has also found and declared that the costs of
hunting and sport fishing programs shall be provided out of
monies received from or for hunting and sport fishing programs,
and other funds appropriated by the Legislature for this
purpose, and that these funds should not be applied to
commercial fishing programs, free hunting and fishing license
programs, or nongame fish and wildlife programs (Fish and Game
Code Section 711). The section also expresses legislative
intent that funding for nongame fish and wildlife programs shall
be provided through the General Fund and sources other than the
Fish and Game Preservation Fund.
In 2010, SB 1058 (Harman, Chapter 408, Statutes of 2010)
established the Upland Game Bird Account and the Big Game
Management Account for proceeds from the sale of game tags,
validations, and stamps to fund land acquisitions, programs
benefiting game bird and big game species, and the expansion of
public hunting opportunities. The bill also established
advisory committees for each account. These committees review
and provide comments to the DFW on all projects funded through
either account to ensure that funds be used solely for projects
benefitting specified game species (upland birds, antelope, elk,
deer, wild pig, bear, or sheep) and expanding public hunting
opportunities.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 5/12/14)
California Waterfowl Association (source)
Audubon California
California Rice Commission
California Rifle and Pistol Association
California Sportsman's Lobby
Ducks Unlimited
Outdoor Sportsmen's Coalition of California
Pheasants Forever
Quail Forever
Safari Club International
OPPOSITION : (Verified 5/12/14)
CONTINUED
SB 1434
Page
5
Public Interest Coalition
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : The California Waterfowl Association
contend that this bill requires that expenditure of PR monies be
"subject to review and comment by stakeholder conservation
groups." They argue that this bill expands existing annual
consultation with advisory committees to include projects funded
with PR monies.
The California Rice Commission (CRC) is concerned with "overall
quality of waterbird populations" and has a natural interest in
the quality of habitat in wetlands adjacent to rice areas. They
assert that these protected areas serve as important
"alternative habitat for waterfowl to use" as their crop
matures. Federal grant dollars not only fund hunting-related
programs, but also support critical wildlife conservation
efforts such as the operation and maintenance of the State's
Wildlife Management Areas as well as game species research
projects. CRC supports this bill as it makes PR monies
available for those purposes.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : According to the Public Interest
Coalition:
As stated in the analysis, the greatly increased sales of guns
and ammunition have created a parallel increase in
Pittman-Robertson (PR) funds for California. However, [SB]
1434 erroneously assumes that the huge increase in guns/ammo
sales revenues are attributable to hunters. In fact, the
increase is due to private citizen gun/ammo sales and is NOT
related to recreational, sport, or trophy killing at all.
Since 1979, ALL weaponry, including hand guns legally sold,
carry an excise tax that is pooled into the Federal Aid for
Wildlife Restoration. Only a small portion of the revenue
comes from hunters.
THEREFORE, any PR funds should neither be focused on nor
legislatively restricted in any way to benefit consumptive
users of wildlife. PR funds should instead be spent for the
benefit of non-consumptive activities because those folks
generated most of the PR funds. Activities such as hiking,
birdwatching, photography, painting, education (and law
enforcement) should be the priority. If hunting activities
also benefit from these increased PR funds, those side-effect
CONTINUED
SB 1434
Page
6
benefits should be considered incidental and not allocated via
legislation. Any increased PR funding should have the
flexibility to be applied to wildlife refuges, habitat,
research, public access, or wherever the need is greatest
(which many citizens believe should be increased law
enforcement).
RM:k 5/13/14 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED