BILL ANALYSIS
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
448 (Pavley)
Hearing Date: 4/27/2009 Amended: As introduced
Consultant: Brendan McCarthy Policy Vote: NR&W, 10-0
Page 2
SB 448 (Pavley)
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY:
SB 448 would create a safe harbor program, under which
landowners could voluntarily enroll in a program to protect
endangered species on their property. The landowner would agree
to provide a net conservation benefit to endangered species over
the lifetime of the agreement. In return, the landowner would be
allowed flexibility in the management of his or her lands,
including the authority for the incidental "take" of endangered
species.
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Fund
Developing agreements Unknown, probably less than $100 per
yearSpecial *
* Fish and Game Preservation Fund
_________________________________________________________________
____
STAFF COMMENTS:
Under the California Endangered Species Act, certain species are
listed as endangered, threatened, or candidates for protected by
the law. The "take" of those listed species is prohibited
without an incidental take permit, which typically includes
stringent mitigation requirements. There is a similar federal
Endangered Species Act.
SB 448 would create a safe harbor agreement program for
landowners in the state. If a landowner decided to voluntarily
enroll in the program, he or she would agree to provide a "net
conservation benefit" to listed species on his or her lands. In
addition, the landowner would agree to return the land to the
baseline conditions present at the beginning of the agreement.
In return, the landowner would be allowed a greater level of
flexibility in the management of his or her lands. The landowner
would also be granted authority for any incidental take of
listed species that would occur due to land management
activities allowed under the agreement. Finally, the landowner
would be given assurances that additional regulatory
requirements would not be imposed to protect listed species.
Page 2
SB 448 (Pavley)
This bill would create a program similar to an existing safe
harbor agreement program allowed under the federal Endangered
Species Act.
Staff notes that this is a new program in state government and
the costs are unknown. However, the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service has a similar program. Over the last ten years,
they have implemented about 15 of these agreements, with
relatively small staff costs.
Staff notes that the department does not currently charge a fee
for incidental take permits under the California Endangered
Species Act. This bill does not include authority for the
department to collect fees to offset additional costs. The
author states that the intent of the bill is to encourage a more
cooperative approach to species protection through this
voluntary program. Thus charging landowners a fee may discourage
participation in the program.