California Assembly Bill AB521

California 2017-2018 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/13/17
• Refer: 2/27/17
• Report Pass: 3/28/17
• Refer: 3/29/17
• Report Pass: 4/4/17
• Refer: 4/4/17
• Report Pass: 4/24/17
• Refer: 4/25/17
• Report Pass: 5/10/17
• Engrossed: 5/31/17
• Refer: 6/1/17
• Refer: 6/14/17
• Report Pass: 6/26/17
• Refer: 6/26/17

Caption

Hunting: elk tags: apprentice elk hunt tags: fees for residents.

Impact

The amendments proposed in AB 521 would have both economic and ecological implications for the state. The reduction in the elk tag fee is expected to increase participation in elk hunting, potentially benefiting local economies. However, since the fee structure will not be adjusted based on annual inflation or other considerations, it raises questions regarding the long-term sustainability of wildlife management funding, which is usually reliant on these fees. The bill seeks to allocate all revenues generated from these tags to the Big Game Management Account to support programs benefiting elk populations.

Summary

Assembly Bill 521, introduced by Assembly Member Frazier, aims to amend the Fish and Game Code concerning elk hunting regulations in California. The bill proposes a significant reduction in the fee for elk tags designated for residents from $165 to $100. This change is intended to make elk hunting more accessible to residents. Additionally, the bill allows the issuance of up to 30 apprentice elk hunt tags at a fee of $20, promoting hunting as a recreational activity and potentially enhancing engagement with wildlife management practices among new hunters.

Sentiment

The overall sentiment surrounding AB 521 appears to be supportive among those who advocate for increased outdoor recreational opportunities such as hunting. Proponents argue that making hunting more affordable will encourage broader participation and assist in wildlife population management. Conversely, there may be concerns raised by those who advocate for wildlife protections, fearing that a higher number of hunters could negatively affect elk populations and local ecosystems. Thus, the sentiment reflects a balance between recreational access and conservation priorities.

Contention

One notable contention within the discussions about AB 521 revolves around the potential long-term financial implications of reducing fees without adjusting for cost-of-living increases. While the intention is to stimulate participation, opponents warn about setting a precedent that may weaken funding for wildlife conservation. Moreover, the expiration date set for certain provisions of the bill (January 1, 2024) indicates a need for further evaluation and possibly revisiting these policies to ensure that wildlife management objectives are met effectively.