BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  SB 1480
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   August 8, 2012

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                Felipe Fuentes, Chair

                    SB 1480 (Corbett) - As Amended:  July 5, 2012 

          Policy Committee:                             Water, Parks and 
          Wildlife     Vote:                            8-2

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program: 
          Yes    Reimbursable:              No

           SUMMARY  

          This bill licenses commercial trappers and regulates and 
          restricts certain trapping methods and practices. (Summary 
          continued below.)

           FISCAL EFFECT  

          1)One-time costs of approximately $125,000 to the Department of 
            Fish and Game (DFG) to establish a base fee for a class II 
            commercial trapping license and develop regulations ($100,000) 
            and modify the  automated licensing system ($25,000) (special 
            fund).

          2)Annual costs of approximately $330,000 to DFG for a warden to 
            monitor trapper activities ($200,000), for regional staff to 
            consult with property owners on bat issues ($90,000), and for 
            staff to administer sales, update website and coordinate with 
            regional staff  ($40,000) (special fund).

          3)Annual fee revenue of an unknown amount but presumably 
            sufficient to cover all DFG's one-time and ongoing costs that 
            result from implementation of this bill (special fund). 

            While fee revenue will eventually roughly cover all 
            implementation and administration costs, there will be a delay 
            in fee collection, during which time DFG will incur unfunded 
            costs.  This is because DFG must develop a proposed class II 
            fee amount and the Fish and Game Commission (FGC) must approve 
            the fee amount, before DFG many collect any class II fee.  It 
            is not clear DFG can cover these unfunded costs from other 
            departmental funds during the interim.  








                                                                  SB 1480
                                                                  Page  2


            In addition, DFG expresses concern that the class II 
            fee-paying universe may be too small to support the class II 
            fee, which DFG estimates will be $1,200 to $1,500, if a large 
            number of current commercial trapping operations cease 
            operation as a result of the fee.  

           SUMMARY (continued)
           
          Specifically, this bill:

          1)Establishes a class I trapping license, which, consistent with 
            the general trapping license authorized by existing law, 
            allows a licensee to take fur-bearing mammals and nongame 
            mammals and to sell the raw fur. 
          2)Establishes a class II trapping license, which authorizes a 
            licensee to provide trapping services to the public for 
            profit.
             
          3)Authorizes FGC to establish a base fee for a class II license 
            sufficient to cover all directly related administration, 
            implementation and enforcement costs incurred by DFG and FGC.

          4)Requires a class II licensee to provide each client with a 
            written contract of prescribed information, including the 
            trapper's license number and contact information; declaration 
            that state law only allows commercial trapping for damage to 
            crops and property and not for risks to health and safety, 
            identification of the animals or species targeted for 
            trapping; and other information. 

          5)Requires a class II licensees to make a reasonable effort to 
            avoid orphaning young animals, and prohibits such a licensee 
            from killing or setting traps for lactating females.

          6)Requires DFG to publish on its website a list of class II 
            licensees authorized to provide commercial trapping services 
            to the public.

          7)Prohibits:

             a)   Killing of any trapped animal by means of intentional 
               drowning, injection with a chemical not sold for the 
               purpose of euthanizing animals, or chest crushing, with 
               specified exceptions.








                                                                  SB 1480
                                                                  Page  3

             b)   Soliciting trapping business from the public under a 
               class II trapping license for any reason other than damage 
               to crops or property.
             c)   Trapping bats, except by use of nets or exclusion, as 
               specified.

          8)Requires DFG to assist property owners who contact the 
            department to report bats entering the interior of a 
            structure.

           COMMENTS  

          1)Rationale.   The author intends this bill to enact consumer 
            protections against unscrupulous commercial trapping practices 
            and to ban the most inhumane wildlife trapping practices.

           2)Background.   Existing law requires trappers of fur-bearing 
            mammals or nongame mammals for profit to be licensed by FGC, 
            with no distinction between fur trappers and those who trap 
            pests commercially.  A person or business may contract for 
            commercial trapping services to address only damage to crops 
            or other property.  Commercial trapping services may not be 
            engaged to address threats to human health and safety.  
            Rather, state law requires such threats be addressed by DFG, 
            local animal control officers of other authorized public 
            agents.  

           3)Support  .  This bill is supported by numerous animal welfare 
            groups, who assert that consumers have little protection from 
            unscrupulous commercial trappers who produce misleading 
            promotional materials and use cruel, indiscriminate trapping 
            methods.  These supporters contend it appropriate to license 
            and regulate commercial trappers, consistent with licensing 
            and regulation of many other commercial services.

           4)Opposition  .  This bill is opposed by The California Farm 
            Bureau Federation, certain hunting organizations and at least 
            two commercial trapping services, who are concerned that fee 
            and regulatory requirements are unnecessary and onerous.

           Analysis Prepared by  :    Jay Dickenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081 












                                                                  SB 1480
                                                                  Page  4