BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 904|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 904
Author: Hollingsworth (R)
Amended: 4/6/10
Vote: 21
SENATE NATURAL RES. & WATER COMMITTEE : 9-0, 3/23/10
AYES: Pavley, Cogdill, Hollingsworth, Huff, Kehoe,
Lowenthal, Padilla, Simitian, Wolk
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 9-0, 4/26/10
AYES: Kehoe, Cox, Alquist, Corbett, Denham, Leno, Price,
Wolk, Yee
NO VOTE RECORDED: Walters, Wyland
SUBJECT : Hunting: commercial hunting clubs
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill eliminates the classification and
license of $2000 for 11 more hunting clubs and properties,
and increases new classification for all clubs that operate
six or more properties and establish a fee for this
classification of $1000. This bill also prohibits the
application of Section 713 of the Fish and Game Code, a
provision that applies an annual inflation adjustment to
many fees at the Department of Fish and Game.
ANALYSIS :
Existing law
CONTINUED
SB 904
Page
2
1.Provides that a person in possession or control of
property on or with respect to which a fee for the
privilege of taking birds or mammals is imposed or
collected, or on or with respect to which a fee for any
type of entry or use permit that includes the privilege
of taking birds or mammals on the property is imposed or
collected, is maintaining a commercial hunting club if
birds or mammals are taken on the property, and requires
a person to procure a "commercial hunting club license"
from the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) before birds
or mammals are taken.
2.Authorizes the DFG to issue a license to any person upon
submission of a completed application and payment of a
fee, in accordance with a fee schedule based on the
number of properties used by the club, including a $1,000
fee for six to ten, inclusive, properties and a $2,000
fee for 11 or more properties.
This bill eliminates the classification and license of
$2000 for 11 more hunting clubs and properties, and
increases new classification for all clubs that operate six
or more properties and establish a fee for this
classification of $1000. This bill also prohibits the
application of Section 713 of the Fish and Game Code, a
provision that applies an annual inflation adjustment to
many fees at the Department of Fish and Game.
Background
Historically, the fee for commercial hunting club licenses
was $165 annually. SB 1200 (Hollingsworth), Chapter 394,
Statutes of 2006 authorized landowners who established
commercial hunting clubs on multiple parcels to submit one
application for the aggregated properties, although a
separate fee would be assessed for each club. (It should
be noted that Senator Hollingsworth objected to the
provision about separate fees that was added in the
Assembly.) That bill also exempted from the fee those
landowners who lease their lands to a club but who do not
participate in the club's operation.
AB 1423 (Berryhill, Tom), Chapter 394, Statutes of 2009
SB 904
Page
3
substantially revised the commercial hunting club license
fees by establishing a graduated license fee based on the
number of properties used by the club. The fee schedule
requires payment of $200 for one property, $500 for two to
five properties, $1,000 for six to ten properties, and
$2,000 for 11 or more properties. AB 1423 defined property
for these purposes as a number of contiguous parcels held
by an owner or combination of owners and held out for a
common purpose. AB 1423 added exceptions to the
commercial hunting club license, including exemptions for
lands enrolled in conservation programs, and clubs at
which entrance fees are less than $200 per person and whose
total receipts are less than $2,000 per year.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee analysis,
because the new tiered fee structure has not been in effect
for a full year, the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) does
not have data on the number of licensed commercial hunting
clubs that fall into each of the fee tiers. DFG estimates
that the number of licensed clubs in the top tier (eleven
or more properties) is likely between 10 and 20 statewide.
By reducing the fee for these clubs, the bill will reduce
fee revenues from $10,000 to $20,000 per year.
In addition to the licensed commercial hunting clubs in the
state, there are a large number of hunting clubs that do
not comply with the state's licensing requirements. In
2009, there were 73 licensed clubs, whereas the Department
estimates that there are as many as 1,000 commercial
hunting clubs in the state.
By reducing the top tier fee, this bill will also
potentially reduce fees paid by unlicensed commercial
hunting clubs, should DFG increase its enforcement efforts
to improve compliance with the law. The extent of this
impact is very uncertain, given that the total number of
clubs is not known, nor is the proportion of those
unlicensed clubs that would be subject to the top tier fee.
Assuming that there are about 1,000 clubs in the state and
that the top tier clubs make up 15 percent to 30 percent of
the total number of clubs, potential revenue losses could
SB 904
Page
4
be between $125,000 and $250,000 per year. However, the
proposed reduction in fees could potentially encourage some
unlicensed club operators to apply for a license,
offsetting revenue losses. The extent of this offsetting
revenue impact is unknown.
SUPPORT : (Verified 4/27/10)
California Outdoor Heritage Alliance
California Rifle and Pistol Association
California Sportsmen's Lobby
Mutual Rifle Association
Outdoor Sportsmen's Coalition of California
Safari Club International
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : The California Outdoor Heritage
Alliance (COHA), a coalition of hunting and fishing
organizations, is in support. It states that SB 1200
created an unintended consequence by subjecting several
hunting clubs to fees amounting to several thousand
dollars. COHA also contends that the reduction in the
maximum fee is "in line with" DFG enforcement costs.
CTW:DLW:do 4/27/10 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****