| Old | New | Differences | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | - | ||
| 1 | + | CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE 20252026 REGULAR SESSION Senate Bill No. 818Introduced by Senator Alvarado-GilFebruary 21, 2025 An act to amend Section 4808 of, and to add Section 4801.6 to, the Fish and Game Code, relating to mountain lions.LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGESTSB 818, as introduced, Alvarado-Gil. Mountain Lions: pilot program: permitted houndspersons.Proposition 117, an initiative measure approved by the voters at the June 5, 1990, statewide primary election, enacted the California Wildlife Protection Act of 1990. The act establishes that the mountain lion is a specially protected mammal under the laws of this state, and makes it unlawful to take, injure, possess, transport, import, or sell any mountain lion or any part or product thereof. The act authorizes the Department of Fish and Wildlife, or a specified appropriate local agency authorized by the department, to remove or take any mountain lion that is perceived to be an imminent threat to public health or safety or that is perceived by the department to be an imminent threat to the survival of certain sheep species.This bill would require the department to, by January 1, 2027, establish a pilot program known as Tree and Free in the County of El Dorado in order to collect data on the efficacy of authorizing permitted private houndspersons to proactively haze mountain lions deemed to be a potential threat to public safety, livestock, or other domestic animal by the department, animal damage control officer, or local enforcement agency. The bill would require the program to be operative for 5 years from the date of commencement and, once concluded, would require the department to, no later than January 1, 2033, provide a report to the Legislature and the Fish and Game Commission on the efficacy the program and feasibility on expanding the program to other areas, as specified.The bill would require the department to collaborate with federal, state, and county trapping experts and interested nonprofit organizations in developing the criteria and procedure for registering authorized or permitted houndspersons. The bill would require houndspersons permitted and registered with the department to purchase an annual hazing permit for participation in the program, the cost of which shall be determined by the department, not to exceed the cost of implementing the pilot program.This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for County of El Dorado.The California Wildlife Protection Act of 1990 prohibits the Legislature from changing the act, with specified exceptions, except by a 4/5 vote of the membership of both houses of the Legislature and then only if consistent with, and in furtherance of, the purposes of the act.This bill would declare that it is consistent with, and furthers the purposes of, that act.Digest Key Vote: FOUR_FIFTHS Appropriation: NO Fiscal Committee: YES Local Program: NO Bill TextThe people of the State of California do enact as follows:SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:(a) During the 197172 Regular Session, Assembly Bill 660 was passed and signed into law, placing a four-year moratorium on the hunting of mountain lions.(b) At that time, there was great debate over the health of mountain lion populations, but the Department of Fish and Wildlife had no factual evidence on the health of the species.(c) At that time, the popular estimate of 600 mountain lions in the state had been in use since 1919, and was based on the formula of one mountain lion to each township of mountain lion habitat within Californias boundaries.(d) Assembly Bill 660 had two major project goals: first, the establishment of a population estimate for the mountain lion in California; and second, the production of a science-based mountain lion management plan based on life history information.(e) Assembly Bill 660 temporarily prohibited the lethal hunting of mountain lions, but it did not prohibit the Department of Fish and Wildlife from issuing permits for the nonlethal pursuit of the species by hound handlers with purpose-bred scent hounds, also known as houndspersons.(f) During this period, the depredation of livestock by mountain lions and human encounters with mountain lions was nearly nonexistent.(g) The temporary moratorium placed on mountain lion hunting by the passage of Assembly Bill 660 was extended several times.(h) Eighteen years later, although mountain lion populations were still considered stable and healthy by most biologists in our state, the species was designated as a specially protected mammal via the narrow passage of Proposition 117, an initiative measure approved by the electors at the June 5, 1990, statewide primary election. As the state wildlife laboratory noted in a published paper, this special protection was a political designation, with no basis in population abundance or trend.(i) The passage of Proposition 117 in 1990 prohibited the taking, injury, possession, or sale of mountain lion parts in California in perpetuity. By extension, Proposition 117 also banned the nonlethal pursuit and treeing of mountain lions with hounds.(j) For the first five years following the passage of Proposition 117, both mountain lion depredation on livestock and attacks on humans dramatically escalated, including two human fatalities. In response, the Department of Fish and Wildlife increased the issuance of lethal depredation permits, which diminished the rate of mountain lion encounters for the next 15 years.