BILL ANALYSIS
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER |
| Senator Fran Pavley, Chair |
| 2009-2010 Regular Session |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BILL NO: AB 2223 HEARING DATE: June 29, 2010
AUTHOR: Nava URGENCY: No
VERSION: June 23, 2010 CONSULTANT: Katharine Moore
DUAL REFERRAL: No FISCAL: Yes
SUBJECT: Wildlife management areas: nontoxic shot.
THIS BILL CAME BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON JUNE 22, 2010 AND DID NOT
RECEIVE SUFFICIENT VOTES. RECONSIDERATION WAS GRANTED. THE BILL
HAS BEEN AMENDED TO REFLECT THE AMENDMENTS ACCEPTED IN THE JUNE
22, 2010 COMMITTEE HEARING.
THIS BILL IS SET FOR RECONSIDERATION (VOTE ONLY) TODAY.
BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
Lead has long been known to be a toxic substance with no
biological benefits. It has been removed from paint, gasoline
and other items in order to protect human health. In terms of
lead's effect on wildlife, the negative impact of eating
lead-contaminated prey on higher-order predators has been
well-documented. Scavangers - such as the California condor -
who eat carrion also have suffered from lead poisoning. The
California condor has been protected as an endangered species by
federal law since 1967 and by California state law since 1971.
In the 1980s, mortality due to lead poisoning was a driving
factor in moving the few remaining condors into a captive
breeding program. The Ridley-Tree Condor Preservation Act (AB
821, Nava, c. 570, Statutes of 2007) required the use of nonlead
centerfire rifle and pistol ammunition when hunting big game and
non-game species, such as coyote, in the California condor range
in order to help protect the condor from contaminated carrion.
The California Fish and Game Commission (FGC) adopted
regulations in December 2007 to implement this law which limits
the ammunition used for hunting big game and non-game species to
projectiles that have been certified to contain less than or
equal to 1% lead by weight. Lists of certified manufacturers of
non-toxic ammunition are available on-line. Lead projectiles are
still legal for hunting upland game species - for example,
1
quail, dove and pheasant - within the condor range.
PROPOSED LAW
This bill would:
(i) Make numerous legislative findings with regard to the
best management practices of wildlife management areas,
the value of wildlife management areas and hunting, and
the well-documented adverse impacts of lead shot on
various species of wildlife;
(ii) Ban the possession or use of shotgun shells loaded with
anything other than nontoxic shot when taking migratory
game birds, resident small game, or non-game species
under the authority of a hunting license within a
wildlife management area;
(iii) Establish a $500 fine for a
first offense and a $1,000 - $5,000 fine for each
subsequent offense; and
(iv) Take effect on July 1, 2011.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
According to the author, "Research continues to identify
additional threats posed by lead to wildlife even beyond the
wetland environments that precipitated the federal decision to
ban lead shot in 1991. Lead ingestion and poisoning from
ammunition sources has been documented in many avian predators
and scavengers, such as bald and golden eagles, red-tailed hawks
and others."
"Allowing the continued use of lead shot in our state wildlife
areas is inconsistent with best practices," according to the
sponsor. "It is virtually certain that hunters at our wildlife
areas have introduced lead into wetland environments in the
otherwise legal pursuit of upland species. This practice should
cease."
"AB 2223 will close the loophole in existing law which creates a
danger for birds and wildlife on state wildlife areas,"
according to the Humane Society of the United States. "There are
alternatives to lead shot widely used by hunters throughout the
nation."
Clean Water Action states that, "Lead is a potent neurotoxin
that affects both humans and wildlife. When it enters our
waterways, it can contaminate drinking water, resulting in the
need for costly treatment technologies."
2
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
The Department of Fish and Game argues that this bill side-steps
the regulatory process. The Fish and Game Commission will start
formal consideration of banning the use of lead shot in state
wildlife areas later this month. Additionally, DFG is concerned
that limiting the use of lead shot may result in less hunting
activity. DFG's argument is echoed by others, including the
National Rifle Association.
