BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 1249
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 26, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON WATER, PARKS AND WILDLIFE
Jared Huffman, Chair
SB 1249 (Wolk) - As Amended: May 29, 2012
SENATE VOTE : 27-7
SUBJECT : Department of Fish and Game: lands: expenditures
SUMMARY : Authorizes the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) to
enter into agreements with nonprofit conservation groups for the
management and operation of DFG managed lands. Specifically,
this bill :
1)Authorizes DFG to enter into agreements for the management and
operation of department-managed lands with nonprofit
conservation groups or resource conservation districts.
2)Defines department-managed lands for these purposes to include
lands or lands and water acquired for public shooting grounds,
state marine (estuarine) recreational management areas,
ecological reserves, and wildlife management areas.
3)Requires that such agreements be consistent with approved
management plans and the purpose for which the lands were
acquired and managed by DFG, and requires that any changes to
the management plan be subject to public review and comment.
4)Reaffirms existing law providing that multiple recreational
use of department-managed lands is desirable and shall be
encouraged by the Fish and Game Commission (FGC). Provides
that except for hunting and fishing only minimal facilities to
permit other forms of multiple recreational uses, such as
camping, picnicking, boating, or swimming shall be provided.
States that hunting, fishing, wildlife viewing, wildlife
photography, conservation education, and fish and wildlife
research are the priority uses compatible with
department-managed lands. Provides that other public uses may
be authorized by FGC by regulation and may be subject to a
special use permit. Further provides that fees for any use
privileges may be set by the FGC and collected by DFG, and
that the FGC may continue to allow free access to a
department-managed land if it finds that the best interests of
that area would be served by not fixing a fee for use
SB 1249
Page 2
privileges.
5)Requires, commencing January 1, 2015, the purchase of an entry
permit to access all department-managed lands for uses other
than hunting or fishing. Provides that the entry permit shall
be purchased through DFG's Automated License Data System
(ALDS) or other means as determined by DFG. Requires that the
user have the permit in their immediate possession while on
department-managed lands. Makes failure to obtain an entry
permit an infraction. Persons with a valid hunting license,
sport fishing license or trapping license would be exempt from
the entry permit requirement.
6)Requires that moneys generated from the use fees or entry
permits shall be deposited in the Native Species Conservation
and Enhancement Account within the Fish and Game Preservation
Fund and available upon appropriation to DFG for management
and operation of its lands. If the source of the fee revenue
collected can be identified, no less than 35% of the funds
generated shall go to the lands from which the fee revenue was
collected.
7)Requires that proposed expenditures from a county fish and
wildlife propagation fund shall be reviewed first at a meeting
of the county board of supervisors or county fish and game
commission to ensure compliance with existing law requiring
expenditures from propagation funds to be used for specified
purposes related to fish and wildlife conservation.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Requires DFG to manage and operate lands and waters acquired
for public shooting grounds, state marine recreational
management areas, or wildlife management areas.
2)Requires DFG to operate its lands on a nonprofit basis and to
accommodate multiple uses, including hunting and fishing.
3)Authorizes the FGC to charge fees for any use privilege at
these lands and allows DFG to issue annual or per-day wildlife
area passes for DFG managed lands. Annual passes are $10. Day
passes are $2. Persons with valid hunting, trapping, or
fishing licenses are exempt as are school group tours and
persons under 16 years of age.
SB 1249
Page 3
4)Many fines and forfeitures established in the Fish and Game
Code are divided between the state and the county where the
fine was collected. Fish and Game fines paid to the counties
are required to be deposited in a county fish and wildlife
propagation fund and expended for the protection,
conservation, propagation and preservation of fish and
wildlife.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee:
1)One-time costs of $200,000 to $300,000 from the Fish and Game
Preservation Account (special fund) for the FGC to evaluate
all department-managed lands for appropriate entrance fees.
2)Unknown, but potentially tens of thousands of dollars, from
the Fish and Game Preservation Account (special fund) for the
collection and enforcement of entrance fees. These costs may
be fully offset by unknown fee revenues, but potentially up to
$7.5 million dollars.
