BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2376
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 28, 2010
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 2376 (Huffman) - As Amended: April 5, 2010
Policy Committee: Water, Parks and
Wildlife Vote: 9-2
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill requires the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency
to convene a committee to develop a strategic vision for the
Department of Fish and Game (DFG) and the Fish and Game
Commission (FGC). Specifically, this bill:
1)Directs the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency to
convene a committee to develop and submit to the Legislature,
by July 1, 2012, a strategic vision for DFG and FGC.
2)Specifies that the committee shall include the Secretary, the
director of DFG, the president of the FGC, the chair of the
California Energy Commission, a representative of the
University of California, and representatives of the US Fish
and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries
Service.
3)Requires that the strategic vision address specified matters
relating to fish and game management, including biodiversity
and ecosystem management; permitting and regulation;
recreation and commercial harvest; scientific capacity;
relations with the public, landowners, nonprofits and other
land management agencies; use of technology and data systems;
clarification of the roles of DFG and FGC; and funding options
to reduce DFG's dependence on the General Fund.
4)Requires the committee to seek funding from non-state entities
to minimize the use of General Fund moneys for purposes of
implementing this bill.
FISCAL EFFECT
AB 2376
Page 2
One-time costs in 2011-12 of an unknown amount, the equivalent
of at least three positions, but likely in the range of several
hundred thousand dollars, to convene the committee called for by
this bill (General Fund, special fund or private funds).
COMMENTS
1)Rationale . The author notes numerous studies released over
the past several years calling for reform at DFG. Spurred, in
part, by those studies, the Assembly Committee on Water, Parks
and Wildlife, which the author chairs, recently held an
oversight hearing on DFG, its responsibilities and operations,
and ongoing and new challenges the department will face in the
coming century. The author intends this bill as a follow up
on the issues and recommendations presented during the
hearing.
2)Background . The Department of Fish and Game promotes and
regulates hunting and fishing for game species and promotes
resource protection for all California native plants, fish,
and wildlife. The Fish and Game Commission sets policies to
guide the department in its activities. The department
currently manages about one million acres including ecological
reserves, wildlife management areas, hatcheries, and public
access throughout the state.
The Fish and Game Preservation Fund (FGPF) provides the
largest source of ongoing support for the department's
activities. The FGPF receives revenues from hunting and
fishing licenses and taxes, commercial fishing permits and
fees, and environmental review fees paid by project
proponents. The FGPF is divided into a "nondedicated"
account-for which revenues can be spent on a variety of
department-funded activities-and 27 "dedicated accounts"-for
which revenues can only be spent on specified activities.
Many of the fund's revenue sources show a long-term decline,
largely due to declining participation in hunting and fishing
activities in the state. In addition, over time the
department's mandated activities have increased.
In recent years, there have been several reports recommending
reforms of DFG, including reports by the Legislative Analyst's
Office, The Little Hoover Commission, and the State Auditor.
These reports, among other findings, identified ongoing fiscal
AB 2376
Page 3
mismanagement at the department, particularly in its
management of the FGPF and its subaccounts.
3)Related Legislation . Chapter 689, Statutes of 2005 (AB 7,
Cogdill) addressed DFG's shifting of funds by requiring
one-third of the fees derived from sport fishing licenses be
deposited into the newly created Hatchery and Inland Fisheries
Fund. Prior to AB 7, all fees derived from sport fishing
licenses were deposited in the nondedicated account of the
FGPF and used to support all game programs, including hatchery
activities.
4)Support. This bill is supported by several conservation and
outdoor sporting groups, who advocate a stakeholder-driven
reform of DFG's mission and management.
5)Opposition . Opponents, represented by the Northern California
Water Association, express support for the goal of
establishing a strategic vision for DFG but also express
concern that, because the bill does not identify a funding
source, the costs of the commission will be borne by water
users via higher fees.
Analysis Prepared by : Jay Dickenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081