(k) On July 10, 2020, the Department of Fish and Wildlife implemented a Statewide Mountain Lion Depredation Approach that required the issuance of often multiple nonlethal depredation permits for a problem mountain lion before the issuance of a lethal depredation permit. Concomitant with this new depredation policy, attacks on humans again quickly escalated, including the midday fatal attack on a 21-year-old man in the County of El Dorado in March 2024.(l) The absence of houndspersons placing nonlethal pressure on mountain lions for the past 35 years has resulted in changes in their behavior. Traditionally nocturnal hunters and highly elusive, mountain lions now lack a fear of humans and domestic dogs, and are commonly sighted during the middle of the day, frequently around residential areas, resulting in substantially heightened public safety concerns and an exponential increase in the depredation of livestock and pets.(m) In the County of El Dorado, well over 200 domestic animals were killed by mountain lions in 2024 alone, and daytime mountain lion sightings are commonly occurring in every community on the western slope, including suburban neighborhoods and school yards.(n) In 2024, mountain lions were sighted on the campus of two of the three high schools on the County of El Dorados western slope.(o) The citizens and leadership of the County of El Dorado are doing everything possible to mitigate the remarkable increase in mountain lion activity and livestock loss by implementing all the traditional methods of deterring mountain lion conflict, including keeping livestock in fully fenced enclosures, bringing animals in at night, not leaving doors open so pets can go in and out at night, and the use of trained dogs, lights, and radios. Yet mountain lion encounters continue to escalate.(p) Recent peer-reviewed and published scientific studies have documented that preemptive or proactive pressure via nonlethal hound pursuit is the most effective method for hazing mountain lions and strongly reinforces their historic tendency to avoid humans and domestic dogs.(q) Current state policy on the issuance of depredation permits for dealing with problem mountain lions only allows hazing of mountain lions by government trappers after the first kill and typically requires multiple kills on the same parcel before issuing a lethal depredation permit. The implementation of this strict after the damage is done state policy has further escalated the changing mountain lion dynamics in the County of El Dorado, leading to the crisis county residents are currently experiencing.(r) In the County of El Dorado, the recent fatal human attack, combined with the ongoing increase in mountain lion sightings, their aggressive behavior, and daytime attacks on domestic animals and pets, is causing a swell of grief, anger, and fear throughout the public.(s) The County of El Dorado has become a hot spot for mountain lion encounters, and escalating public safety concerns require a special management strategy that is regionalized and tailored to address these unique circumstances.(t) Since the passage of Proposition 117, the lack of any preemptive, nonlethal pursuit of the species by houndspersons with scent hounds to restore mountain lion fear of humans and dogs has substantially promoted an upsurge in their willingness to confront humans, livestock, and pets, resulting in an increase in the legal, lethal taking of problem mountain lions via depredation permit, and likely the illegal removal of many more.(u) We must learn from the past, particularly during the 18 years in that California did not allow lethal-take mountain lion hunting, but did authorize permitted, experienced houndspersons with trained dogs to pursue, tree, and then release mountain lions. Reestablishing a fear of humans and dogs in mountain lions by reinstating their proactive, nonlethal pursuit by qualified and permitted houndspersons with hounds will substantially mitigate rapidly increasing public safety concerns, the loss of livestock and pets, and save the lives of countless mountain lions in the future.SEC. 2. Section 4801.6 is added to the Fish and Game Code, to read:4801.6. (a) The department shall, no later than January 1, 2027, develop a pilot program to collect data on the efficacy of authorizing permitted private houndspersons to proactively haze mountain lions deemed to be a potential threat to public safety, livestock, or other domestic animals by the department, animal damage control officer, or local enforcement agency.(b) The pilot program described in subdivision (a) shall be known and may be refereed to as Tree and Free, and shall be limited to the County of El Dorado. The pilot program shall be operative for five years from the date that it commences.(c) In developing the pilot program, the department shall collaborate with appropriate leadership and enforcement personnel of the County of El Dorado in order to define the area within the county that the pilot program shall be authorized.(d) (1) At the conclusion of the pilot program, the department shall, no later than January 1, 2033, provide a report to the Legislature and the Fish and Game Commission on the efficacy of permitted houndspersons proactively hazing mountain lions as a nonlethal deterrent for reducing threats to public safety, livestock, and domestic animals. The report shall also evaluate the feasibility and cost of expanding the program to other areas experiencing an increased risk of encounters with problem mountain lions.