Further arguments repeatedly invoked by opponents of the measure
include that doves or other hunted species are not in danger of
a population collapse; that condors do not eat small game or gut
piles; that shot becomes widely spread out after firing; that
the lead burden in wildlife areas is small as wildlife areas are
large; and that nontoxic shot is expensive.
COMMENTS
Impacts of lead on wildlife goes beyond high-order predators and
scavengers : Research has shown through the years that wildlife -
including small animals and birds - can also suffer from lead
poisoning. Scientific research estimates that approximately two
million waterfowl died annually from lead poisoning due to the
ingestion of lead shot prior to the 1991 nationwide ban on its
use in waterfowl hunting. This ban reduced the number of
waterfowl dying from lead poisoning and also reduced lead
poisoning in their predators, including Bald Eagles and other
raptors. Lead poisoning has been observed in over 37 species of
birds in addition to waterfowl. For example, the mourning dove
suffers acute effects. Research has shown that changes induced
in mourning dove behavior within 24 hours of lead ingestion
result in increased mortality. Missouri, in fact, banned the use
of lead shot in state conservation areas three years ago upon
determining that 6.5% of mourning doves ate lead shot, thus
killing almost as many doves annually as hunters did. According
to the United States Geological Survey, lead shot concentrations
in frequently used upland hunting locations may be as high as
400,000 per acre. Twenty-five states have lead shot prohibitions
for hunting beyond those required nationally for waterfowl.
Given the effect of lead on small animals, birds, and throughout
the food chain, the committee may find that it is desirable to
require that only nontoxic shot be used in state wildlife areas.
The Fish and Game Commission recently declined to extend the
lead shot ban to additional species: In 2009, the FGC
3
considered, but ultimately denied, the following potential
expansions of the lead ammunition ban in the range of the
California condor in response to a court-issued settlement:
For the hunting of jackrabbits and other hares, several
kinds of rabbits and tree squirrels
The small animals described in the previous bullet point and
game birds- including varieties of doves, quail, grouse,
partridges, pheasant and wild turkeys.
The FGC elected to make no change in the regulations at their
August 2009 meeting. The Legislature is not limited by the
actions taken by the FGC. In the Ridley-Tree Condor
Preservation Act, the FGC was directed to issue appropriate
regulations to implement the lead ammunition ban.
Is the cost of the nontoxic ammunition prohibitive ? According to
Audobon, the approximate cost of a box of shells filled with
lead-based or suitable nontoxic shot is $7 - $11, and $12 - $17,
respectively. This increase is about 60%, or $5.50, on average.
The Amended Initial Statement of Reasons for Regulatory Action
(May 22, 2009) issued for the potential 2009 expansion described
previously considered the increased cost of the ammunition. The
FGC's statement indicated with respect to the cost of non-lead
ammunition that, "when viewed as part of the total cost of a
hunting trip however, (license, food, fuel, etc.) the additional
cost is not likely to be significant."
Are the state wildlife areas and the California condor range the
same ? Official state wildlife areas are located throughout the
entire state. The California condor range - as defined by the
Ridley-Tree Condor Preservation Act - is continuous and
approximately "U"-shaped. The "base" of the range is in northern
Los Angeles County. It extends northward from there both along
the coast into Santa Clara County and along the eastern side of
the Central Valley into Madera County.
SUPPORT
Action for Animals
Audobon California (sponsor)
California Coastal Coalition
Center for Biological Diversity
Clean Water Action of California
Defenders of Wildlife
Forests Forever
Green California
4
Sierra Club California
Natural Resources Defense Council
The Humane Society of the United States
Ventana Wildlife Society
OPPOSITION
California Association of Firearms Retailers
California Outdoor Heritage Alliance
California Rifle and Pistol Association
Department of Fish and Game
National Rifle Association of America
National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc.
Outdoor Sportsmen's Coalition of California
Safari Club International
The California Sportsman's Lobby, Inc.
one individual
5