BILL ANALYSIS
AB 708
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 13, 2008
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Kevin De Leon, Chair
AB 708 (Huffman) - As Amended: April 20, 2009
Policy Committee: WPW Vote:13-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill increases penalties for serious poaching violations by
establishing minimum fines and increasing maximum penalties for
poaching committed for profit or personal gain, for taking or
possessing three times the legal bag limit, and for the torture
or mutilation of wildlife. Specifically, this bill:
1)Establishes a minimum penalty of $5,000 and an increased
maximum penalty of $40,000, and /or up to one year in county
jail, for anyone who illegally poaches or trades animals or
who illegally takes or possesses three times the legal daily
limit or bag limit.
2)Establishes for a second violation of the same crime as those
described above a minimum penalty of $10,000 and a maximum
penalty of $50,000, and /or up to one year in county jail.
3)Applies the penalties described in #1 to any person who
maliciously or intentionally maims, mutilates, or tortures any
fish, reptile, bird, amphibian, or mammal.
4)Provides that the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) may
suspend or revoke the hunting or fishing license of any person
convicted of the crimes described above.
5)Specifies that 50% of the revenue deposited in the Fish and
Game Preservation Fund (FGPF) from fines and forfeitures
collected pursuant to this section is for support of the
Special Operations Unit of DFG and used for law enforcement
purposes.
FISCAL EFFECT
AB 708
Page 2
1)Minimal absorbable costs to DFG to implement bill's
provisions. (FGPF)
2)Potential annual revenue increase, possibly in the low
hundreds of thousands of dollars, resulting from increased
poaching penalties. If the measure is effective in deterring
poaching, these revenue increases will not materialize.
(FGPF)
3)Minor nonreimbursable costs for fiscal incarceration.
COMMENTS
1)Rationale. The author contends existing hunting and fishing
penalties are insufficient to prevent poaching. In addition,
the author claims that the fee revenue from existing hunting
and fishing violations provides inadequate resources to DFG to
address poaching. As evidence, the author notes substantial
increases in convictions for poaching in recent years and to
California's comparatively paltry number of game wardens. The
author contends this bill will establish fines sufficient to
discourage poaching and provide DFG the funding it needs to
confront illegal hunting and fishing.
2)Poaching Is Punishable by Fine and Imprisonment. Existing law
specifies penalties for violations of the Fish and Game Code
(FGC).
a) Noncommercial Violations. Violation of most provisions
of the FGC is a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of not
more than $1,000, imprisonment in county jail for not more
than 6 months, or both the fine and imprisonment. Certain
violations, such as the unlawful taking of wildlife within
a game refuge, are subject to a penalty of not more than
$2,000 and up to one year in jail. Other violations carry
penalties that range from $250 for a first violation to
$2,000 and /or up to one year in jail for subsequent
violations.
b) Commercial Violations. Most violations of the FGC for
commercial purposes-meaning for profit or personal gain-are
punishable by a fine of not more than $30,000 or up to one
year in jail, or both the fine and imprisonment, with
additional penalties for subsequent violations. The law
AB 708
Page 3
does not prescribe minimum penalty amounts. An exception
is illegal abalone fishing, which is punishable by a
minimum fine of $15,000 and not more than $40,000, up to
one year in jail, or by both the fine and penalty.
c) Suspension of License. The law prohibits anyone
convicted of unlawfully taking wildlife for commercial
purposes from hunting or fishing for a minimum of one year.
Anyone with three or more convictions within five years
for the unlawful taking or possession of fish, reptiles or
amphibians is prohibited from taking any fish, reptiles or
amphibians for a minimum of three years.
3)Poaching on the Rise. According to DFG, poaching cases have
increased as the economy has declined. On the commercial
black market, certain species can be sold to consumers,
restaurants and retailers at a profit that exceeds established
penalties, for which there are no mandatory minimums.
According to DFG, between 2005 and 2007, poaching-related
violations increased by 25%, and between 2003 and 2007 the
number of violations more than doubled.
4)Few Wardens Patrolling a Big, Wild State. Fish and Game
wardens make up DFG's law enforcement staff. They enforce
fish, wildlife, and habitat protection laws. Like other sworn
peace officers, wardens secure and serve search warrants, make
arrests, and testify in court. Wardens sometimes perform their
duties alone in the field and, like some other peace officers,
may be armed.
DFG recently reported there were just over 300 filled warden
positions, including about 100 supervisory positions, and
about a dozen warden cadets. Groups representing the wardens
report that California has significantly fewer wardens on
patrol than do other comparably large states with significant
wilderness areas, such as Florida and Texas.
Analysis Prepared by : Jay Dickenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081