(2) The requirement for submitting a report imposed under paragraph (1) is inoperative on January 1, 2037, pursuant to Section 10231.5 of the Government Code.(3) A report to be submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code.(e) As used in this section, qualified individuals shall include any authorized or permitted houndsperson, as described in Section 4808.SEC. 3. Section 4808 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:4808. (a) As used in this chapter, agent means the agent or employee of the owner of the damaged or destroyed property, any county or city predator control officer, any employee of the Animal Damage Control Section of the United States Department of Agriculture, any departmental personnel, or any authorized or permitted houndsman houndsperson registered with the department as possessing the requisite experience and having no prior conviction of any provision of this code or regulation adopted pursuant to this code. A plea of nolo contendere is a conviction for purposes of this section.(b) The department shall collaborate with federal, state, and county trapping experts and interested nonprofit organizations that have goals and objectives directly related to the interests of houndspersons in developing the criteria and procedure for registering authorized or permitted houndspersons.(c) In order to participate in the pilot program authorized pursuant to Section 4801.6, houndspersons permitted and registered with the department shall purchase an annual hazing permit. The department shall determine the cost of the permit, not to exceed the cost of implementing the pilot program authorized pursuant to Section 4801.6.SEC. 4. The Legislature finds and declares that a special statute is necessary and that a general statute cannot be made applicable within the meaning of Section 16 of Article IV of the California Constitution because of the severity of mountain lion attacks that have occurred in the County of El Dorado.SEC. 5. The Legislature finds and declares that the amendments made by this act are consistent with, and further the purposes of, the California Wildlife Protection Act of 1990. | |
| 2 | 2 | ||
| 3 | - | ||
| 3 | + | CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE 20252026 REGULAR SESSION Senate Bill No. 818Introduced by Senator Alvarado-GilFebruary 21, 2025 An act to amend Section 4808 of, and to add Section 4801.6 to, the Fish and Game Code, relating to mountain lions.LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGESTSB 818, as introduced, Alvarado-Gil. Mountain Lions: pilot program: permitted houndspersons.Proposition 117, an initiative measure approved by the voters at the June 5, 1990, statewide primary election, enacted the California Wildlife Protection Act of 1990. The act establishes that the mountain lion is a specially protected mammal under the laws of this state, and makes it unlawful to take, injure, possess, transport, import, or sell any mountain lion or any part or product thereof. The act authorizes the Department of Fish and Wildlife, or a specified appropriate local agency authorized by the department, to remove or take any mountain lion that is perceived to be an imminent threat to public health or safety or that is perceived by the department to be an imminent threat to the survival of certain sheep species.This bill would require the department to, by January 1, 2027, establish a pilot program known as Tree and Free in the County of El Dorado in order to collect data on the efficacy of authorizing permitted private houndspersons to proactively haze mountain lions deemed to be a potential threat to public safety, livestock, or other domestic animal by the department, animal damage control officer, or local enforcement agency. The bill would require the program to be operative for 5 years from the date of commencement and, once concluded, would require the department to, no later than January 1, 2033, provide a report to the Legislature and the Fish and Game Commission on the efficacy the program and feasibility on expanding the program to other areas, as specified.The bill would require the department to collaborate with federal, state, and county trapping experts and interested nonprofit organizations in developing the criteria and procedure for registering authorized or permitted houndspersons. The bill would require houndspersons permitted and registered with the department to purchase an annual hazing permit for participation in the program, the cost of which shall be determined by the department, not to exceed the cost of implementing the pilot program.This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for County of El Dorado.The California Wildlife Protection Act of 1990 prohibits the Legislature from changing the act, with specified exceptions, except by a 4/5 vote of the membership of both houses of the Legislature and then only if consistent with, and in furtherance of, the purposes of the act.This bill would declare that it is consistent with, and furthers the purposes of, that act.Digest Key Vote: FOUR_FIFTHS Appropriation: NO Fiscal Committee: YES Local Program: NO | |
| 4 | 4 | ||
| 5 | - | Amended IN Senate April 10, 2025 | |
| 6 | 5 | ||
| 7 | - | Amended IN Senate April 10, 2025 | |
| 6 | + | ||
| 7 | + | ||
| 8 | 8 | ||
