BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2223
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 2223 (Nava)
As Amended May 28, 2010
Majority vote
WATER, PARKS & WILDLIFE 8-4APPROPRIATIONS 12-5
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Huffman, Arambula, |Ayes:|Fuentes, Ammiano, |
| |Blumenfield, Ruskin, | |Bradford, |
| |Bonnie Lowenthal, Salas, | |Charles Calderon, Coto, |
| |Yamada, Fong | |Davis, |
| | | |Monning, Ruskin, Skinner, |
| | | |Solorio, Torlakson, |
| | | |Torrico |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Fuller, Bill Berryhill, |Nays:|Conway, Harkey, Miller, |
| |Tom Berryhill, Fletcher | |Nielsen, Norby |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Requires the use of nontoxic shot when shooting or
hunting in state wildlife management areas. Specifically, this
bill :
1)States legislative findings regarding the values of
California's wildlife management areas, the effects of lead
poisoning on various species of birds, the critical role of
hunting in wildlife management and conservation, and the
inconsistency with best management practices of allowing
continued use of lead shot ammunition in state wildlife areas.
2)States legislative intent to eliminate the use of lead shot
for purposes of shooting or hunting in wildlife management
areas.
3)Prohibits the possession or use of any shotgun shell loaded
with anything other than nontoxic shot approved by the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) when hunting
migratory game birds, resident small game, or nongame species
taken under the authority of a hunting license within a
wildlife management area.
4)Defines wildlife management area to include those areas
AB 2223
Page 2
designated as state wildlife areas in subdivision (a) of
section 550 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.
5)Provides that violation of this requirement shall be an
infraction punishable by a fine of $500 for a first offense,
and not less than $1,000 or more than $5,000 for a second
offense.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Under federal law, prohibits the use of lead shot to hunt
waterfowl (USFWS regulation). The ban has applied nationwide
since 1991. Defines nontoxic shot as any shot type that does
not cause sickness and death when ingested by migratory birds.
2)Under state law, requires the use of nonlead centerfire rifle
and pistol ammunition when taking big game and coyote within
the California condor range in California.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee:
1)Ongoing minor absorbable costs, likely during the first few
years of implementation, from 2011-12 through 2013-14, to the
Department of Fish and Game (DFG) as game wardens educate
hunters on new shot restrictions and enforce them in the field
(Fish and Game Preservation Fund (FGPF)).
2)Potential loss of revenue to DFG of an unknown amount as some
hunters may balk at paying for higher-cost nontoxic shot and
so give up hunting in the state's wildlife management areas
(FGPF).
3)Potential minor ongoing savings to DFG, the wardens of which
will be able to more easily manage the use of shot in wildlife
management areas, especially after the lead shot ban becomes
implemented and accepted.
COMMENTS : The purpose of this bill is to reduce lead poisoning
among wildlife species, particularly birds. The author notes
that lead poisoning has been observed in 37 species of birds
beyond waterfowl, with impacts on mourning doves appearing to be
particularly acute. Since the federal government banned the use
AB 2223
Page 3
of lead shot for hunting waterfowl in 1991, research continues
to identify additional threats posed by lead to wildlife. Lead
ingestion and poisoning from ammunition sources has been
documented in many avian predators and scavengers, such as bald
eagles, golden eagles, red-tail hawks and others. The author
notes that failure to address these problems will impact both
wetland and upland bird populations and diminish opportunities
for hunting on these lands. The sponsors of this bill further
note there is widespread consensus among conservationists,
hunters, public agencies and land managers that use of lead shot
for waterfowl is dangerous to bird populations, and lead shot
has thus been banned for waterfowl hunting since 1991. However,
the current loophole which allows use of lead shot to hunt other
migratory birds and small game upland species within wildlife
management areas still allows significant amounts of lead to be
introduced into these wetland environments.
The USFWS adopted a nationwide ban on lead shot for all
waterfowl hunting in 1991 after studies showed waterfowl can
ingest expended lead shot and die from lead poisoning.
