BILL ANALYSIS
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER |
| Senator Fran Pavley, Chair |
| 2009-2010 Regular Session |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BILL NO: SB 589 HEARING DATE: April 28, 2009
AUTHOR: Harman URGENCY: No
VERSION: April 21, 2009 CONSULTANT: Bill Craven
DUAL REFERRAL: No FISCAL: Yes
SUBJECT: Game hunting.
BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
Existing law in the Fish and Game Code and in regulations of the
California Fish and Game Commission (CFGC) establish hunting
seasons, bag limits, and other statutory qualifications and
restrictions for the hunting of game in California. Additional
provisions are specific to various species. For example,
existing provisions explicitly provide for a licensed hunter to
supplement his or her license with "tags" that allow the lawful
take various species, including deer, elk, bear, wild pigs,
antelope, bighorn sheep, and upland game birds.
Existing law establishes the regulatory powers of the CFGC
including the power to regulate the taking or possession of
wildlife. The Commission is also responsible for establishing
general policies for the conduct of the department.
Existing law requires the Director of the department (DFG) and
the Secretary for Resources to annually report on the fund
condition of the department's various accounts that comprise the
Fish and Game Preservation Fund as part of the annual budget
process. This was a provision of SB 1535 (Kuehl) that
implemented a recommendation of the LAO which was concerned
about the accounting practices of DFG. In 2004, a state audit
noted accounting issues with various dedicated accounts within
the Fish and Game Preservation Fund hat have been addressed to a
certain extent both with remedial legislation and internally
within the department.
Existing law provides for the continuous appropriation of 54% of
the funds generated by the sale of deer tags for the
1
implementation of deer herd management funds.
More than $9 million is generated through the sale of hunting
licenses, and specialized tags generate another $2 million. Bear
tags generate $775,000. Elk tags generate about $100,000
annually, antelope about $10,000, and bighorn sheep about
$5,000.
PROPOSED LAW
This bill would establish a new, consolidated "big game
management account" in the Fish and Game Preservation Fund.
Proceeds of specialized tags to authorize the hunting of
antelope, elk, deer, wild pig, bear, and bighorn sheep would be
deposited. The funds would be available upon appropriation for
projects that would benefit these species and expand public
hunting opportunities as well as land acquisition, enforcement,
and the department's reasonable costs. An advisory committee
would be appointed to review expenditures. Grants to nonprofits
that are consistent with the purposes of this account would be
authorized. The continuous appropriation for deer tags would be
eliminated.
The existing upland game bird account would be amended to
provide for an advisory committee to provide oversight of the
funds recommended for expenditure. Presently, this function is
performed by a subcommittee of the CFGC. Funds could also be
awarded to reimburse nonprofit groups that develop habitat
projects.
The bill also provides that lands purchased by the state with
hunting license revenues shall be open to the public for hunting
and other activities that require only minimal facilities.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
According to the author, this bill will continue recent efforts
to ensure that revenues from the sale of hunting licenses and
tags are used for habitat improvements and conservation
activities for the named species: deer, antelope, wild pigs,
bear, bighorn sheep, elk, and upland game birds.
By combining several dedicated accounts in the Fish and Game
Preservation Fund into a single Big Game Management Account, the
author and sponsors are attempting to allow more flexibility in
DFG for expenditures consistent with improving hunting for the
named species. By allowing nonprofit groups to provide comments
to the department for the expenditure of these funds, the author
is hoping to improve transparency of how the funds are spent and
2
to provide more public support for the proposed expenditures.
The California Council of Land Trusts supports the provisions
that will direct funding to habitat restoration and nonprofits
that work with DFG to improve habitat.
The Mule Deer Foundation supports the provisions that direct
license tag monies to game species conservation and that
establishes a role for sportsmen's groups to review and comment
on proposed expenditures.
The California Chapter Foundation for North American Wild Sheep
believes that the consolidation of the existing fiscal accounts
for big game species into a single account will improve
efficiencies at DFG and helps ensure that there will be adequate
funds available for various projects.
The California Outdoor Heritage Alliance, as sponsor, points out
that this bill is a continuation of the effort to restore
transparency and accountability to the DFG budget. It observes
that DFG has in the past not used tag revenues to benefit the
species for which the tags were sold.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
Born Free USA objects to the bill because it would fund projects
related to hunting and habitat improvements for that purpose.
SUPPORT
California Outdoor Heritage Alliance (Sponsor)
California Council of Land Trusts
California Deer Association
The Mule Deer Foundation
California Chapter Foundation for North American Wild Sheep
Lower Sherman Island Duck Hunters Association
OPPOSITION
Born Free USA
3