| 9 | 9 | CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE 20252026 REGULAR SESSION | |
| 10 | 10 | ||
| 11 | 11 | Senate Bill | |
| 12 | 12 | ||
| 13 | 13 | No. 818 | |
| 14 | 14 | ||
| 15 | 15 | Introduced by Senator Alvarado-GilFebruary 21, 2025 | |
| 16 | 16 | ||
| 17 | 17 | Introduced by Senator Alvarado-Gil | |
| 18 | 18 | February 21, 2025 | |
| 19 | 19 | ||
| 20 | 20 | An act to amend Section 4808 of, and to add Section 4801.6 to, the Fish and Game Code, relating to mountain lions. | |
| 21 | 21 | ||
| 22 | 22 | LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST | |
| 23 | 23 | ||
| 24 | 24 | ## LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST | |
| 25 | 25 | ||
| 26 | - | SB 818, as | |
| 26 | + | SB 818, as introduced, Alvarado-Gil. Mountain Lions: pilot program: permitted houndspersons. | |
| 27 | 27 | ||
| 28 | 28 | Proposition 117, an initiative measure approved by the voters at the June 5, 1990, statewide primary election, enacted the California Wildlife Protection Act of 1990. The act establishes that the mountain lion is a specially protected mammal under the laws of this state, and makes it unlawful to take, injure, possess, transport, import, or sell any mountain lion or any part or product thereof. The act authorizes the Department of Fish and Wildlife, or a specified appropriate local agency authorized by the department, to remove or take any mountain lion that is perceived to be an imminent threat to public health or safety or that is perceived by the department to be an imminent threat to the survival of certain sheep species.This bill would require the department to, by January 1, 2027, establish a pilot program known as Tree and Free in the County of El Dorado in order to collect data on the efficacy of authorizing permitted private houndspersons to proactively haze mountain lions deemed to be a potential threat to public safety, livestock, or other domestic animal by the department, animal damage control officer, or local enforcement agency. The bill would require the program to be operative for 5 years from the date of commencement and, once concluded, would require the department to, no later than January 1, 2033, provide a report to the Legislature and the Fish and Game Commission on the efficacy the program and feasibility on expanding the program to other areas, as specified.The bill would require the department to collaborate with federal, state, and county trapping experts and interested nonprofit organizations in developing the criteria and procedure for registering authorized or permitted houndspersons. The bill would require houndspersons permitted and registered with the department to purchase an annual hazing permit for participation in the program, the cost of which shall be determined by the department, not to exceed the cost of implementing the pilot program.This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for County of El Dorado.The California Wildlife Protection Act of 1990 prohibits the Legislature from changing the act, with specified exceptions, except by a 4/5 vote of the membership of both houses of the Legislature and then only if consistent with, and in furtherance of, the purposes of the act.This bill would declare that it is consistent with, and furthers the purposes of, that act. | |
| 29 | 29 | ||
| 30 | 30 | Proposition 117, an initiative measure approved by the voters at the June 5, 1990, statewide primary election, enacted the California Wildlife Protection Act of 1990. The act establishes that the mountain lion is a specially protected mammal under the laws of this state, and makes it unlawful to take, injure, possess, transport, import, or sell any mountain lion or any part or product thereof. The act authorizes the Department of Fish and Wildlife, or a specified appropriate local agency authorized by the department, to remove or take any mountain lion that is perceived to be an imminent threat to public health or safety or that is perceived by the department to be an imminent threat to the survival of certain sheep species. | |
| 31 | 31 | ||
| 32 | 32 | This bill would require the department to, by January 1, 2027, establish a pilot program known as Tree and Free in the County of El Dorado in order to collect data on the efficacy of authorizing permitted private houndspersons to proactively haze mountain lions deemed to be a potential threat to public safety, livestock, or other domestic animal by the department, animal damage control officer, or local enforcement agency. The bill would require the program to be operative for 5 years from the date of commencement and, once concluded, would require the department to, no later than January 1, 2033, provide a report to the Legislature and the Fish and Game Commission on the efficacy the program and feasibility on expanding the program to other areas, as specified. | |
| 33 | 33 | ||
| 34 | 34 | The bill would require the department to collaborate with federal, state, and county trapping experts and interested nonprofit organizations in developing the criteria and procedure for registering authorized or permitted houndspersons. The bill would require houndspersons permitted and registered with the department to purchase an annual hazing permit for participation in the program, the cost of which shall be determined by the department, not to exceed the cost of implementing the pilot program. | |
| 35 | 35 | ||
| 36 | 36 | This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for County of El Dorado. | |