3)Unknown, but likely minor and absorbable costs from the Fish
and Game Preservation Account for reimbursement of board of
supervisor meetings required to review proposed expenditures
of penalty revenues.
COMMENTS : The author has introduced this bill to improve DFG's
ability to manage its more than one million acres of lands,
including wildlife management areas, under its jurisdiction.
This bill would accomplish this in three ways: 1) by requiring
all users of DFG lands to pay a fee to access these lands; 2) by
authorizing DFG to enter into agreements with nonprofit wildlife
conservation groups and resource conservation districts to
assist with management and operation of DFG lands; and 3) by
clarifying priority, compatible uses for DFG lands.
DFG manages over one million acres of fish and wildlife habitat
throughout the state. Currently, hunters and fishers pay
license, tag and stamp fees that contribute to the costs of
managing department lands. However, other recreational users
are currently only required to purchase a pass to access seven
wildlife management areas and ecological reserves but can access
most department-managed lands that are open to public access for
free. Hunters and fishermen also contribute to wildlife habitat
conservation through payment of federal taxes on hunting and
SB 1249
Page 4
fishing equipment.
The need for the costs of wildlife habitat management to be born
more broadly by all recreational users of DFG lands was raised
and discussed in the stakeholder advisory group for the DFG
Strategic Vision process without opposition. While it may be
appropriate that consumptive users like hunters and fishers pay
a higher proportional cost, the concept that all users should
contribute toward the costs of habitat management appears to be
broadly accepted.
The author's office also notes that the six activities sited in
this bill as priority compatible uses for department-managed
lands - hunting, fishing, wildlife viewing, wildlife
photography, conservation education and research - are also the
six priority public uses identified in federal law for the
National Wildlife Refuge System.
Arguments in Support : Supporters note this bill will enhance
operation, maintenance and funding of DFG managed lands; provide
consistency between public use regulations on state and federal
wildlife refuges; help prevent public uses incompatible with
wildlife conservation objectives on DFG lands; authorize
cooperative agreements to assist in DFG lands management;
provide additional funding for land management in a manner
accessible and convenient to the public; and ensure greater
accountability in expenditure of county fish and wildlife
propagation funds.
Suggested Amendments : Committee staff suggests three clarifying
amendments as follows:
While online access to purchase an entry permit is a preferred
option for some users, online access is not necessarily an
accessible and convenient option for all persons, particularly
if that is the only option available. Visitors to state and
federal wildlife refuges may not know in advance that they need
to have purchased an entry permit online before they can access
a wildlife refuge, particularly if they are following signs on a
highway directing motorists to an area for wildlife viewing.
Committee staff suggests the following amendment be added on
page 4, after line 29:
"Where, in the determination of the department, it is feasible
and cost effective, the department shall make entry permits
SB 1249
Page 5
available for purchase onsite, and shall also modify its online
processes for purchase of entry permits to make these systems
compatible for nonconsumptive users. As used in this section,
"nonconsumptive uses" means compatible uses other than hunting
and fishing."
Committee staff also suggests an amendment to clarify that
subdivision (e)(2) applies to the entire section, including the
entry passes required by subdivision (f). This would clarify
that the commission or department may continue to allow free
access to a department-managed land without purchase of an entry
permit if the commission finds that the best interests of that
area would be served by not charging the fee. This can be
accomplished by moving subdivision (e)(2) to a new (h) and
clarifying that it applies to the department and the commission.
Finally, subdivision (B) on page 3 refers to management plans
approved pursuant to Section 1764, but Section 1764 is not the
only place in the code where management plans are referenced.
Committee staff suggests that subdivision (B) therefore be
reworded to read as follow:
"(B) The contracts or other agreements authorized pursuant to
this paragraph shall adher to the goals and objectives included
in an approved management plan approved pursuant to Section 1764
and shall be consistent with the purpose for which the lands
were acquired and managed by the department. Any changes to the
management plan shall be subject to public review and comment."
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support Opposition
California Waterfowl Association Paw Pac
California Outdoor Heritage AlliancePublic Interest Coalition
Analysis Prepared by : Diane Colbor*n / W., P. & W. / (916)
319-2096