BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  AB 2427
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   April 13, 2010

                   ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON WATER, PARKS AND WILDLIFE
                            Jared William Huffman, Chair
             AB 2427 (Bill Berryhill) - As Introduced:  February 19, 2010
           
          SUBJECT  :   Hunting

           SUMMARY  :   Prohibits the Fish and Game Commission (FGC) from  
          imposing an absolute prohibition on hunting or taking game.   
          Specifically,  this bill  :

          1)Provides that with regard to the existing statutory delegation  
            to the FGC of the power to regulate the taking or possession  
            of birds, mammals, fish, amphibians, and reptiles, no power is  
            delegated to the FGC to impose an absolute prohibition on  
            hunting or taking game.  Further provides that this does not  
            prohibit the FGC, in accordance with Section 20 of Article IV  
            of the California Constitution, from imposing conditions  
            necessary for the protection and propagation of game.

          2)Prohibits policies of the Department of Fish and Game (DFG)  
            from including an absolute prohibition on hunting or taking  
            game.

           EXISTING LAW  :

          1)The California Constitution, Article 10, Section 4, protects  
            the right of public access to navigable waters for public  
            purposes.  Court decisions have held that hunting is a  
            privilege incident to the right of navigation.

          2)Provides in the Fish and Game Code for the issuance of hunting  
            licenses granting the privilege to take birds and mammals.   
            Authorizes hunting licenses to be issued to any resident of  
            the state upon payment of a fee and completion of a hunter  
            education course.

          3)Establishes, seasons, locations, bag limits, and other  
            conditions for the hunting of game.

          4)The California Constitution, Article IV, Section 20,  
            authorizes the Legislature to provide for division of the  
            state into fish and game districts and to provide for  
            protection of fish and game by districts.  Creates the FGC and  








                                                                  AB 2427
                                                                  Page  2

            authorizes the Legislature to delegate to the FGC powers  
            related to the protection and propagation of fish and game as  
            the Legislature sees fit.  The Legislature has delegated to  
            the FGC the power to regulate the taking or possession of  
            birds, mammals, fish, amphibians and reptiles for recreational  
            purposes, including the setting of seasons, bag limits, and  
            conditions on the manner and means of taking.  The Legislature  
            has also enacted numerous statutes regulating hunting,  
            including, for example, requirements related to hunting  
            licenses and tags, methods of take, hunter safety and hunting  
            clubs.

          5)The California Constitution, Article 1, Section 25, protects  
            the right of the people of the state to fish on public lands  
            and waters, subject to the Legislature's authority to provide  
            for seasons and conditions for the take of different species  
            of fish.


           FISCAL EFFECT  :   Nonfiscal.

           COMMENTS  :   The author indicates that this bill is being  
          introduced for the purpose of protecting the balance between  
          outdoor sports and environmental protection by preventing the  
          FGC or DFG from imposing an absolute ban on hunting.   The  
          author believes that this bill does not compromise existing  
          regulations or effect existing gun laws, and asserts this bill  
          is necessary because there is currently no statute that  
          prohibits DFG or FGC from imposing an outright ban.  The author  
          also notes that hunting is a traditional recreational  
          opportunity that is part of California's heritage, is an  
          important wildlife management tool, and contributes to  
          sustainable wildlife populations and to California's economy,  
          and for these reasons it is important that hunting be preserved.

          The actual legal affect of the language in this bill is  
          uncertain for several reasons.  Specifically, it is unclear what  
          the term "absolute prohibition" as used in this bill means.    
          For instance, it could mean that the FGC is prohibited from  
          imposing a statewide prohibition on hunting, which would clearly  
          be an absolute prohibition because hunting would not be allowed  
          anywhere in the state.  Alternatively, it could mean that the  
          FGC is prohibited from imposing an absolute prohibition on  
          hunting in any specific area of the state.  This would mean that  
          the FGC could not prohibit hunting in, for example, wildlife  








                                                                  AB 2427
                                                                  Page  3

          sanctuaries, state parks, marine protected areas, or in other  
          areas protected by conservation easements where hunting may be  
          incompatible with the conservation objectives of the refuge or  
          conservation area.  Third, it could mean that the FGC would not  
          have authority to prohibit hunting of particular species, since  
          such a prohibition could be interpreted as an absolute  
          prohibition on hunting of that species.  Terms that are vague or  
          undefined may be subject to differing interpretations and  
          therefore lead to litigation.  