| 37 | 37 | ||
| 38 | 38 | The California Wildlife Protection Act of 1990 prohibits the Legislature from changing the act, with specified exceptions, except by a 4/5 vote of the membership of both houses of the Legislature and then only if consistent with, and in furtherance of, the purposes of the act. | |
| 39 | 39 | ||
| 40 | 40 | This bill would declare that it is consistent with, and furthers the purposes of, that act. | |
| 41 | 41 | ||
| 42 | 42 | ## Digest Key | |
| 43 | 43 | ||
| 44 | 44 | ## Bill Text | |
| 45 | 45 | ||
| 46 | - | The people of the State of California do enact as follows:SECTION 1 | |
| 46 | + | The people of the State of California do enact as follows:SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:(a) During the 197172 Regular Session, Assembly Bill 660 was passed and signed into law, placing a four-year moratorium on the hunting of mountain lions.(b) At that time, there was great debate over the health of mountain lion populations, but the Department of Fish and Wildlife had no factual evidence on the health of the species.(c) At that time, the popular estimate of 600 mountain lions in the state had been in use since 1919, and was based on the formula of one mountain lion to each township of mountain lion habitat within Californias boundaries.(d) Assembly Bill 660 had two major project goals: first, the establishment of a population estimate for the mountain lion in California; and second, the production of a science-based mountain lion management plan based on life history information.(e) Assembly Bill 660 temporarily prohibited the lethal hunting of mountain lions, but it did not prohibit the Department of Fish and Wildlife from issuing permits for the nonlethal pursuit of the species by hound handlers with purpose-bred scent hounds, also known as houndspersons.(f) During this period, the depredation of livestock by mountain lions and human encounters with mountain lions was nearly nonexistent.(g) The temporary moratorium placed on mountain lion hunting by the passage of Assembly Bill 660 was extended several times.(h) Eighteen years later, although mountain lion populations were still considered stable and healthy by most biologists in our state, the species was designated as a specially protected mammal via the narrow passage of Proposition 117, an initiative measure approved by the electors at the June 5, 1990, statewide primary election. As the state wildlife laboratory noted in a published paper, this special protection was a political designation, with no basis in population abundance or trend.(i) The passage of Proposition 117 in 1990 prohibited the taking, injury, possession, or sale of mountain lion parts in California in perpetuity. By extension, Proposition 117 also banned the nonlethal pursuit and treeing of mountain lions with hounds.(j) For the first five years following the passage of Proposition 117, both mountain lion depredation on livestock and attacks on humans dramatically escalated, including two human fatalities. In response, the Department of Fish and Wildlife increased the issuance of lethal depredation permits, which diminished the rate of mountain lion encounters for the next 15 years.(k) On July 10, 2020, the Department of Fish and Wildlife implemented a Statewide Mountain Lion Depredation Approach that required the issuance of often multiple nonlethal depredation permits for a problem mountain lion before the issuance of a lethal depredation permit. Concomitant with this new depredation policy, attacks on humans again quickly escalated, including the midday fatal attack on a 21-year-old man in the County of El Dorado in March 2024.(l) The absence of houndspersons placing nonlethal pressure on mountain lions for the past 35 years has resulted in changes in their behavior. Traditionally nocturnal hunters and highly elusive, mountain lions now lack a fear of humans and domestic dogs, and are commonly sighted during the middle of the day, frequently around residential areas, resulting in substantially heightened public safety concerns and an exponential increase in the depredation of livestock and pets.(m) In the County of El Dorado, well over 200 domestic animals were killed by mountain lions in 2024 alone, and daytime mountain lion sightings are commonly occurring in every community on the western slope, including suburban neighborhoods and school yards.(n) In 2024, mountain lions were sighted on the campus of two of the three high schools on the County of El Dorados western slope.(o) The citizens and leadership of the County of El Dorado are doing everything possible to mitigate the remarkable increase in mountain lion activity and livestock loss by implementing all the traditional methods of deterring mountain lion conflict, including keeping livestock in fully fenced enclosures, bringing animals in at night, not leaving doors open so pets can go in and out at night, and the use of trained dogs, lights, and radios. Yet mountain lion encounters continue to escalate.(p) Recent peer-reviewed and published scientific studies have documented that preemptive or proactive pressure via nonlethal hound pursuit is the most effective method for hazing mountain lions and strongly reinforces their historic tendency to avoid humans and domestic dogs.