AB 815 – Wildlife Management by Wildlife Managers
I guess I’ve been really remiss here, because while I spent so much time going on about the Lead Ammo ban, I never really said anything about another Assembly Bill that could mean a lot to CA hunters.
Here’s a summary of the bill:
AB 815, Berryhill. Hunting or fishing: local regulation.
The California Constitution provides for the delegation to the Fish and Game Commission of powers relating to the protection and propagation of fish and game. Existing statutory law delegates to the commission the power to regulate the taking or possession of birds, mammals, fish, amphibia, and reptiles in accordance with prescribed laws. Under existing law, the Department of Fish and Game exercises various functions with regard to the taking of fish and game. Under existing law, a city or county exercises certain limited authority with regard to the regulation of fish and game for the protection of public health and safety.
This bill would provide that the state fully occupies the field of hunting and fishing. The bill would also provide that unless otherwise expressly authorized by the Fish and Game Code or other state or federal law, the commission and the department are the only entities that may adopt or promulgate regulations regarding the taking of fish and game on any lands or waters within the state. The bill would provide that local ordinances and regulations that regulate trapping are not subject to these provisions.
In lay terms, this means that the power to legislate matters related to wildlife management is restored completely in the hands of the CA Fish and Game Commission. Currently, the cities and counties can set their own laws that conflict with the F&G regulations (often under the guise of “public safety”). For example, Fish and Game often recommends antlerless deer hunts in certain zones to restore the buck-doe ratio, but cities and counties override that recommendation. Other areas that may be impacted by this new bill include the management of wild hogs, turkeys, and resident geese in some areas that were previously off-limits.
AB 815 seems to be doing OK without me, having passed both the State Senate and the Assembly, but it bears mention now. Why?
Hunters don’t seem to know much about this bill, but a recent visit to PETA and HSUS websites shows that these organizations are doing all they can to mobilize their membership against it. Now would be a REAL GOOD time to send out our support of this bill. Contact Governor Schwartzenegger and your state representatives to encourage the final passage of AB 815.
And while you’re at it, why not drop a note to Assembly Members Berryhill, Maze, Parra, Harman, and Hollingsworth for authoring and introducing this common sense piece of legislation.
That one got by me, too! I’m impressed they got it to pass Senate and Assembly. It sounds like a great idea, I’ll be sending in my support.
August 28th, 2008 at 10:59 am
By the way, here’s the contact information:
http://gov.ca.gov/interact#email
Or, you can call, write or fax:
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
State Capitol Building
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-445-2841
Fax: 916-558-3160 ( new number )
August 28th, 2008 at 11:01 am
I’ve been following this one for my day job; looks likely da guv will sign it…if the leg can get its act together and pass a budget.
August 28th, 2008 at 11:24 am
Hank, that’s good info.
I don’t think anyone thought it would get to his desk, but since it has, I wouldn’t be surprised if he signs it.
I did notice that one of the amendments excluded trapping from the provisions, though… a major management tool. One step at a time, though, I guess.
August 28th, 2008 at 12:41 pm
Come on California hunters-write and let them know you support this bill. The Fish and Game department should definitely have control over outdoor decisions that are made for the state, not local municipalities.
Michigan passed a similar bill a few years back, and it has worked in our favor when certain townships and such tried to ban bowhunting and our DNR CONSIDERED THE EVIDENCE and overruled them.
It is well worth the effort of contacting your reps in order to put the outdoor decisions of the state back into the right hands.
August 28th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
On the other hand though, does it worry any of you that this might “not” be a good thing that one single entity (which the antis have infiltrated quite successfully over the last two decades, “personal knowledge of this” ) that this single entity (D.F.G.) will then have complete control over all of our natural resources?
When this happens, then where will the balanced decision making come from?
I will be watching this unfold with much trepidation!…………..
fighting AB1634 for the past 2 years really has taught me a lot!
August 29th, 2008 at 3:24 am
Just because you’re paranoid, it doesn’t mean they’re NOT out to get you…
It’s a fair enough point, Michael, and your skepticism is well received, but no, I’m much less concerned that giving decisions regarding wildlife management, hunting, and fishing back to the F&G Commission than I was with having that power in the hands of the cities and counties.
Sure, there’s always the risk that antis could get a stronger foothold in the F&G Commission and in DFG, but that’s a only a risk. As sportsmen and voters, it is up to us to stay vigilant and vocal should that appear to happen, and for us to step up and take very real action to set it right, both in the State and Federal courts if necessary. But right now, while F&G has made some boneheaded and misguided decisions along the way, they are still providing hunting and fishing opportunities, and there is still the semblance of biological common sense to most of the laws and regulations.
It’s a simple fact that antis and emotion ALREADY hold strong sway over the city and county bureaucrats, and they influence everything from attempted bans on mourning dove hunts to nixing the doe management hunts recommended by the F&G biologists. They’ve blocked DFG and CWA from trying to manage small predators that prey on nesting waterfowl because there’s an uproar about killing those “cute foxes”, and they’ve shut down or attempted to shut down waterfowl hunting areas in several coastal towns (e.g. Marin and Napa counties). The fight to perform management hunts on the non-native species in the Marin Headlands (fallow deer among them) has cost us, the taxpaying, fee-paying sportsmen, a small fortune, with the result that DFG had to practically sneak in sharpshooters to do the work.
All of this is the case because the counties and cities have a say in wildlife management decisions, but that say is almost NEVER based on science. The F&G Commission and DFG have their warts, but as a whole we, as sportsmen, are a whole lot better off with the reins in their hands than in the hands of city councils and county assemblies.
August 29th, 2008 at 6:16 am
I agree with you, Phillip. The purpose of an appointed commission is to try to get some distance between effective management and the volatility of politics. Granted, there is some inherent conflict between this style of governance and democracy, but on the other hand there exists the potential tyranny of the majority, in this case the majority being non-hunters. I think the day-to-day or season-to-season management decisions are better served by the commission. Thank God for the requirement of legal transparency, now for some continued vigilance!
August 30th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Good strong points in favor of turning the powers of decision back into the hands of the professionals!
This is the way that it should be, sound management along with solid scientific support with no emotional, knee jerk reactions which only will serve special interests.
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:02 am