BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                       



           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                   SB 448|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                         |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                         |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                         |
          |327-4478                          |                         |
           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
           
                                         
                              UNFINISHED BUSINESS


          Bill No:  SB 448
          Author:   Pavley (D)
          Amended:  7/9/09
          Vote:     21

           
           SENATE NATURAL RES. & WATER COMMITTEE  :  10-0, 4/14/09
          AYES:  Pavley, Cogdill, Hollingsworth, Huff, Kehoe, Leno,  
            Padilla, Simitian, Wiggins, Wolk
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Benoit

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  12-0, 4/27/09
          AYES:  Kehoe, Cox, Corbett, Denham, DeSaulnier, Hancock,  
            Leno, Oropeza, Runner, Walters, Wolk, Yee
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Wyland

           SENATE FLOOR  :  35-0, 5/6/09 (Consent)
          AYES:  Alquist, Ashburn, Benoit, Calderon, Cogdill,  
            Corbett, Correa, Cox, Denham, Ducheny, Dutton, Florez,  
            Hancock, Harman, Hollingsworth, Huff, Kehoe, Leno, Liu,  
            Lowenthal, Maldonado, Negrete McLeod, Oropeza, Padilla,  
            Pavley, Romero, Simitian, Steinberg, Strickland, Walters,  
            Wiggins, Wolk, Wright, Wyland, Yee
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Aanestad, Cedillo, DeSaulnier, Runner,  
            Vacancy

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  77-0, 9/1/09 - See last page for vote


           SUBJECT  :    California State Safe Harbor Agreement Program  
          Act

           SOURCE  :     Defenders of Wildlife
                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 448
                                                                Page  
          2



           DIGEST  :    This bill authorizes the Department of Fish and  
          Game to enter into a safe harbor agreement with a landowner  
          for the protection of species that are listed as threatened  
          or endangered under the California Endangered Species Act.   
          Such an agreement will allow "taking" (killing) of these  
          species that is incidental to an otherwise lawful activity,  
          provided certain conditions are met that provide for the  
          protection of those species. 

           Assembly amendments  (1) add several provisions protecting  
          landowners from liability for injury as a result of  
          granting access as required by the bill, but provides the  
          bill does not limit liability for injury in the case of  
          willful or malicious failure to guard or warn of a  
          dangerous condition, (2) allow neighboring landowners who  
          own land that abuts property enrolled in a safe harbor  
          agreement to secure an incidental take permit without  
          undertaking the management activities set forth in the safe  
          harbor agreement if certain conditions are met, (3)  
          prohibit the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) from  
          releasing or disclosing proprietary information except  
          under specified circumstances, (4) require DFG to maintain  
          a list of qualified persons and organizations who have  
          worked with DFG on approved agreements and serving as  
          program administrators, and (5) add a January 1, 2020  
          sunset date.

           ANALYSIS  :    The state and federal endangered species acts  
          (ESA) generally provide a scientific basis for determining  
          the biological status of species that potentially face  
          extinction.  Although there are differences between the  
          federal and state acts, the overarching intent of both is  
          to regulate and impose mitigation activities on activities  
          that could contribute to the extirpation of species.  Under  
          the California ESA, species whose survival are imperiled  
          may be categorized as "endangered" or "threatened" or  
          "candidate" and once categorized, the "take" of those  
          species may be prohibited unless authorized by a permit  
          issued by the appropriate regulatory agency.  These permits  
          are called "incidental take" permits and authorize harm to  
          listed species that occurs "incidental" to other lawful  
          activities such as development, agriculture, and other  







                                                                SB 448
                                                                Page  
          3

          private and public sector activities. Mitigation  
          requirements are generally imposed on applicants for  
          incidental take permits.  In California, for species listed  
          under state law, that regulatory agency role belongs to  
          DFG. 

          The determination whether to list a species based on a  
          review of appropriate scientific data is assigned to the  
          Fish and Game Commission. 

          The California ESA regulates the take of listed species in  
          several provisions. 

          The Fish and Game Code also authorizes voluntary programs  
          that encourage private landowners to undertake conservation  
          efforts for wildlife.  One program focuses on wetlands, and  
          one on waterfowl.  A third, federally funded, focuses on  
          landowner incentives. 