According to the USFWS, a study in the mid-1990s suggested that
the nationwide ban in the United States on the use of lead shot
for waterfowl hunting has had remarkable success. Six years
after the ban, researchers estimated a 64% reduction in lead
poisoning deaths of surveyed mallard ducks and a 78% decline in
lead pellet ingestion. The study concluded the restrictions on
lead shot have prevented the deaths of thousands of waterfowl.
Since the ban on use of lead shot for waterfowl, concern has
grown over the impact of lead shot on other species. At least
21 states have adopted some lead shot prohibitions for hunting
beyond those required by the federal government for waterfowl.
Most recently, California banned the use of lead ammunition in
the California condor range. The state of Missouri banned use
of lead shot in state conservation areas three years ago, after
finding that 6.5% of mourning doves ate lead shot, which killed
almost as many doves each year as hunters did. They also found
that due to the concentration of hunters in state wildlife areas
the amount of lead shot left on the ground, where it is
available to be ingested by other animals, was particularly
significant.
This bill would require use of non-lead shot when hunting small
mammals and game birds, but does not restrict the use of lead
AB 2223
Page 4
ammunition when hunting big game beyond the restrictions under
current law. This bill in effect extends the existing federal
ban on use of lead shot in federal wildlife refuges and when
hunting waterfowl, to other game birds and small mammals which
are hunted with shotguns when hunting within state wildlife
management areas.
According to the United States Geologic Service (USGS) National
Wildlife Health Center, lead is a metal with no known
biologically beneficial role, and its use in gasoline, paint,
pesticides and solder in food cans has nearly been eliminated.
Although lead shot was banned for waterfowl hunting in 1991, its
use in ammunition for upland hunting and shooting sports remains
widespread. Wild birds, such as mourning doves, bald eagles,
California condors, and loons, can die from the ingestion of
lead shot or bullet fragments. According to the USGS, the most
significant hazard to wildlife is through direct ingestion of
spent lead shot and bullets, lost fishing sinkers, tackle and
related fragments, or through consumption of wounded or dead
prey containing lead shot, bullets or fragments. Research on
lead poisoning has focused on bird species, with at least two
studies indicating that the ban on use of lead shot for
waterfowl hunting in North America has been successful in
reducing lead exposure in waterfowl. These studies found that
upland game, like doves and quail, and scavenging birds, such as
vultures and eagles, continue to be exposed to lead shot,
putting some populations at risk of lead poisoning, most notably
California condors. USGS indicates a variety of alternatives to
lead shot are available, and have been used for hunting
waterfowl since lead shot was banned for that purpose in 1991.
The USFWS has approved over a dozen types of nontoxic shot for
use in hunting waterfowl.
Supporters of this bill assert state wildlife areas are islands
of habitat for wildlife and humans who visit them for both
hunting and wildlife viewing, and should be managed in
accordance with the highest standards of wildlife management.
Supporters assert that allowing continued use of lead shot in
these areas is inconsistent with best practices. Supporters
further note that lead shot is extremely toxic to wildlife and
can linger in the environment for years, where it is often
swallowed by mourning doves, pheasants, quail, wild turkey, and
33 other bird species beyond waterfowl. Animals that feed on
lead-poisoned species can also become sick, particularly
AB 2223
Page 5
scavenger and predator species. The sponsors of this bill also
note the important role hunters play in wildlife management and
conservation, and stress this bill does not attempt to restrict
hunting, but only to ensure that state wildlife management areas
are managed according to best standards to ensure that wildlife
continue to thrive.
Opponents of this bill argue there are no species currently in
danger of becoming threatened or endangered because of hunting
with lead shot, and that this bill would create confusion for
hunters as to the rules for hunting in different areas.
Opponents assert alternatives to lead shot are more expensive or
are not as effective, and that decisions about use of ammunition
should be left to DFG and the Fish and Game Commission (FGC),
and based on science. Some opponents also note that proposals
to expand the current prohibition on the use of lead ammunition
for hunting big game within the California condor range to other
parts of the state have been rejected by the FGC. It should be
noted this bill does not propose to expand the lead ban for big
game hunting, but applies only to use of lead shot for hunting
migratory birds and small game within state wildlife management
areas.
Analysis Prepared by : Diane Colborn / W., P. & W. / (916)
319-2096
FN: 0004693