BILL ANALYSIS �
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 770|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 770
Author: Evans (D)
Amended: 5/31/11
Vote: 21
SENATE NATURAL RESOURCES & WATER COMM. : 9-0, 4/26/11
AYES: Pavley, La Malfa, Cannella, Evans, Fuller, Kehoe,
Padilla, Simitian, Wolk
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 9-0, 5/26/11
AYES: Kehoe, Walters, Alquist, Emmerson, Lieu, Pavley,
Price, Runner, Steinberg
SUBJECT : Marine protected areas: Native American tribes
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill requires the Department of Fish and
Game to consult with tribal governments on the development
of specified memorandums of understanding for tribal access
to fish and wildlife resources and the co-management of
fish and wildlife species under the Marine Life Protection
Act, as it relates to the north coast regional of
California.
ANALYSIS : The Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA)
requires the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) to develop
and implement marine protected areas using science-driven
ecosystem-based management as a way to preserve and enhance
fisheries and marine biological diversity. Several MLPAs
CONTINUED
SB 770
Page
2
have been developed or proposed, and one is now pending on
the north coast.
The MLPA presently does not have provisions pertaining to
Native American fishing rights.
This bill:
1. Authorizes Native American tribes to submit proposals
for comanagement of marine species within marine
protected areas that are designated or proposed to be
designated under the MLPA.
2. Requires comanagement proposals to include prescribed
information, and would require submission of the
proposals to the Secretary of the Natural Resources
Agency.
3. Authorizes the Secretary to request additional
information before determining that a proposal is
complete, and upon a determination that a proposal is
complete, would require the Director of DFG to consult
with the tribe to develop memoranda of understanding or
other agreements to, among other things, provide access
to the tribe for traditional hunting and gathering and
cultural activities.
4. States the following:
A. If multiple tribal governments or groups of tribal
governments submit proposals to the Secretary of the
Natural Resources Agency, the Secretary shall
prioritize the proposals for negotiation by the
extent to which a proposal includes multiple tribal
governments, the overall importance of the species
covered by the proposal to the implementation of this
chapter, and other criteria identified by the
Secretary.
B. By July 1, 2012, the Secretary shall forward the
first proposal for negotiation to the Director.
C. The Director shall enter into negotiations
pursuant to this section for only one memorandum of
CONTINUED
SB 770
Page
3
understanding or other agreement at a time.
D. Upon completion of an agreement or a determination
by the Secretary that negotiations have ceased, the
Secretary shall forward the next proposal in order of
priority to the Director for negotiation.
Background
Recognized Native American tribes retain certain fishing
rights through various mechanisms including treaties,
presidential executive orders, or congressional acts.
Defining with particularity those reserved rights is
extremely contentious and is often accomplished through the
allocation process undertaken by the Pacific Fishery
Management Council, a regional group established by federal
law. In addition, numerous court cases have made
determinations that effect tribal fishing rights.
The Klamath basin has seen more than its fair share of
acrimony, litigation, and social unrest over this issue
going back many decades. The issue of tribal fishing
rights is presently affecting the ongoing discussion of the
proposed north coast marine protected area proposal. Last
July, at Fort Bragg, several tribal representatives and
others (numbering nearly 300) protested the proposal.
The California Resources Agency is currently working with
tribal representatives and other stakeholders in a process
to resolve these issues. The North Coast Regional
Stakeholder Group for the proposed MLPA includes several
tribal representatives. There is general agreement that
the traditional, non-commercial tribal uses of the fishing
and marine resources of the north coast region should be
recognized and protected in MLPA regulations.
An example from another state, Washington, may be useful to
California. The Centennial Accord, adopted in 1989,
included 25 federally-recognized tribes and the State of
Washington in an agreement that included mutually
acceptable procedures for conducting negotiations on tribal
fishing rights on a government-to-government basis.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
CONTINUED
SB 770
Page
4
Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 Fund
Consultation/drafting of $850 $1,500
$1,500Special*
co-management agreements
* Fish and Game Preservation Fund
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office,
this bill could serve two possible purposes: (1) it may
assist the administration in its ongoing efforts to resolve
this issue administratively, which the author believes is
the preferable outcome, and (2) should the administration
effort get bogged down, the bill could become a legislative
solution.
CTW:mw 5/31/11 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: NONE RECEIVED
**** END ****
CONTINUED