          Unlike the regulations adopted pursuant to the federal ESA,  
          the California ESA and its regulations do not explicitly  
          authorize "safe harbor" agreements that embody voluntary  
          agreements between landowners and the DFG for the  
          conservation of protected species. 

          DFG has begun using a provision in Section 2086 of the Fish  
          and Game Code to design safe harbor agreements in limited  
          circumstances.  By its own terms, Section 2086 authorizes  
          "voluntary local programs" only for agricultural  
          landowners.  Also, any incidental take of protected species  
          must occur in the course of "routine and ongoing"  
          agricultural activities.  Such activities are defined in 14  
          CCR 786.1, a regulation adopted by DFG. 

          Section 2087 exempts the "accidental take" of listed  
          species resulting from acts that occur while farming or  
          ranching; but such take must also occur in the context of  
          "otherwise lawful and routine and ongoing agricultural  
          activities." 
          
          This bill:

          1. Authorizes DFG to authorize acts that would otherwise be  
             prohibited as illegal takings under the CESA through a  







                                                                SB 448
                                                                Page  
          4

             safe harbor agreement if the following conditions are  
             met: 

             A.    DFG receives an application containing specified  
                information.

             B.    The take is incidental to an otherwise lawful  
                activity.

             C.    DFG finds that the agreement is reasonably  
                expected to provide a "net conservation benefit" to  
                the species listed.

             D.    The take will not jeopardize the existence of the  
                species.

             E.    The landowner agrees to avoid or minimize any  
                incidental take, including returning to baseline.

             F.    DFG establishes or approves a monitoring program,  
                as specified.

             G.    DFG determines sufficient funding is ensured to  
                determine baseline conditions, and there is  
                sufficient funding for the landowner to carry out  
                management and monitoring for the duration of the  
                agreement.

             H.    The agreement is not in conflict with any existing  
                conservation or recovery programs for the species  
                covered. 

          2. Requires that the application submitted by the landowner  
             include detailed information, as specified, including a  
             detailed map, the list of species for which take  
             authorization is requested, and detailed descriptions of  
             the landowner's land and water management practices that  
             affect the habitat of the covered species, proposed  
             management and monitoring, the proposed duration of the  
             agreement, and other information required by DFG. 

          3. Allows for a property enrolled in an agreement to be  
             altered or modified if the agreement is being properly  
             implemented and the alteration returns the species to  







                                                                SB 448
                                                                Page  
          5

             baseline conditions. 

          4. Requires the landowner, subject to certain exceptions,  
             to notify DFG at least 60 days in advance of any  
             expected incidental take, of a plan by the landowner to  
             return to baseline at the end of the agreement, or of  
             any plan to transfer the landowner's interest. 

          5. Requires the landowner to provide DFG with access to  
             remove or salvage the species, to develop the agreement,  
             to determine baseline conditions, and to monitor  
             management.  Requires DFG to provide notice to the  
             landowner at least seven days prior to accessing the  
             land or water, and allows the landowner to object to the  
             specific person selected by DFG to access the property,  
             subject to specified conditions.  The 60- day notice  
             required before take occurs is tolled if the owner  
             objects to the person selected to access the property. 

          6. Contains several provisions protecting landowners from  
             liability for injury as a result of granting access as  
             required by this bill.  Specifically, provides that this  
             bill does not create a duty of care or a ground of  
             liability for injury to person or property, that the  
             landowner is not required to maintain property in a safe  
             condition for DFG to access or to provide a warning to  
             DFG of hazardous conditions, and that the landowner  
             shall not be liable for injury and does not owe a duty  
             of care to DFG.  Provides that allowing access as  
             required by this bill shall not be construed as an  
             assurance the land or water is safe, or as an assumption  
             of responsibility or liability for injury to the person  
             granted access. 

          7. Provides that this bill does not limit liability for  
             injury in the case of willful or malicious failure to  
             guard or warn of a dangerous condition, or in the case  
             of an express invitation beyond the access required to  
             be provided by this bill. 