          The provision in subsection (c) of the bill, which states that  
          this bill does not prohibit the FGC from imposing conditions  
          necessary for the protection and propagation of game, may not  
          cure these problems for several reasons.  First, this clause  
          implies that the FGC could place conditions on but not prohibit  
          hunting to protect a game species, even if a prohibition was  
          necessary to protect the survivability of the species.  It is  
          conceivable that the population of a game species could fall so  
          low, perhaps due to loss of habitat or other factors, that  
          cessation of hunting may be necessary for the population to  
          recover, even if on only a temporary basis.  Secondly, this  
          clause would allow FGC to impose conditions necessary for  
          protection and propagation of game, but not for public health  
          and safety reasons, or for larger ecosystem sustainability  
          purposes.  With regard to the latter concern, it is conceivable  
          that restrictions may be needed on hunting of some species due  
          to their role in the larger ecosystem and not just for  
          protection and propagation of game.  Third, this exception  
          applies only to game species, leaving an ambiguity as to the  
          FGC's ability to regulate or prohibit hunting of non-game  
          species.

          Finally, the committee may wish to consider whether there is  
          actually an existing problem this bill seeks to cure, since  
          committee staff is unaware that there has ever been any proposal  
          by the FGC to place an absolute prohibition on hunting in this  
          state.  The FGC has adopted a number of policies to promote and  
          encourage hunting, and even has a standing committee, the Al  
          Tauscher Committee, to advise the FGC on hunting matters.  The  
          Al Tauscher Committee is described on the FGC website as "a  
          working group of constituent representatives selected by the  
          Fish and Game Commission to develop strategies to maintain  
          and/or enhance hunting and sport fishing opportunities in  
          California."









                                                                  AB 2427
                                                                  Page  4

           Related Legislation  :  The author of this bill also introduced  
          ACA 11, which, if approved by the voters, would create a  
          constitutional right to hunt and also prohibit the FGC or the  
          Legislature from placing an absolute prohibition on hunting.   
          ACA 11 was heard in this committee on April 13th and failed  
          passage.

           Arguments in Support  :  Supporters assert this bill is consistent  
          with the function of FGC to regulate hunting activities in a  
          manner that is consistent with good conservation and wildlife  
          management practices based on sound scientific principles.   
          While acknowledging that current and previous commission members  
          have generally operated according to these principles, they  
          believe passage of this bill would be prudent to assure that  
          future commission members will not act arbitrarily to completely  
          ban all hunting or any single form of hunting. 

           Arguments in Opposition  :  Opponents generally assert this bill  
          is unnecessary as the ability of the people to hunt and fish is  
          already protected, and the FGC's regulatory decisions are made  
          with public input.  They further assert this bill could handcuff  
          the FGC's ability to take actions necessary to protect and  
          sustain viable habitat and wildlife populations, and increase  
          litigation costs for the state as a result of lawsuits which may  
          be filed over whether a particular FGC or agency decision  
          amounts to an absolute ban under the bill, either temporary or  
          permanent.          

           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :   

           Support 
           
          California Rifle and Pistol Association (co-sponsor)
          National Rifle Association (co-sponsor)
          California Outdoor Heritage Alliance
          California Sportsman's Lobby
          Outdoor Sportsmen's Coalition of California
          Safari Club International

           Opposition 
           
          Humane Society
          Paw PAC
          Sierra Club California
           








                                                                 AB 2427
                                                                  Page  5

          Analysis Prepared by  :    Diane Colborn / W., P. & W. / (916)  
          319-2096