          8. Allows an agreement to be amended by mutual consent. 

          9. Allows for incidental take under a federal safe harbor  
             agreement if certain procedures are followed. 







                                                                SB 448
                                                                Page  
          6


          10.Authorizes DFG to promulgate regulations to implement  
             this bill, and to adopt nonregulatory guidelines to  
             clarify use of this bill with regard to voluntary  
             agricultural activities and natural community  
             conservation plans. 

          11.Defines various terms for purposes of this bill, and  
             states legislative findings regarding the importance of  
             habitat and conservation efforts to recovery of  
             endangered species, a significant portion of which are  
             on private lands.  States that the purpose of this bill  
             is to establish a program that will encourage landowners  
             to voluntarily manage their lands to benefit endangered  
             or threatened species without additional regulatory  
             restrictions. 

          12.States that this bill does not relieve landowners of any  
             legal obligation with respect to endangered, threatened  
             or candidate species existing on their land, and that  
             the program is designed to increase species populations,  
             create new habitats, and enhance existing habitats.   
             Further states that although the safe harbor agreements  
             may be temporary they shall not reduce the existing  
             number of species present at the time the baseline is  
             established. 

          13.Allows neighboring landowners who own land that abuts  
             property enrolled in a safe harbor agreement to secure  
             an incidental take permit without undertaking the  
             management activities set forth in the safe harbor  
             agreement if certain conditions are met. 

          14.Prohibits DFG from releasing or disclosing proprietary  
             information except under specified circumstances,  
             including for enforcement, to provide technical or  
             financial assistance, if the owner has given consent, or  
             in statistical or aggregate form without identifying  
             information. 

          15.Requires DFG to maintain a list of qualified persons and  
             organizations who have worked with DFG on approved  
             agreements and serving as program administrators. 








                                                                SB 448
                                                                Page  
          7

          16.Contains a sunset clause providing that this bill shall  
             be repealed on January 1, 2020. 

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  Yes    
          Local:  No

          According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

                          Fiscal Impact (in thousands)

           Major Provisions      2009-10     2010-11    2011-12        Fund  

          Developing agreements         Unknown, probably less than  
          $100 per year                 Special*

          * Fish and Game Preservation Fund

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  9/2/09)

          Defenders of Wildlife (source)
          Audubon California
          California Outdoor Heritage Alliance
          Nature Conservancy


           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    According to the author's office  
          and the bill's sponsor, it is important to create an  
          explicit authorization for a safe harbor program under  
          state law.  While federal agencies are actively engaged in  
          working with landowners in California to create safe harbor  
          agreements for federally listed species, landowners and DFG  
          are handicapped by the silence of state law on this matter.  
           The author's office believes that landowners would benefit  
          from the ability to work simultaneously with state and  
          federal wildlife agencies on safe harbor agreements for  
          species that may be listed under both statutes. 

          The author's office and bill's sponsor agree that Section  
          2086 provides limited authority to DFG to create "safe  
          harbor" provisions.  However, legislation is clearly needed  
          not only to provide certainty to landowners that DFG is  
          acting with complete authority, but also to establish a  
          conservation benchmark ("net conservation benefit") that is  
          not mentioned in Section 2086. 







                                                                SB 448
                                                                Page  
          8



           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  : 
          AYES:  Adams, Ammiano, Anderson, Arambula, Beall, Bill  
            Berryhill, Tom Berryhill, Blakeslee, Block, Blumenfield,  
            Brownley, Caballero, Charles Calderon, Carter, Chesbro,  
            Conway, Cook, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De Leon, DeVore,  
            Emmerson, Eng, Evans, Feuer, Fletcher, Fong, Fuentes,  
            Fuller, Furutani, Gaines, Galgiani, Garrick, Gilmore,  
            Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill, Huber,  
            Huffman, Jeffries, Jones, Knight, Krekorian, Lieu, Logue,  
            Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Miller, Monning, Nava,  
            Nestande, Niello, Nielsen, John A. Perez, V. Manuel  
            Perez, Portantino, Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Silva,  
            Skinner, Smyth, Solorio, Audra Strickland, Swanson,  
            Torlakson, Torres, Torrico, Tran, Villines, Yamada, Bass
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Buchanan, Duvall, Vacancy


          JJA:mw  9/2/09   Senate Floor Analyses 

                         SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                ****  END  ****