(q) Current state policy on the issuance of depredation permits for dealing with problem mountain lions only allows hazing of mountain lions by government trappers after the first kill and typically requires multiple kills on the same parcel before issuing a lethal depredation permit. The implementation of this strict after the damage is done state policy has further escalated the changing mountain lion dynamics in the County of El Dorado, leading to the crisis county residents are currently experiencing.(r) In the County of El Dorado, the recent fatal human attack, combined with the ongoing increase in mountain lion sightings, their aggressive behavior, and daytime attacks on domestic animals and pets, is causing a swell of grief, anger, and fear throughout the public.(s) The County of El Dorado has become a hot spot for mountain lion encounters, and escalating public safety concerns require a special management strategy that is regionalized and tailored to address these unique circumstances.(t) Since the passage of Proposition 117, the lack of any preemptive, nonlethal pursuit of the species by houndspersons with scent hounds to restore mountain lion fear of humans and dogs has substantially promoted an upsurge in their willingness to confront humans, livestock, and pets, resulting in an increase in the legal, lethal taking of problem mountain lions via depredation permit, and likely the illegal removal of many more.(u) We must learn from the past, particularly during the 18 years in that California did not allow lethal-take mountain lion hunting, but did authorize permitted, experienced houndspersons with trained dogs to pursue, tree, and then release mountain lions. Reestablishing a fear of humans and dogs in mountain lions by reinstating their proactive, nonlethal pursuit by qualified and permitted houndspersons with hounds will substantially mitigate rapidly increasing public safety concerns, the loss of livestock and pets, and save the lives of countless mountain lions in the future.SEC. 2. Section 4801.6 is added to the Fish and Game Code, to read:4801.6. (a) The department shall, no later than January 1, 2027, develop a pilot program to collect data on the efficacy of authorizing permitted private houndspersons to proactively haze mountain lions deemed to be a potential threat to public safety, livestock, or other domestic animals by the department, animal damage control officer, or local enforcement agency.(b) The pilot program described in subdivision (a) shall be known and may be refereed to as Tree and Free, and shall be limited to the County of El Dorado. The pilot program shall be operative for five years from the date that it commences.(c) In developing the pilot program, the department shall collaborate with appropriate leadership and enforcement personnel of the County of El Dorado in order to define the area within the county that the pilot program shall be authorized.(d) (1) At the conclusion of the pilot program, the department shall, no later than January 1, 2033, provide a report to the Legislature and the Fish and Game Commission on the efficacy of permitted houndspersons proactively hazing mountain lions as a nonlethal deterrent for reducing threats to public safety, livestock, and domestic animals. The report shall also evaluate the feasibility and cost of expanding the program to other areas experiencing an increased risk of encounters with problem mountain lions.(2) The requirement for submitting a report imposed under paragraph (1) is inoperative on January 1, 2037, pursuant to Section 10231.5 of the Government Code.(3) A report to be submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code.(e) As used in this section, qualified individuals shall include any authorized or permitted houndsperson, as described in Section 4808.SEC. 3. Section 4808 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:4808. (a) As used in this chapter, agent means the agent or employee of the owner of the damaged or destroyed property, any county or city predator control officer, any employee of the Animal Damage Control Section of the United States Department of Agriculture, any departmental personnel, or any authorized or permitted houndsman houndsperson registered with the department as possessing the requisite experience and having no prior conviction of any provision of this code or regulation adopted pursuant to this code. A plea of nolo contendere is a conviction for purposes of this section.(b) The department shall collaborate with federal, state, and county trapping experts and interested nonprofit organizations that have goals and objectives directly related to the interests of houndspersons in developing the criteria and procedure for registering authorized or permitted houndspersons.(c) In order to participate in the pilot program authorized pursuant to Section 4801.6, houndspersons permitted and registered with the department shall purchase an annual hazing permit. The department shall determine the cost of the permit, not to exceed the cost of implementing the pilot program authorized pursuant to Section 4801.6.SEC. 4. The Legislature finds and declares that a special statute is necessary and that a general statute cannot be made applicable within the meaning of Section 16 of Article IV of the California Constitution because of the severity of mountain lion attacks that have occurred in the County of El Dorado.SEC. 5. The Legislature finds and declares that the amendments made by this act are consistent with, and further the purposes of, the California Wildlife Protection Act of 1990. | |
| 47 | 47 | ||
| 48 | 48 | The people of the State of California do enact as follows: | |
| 49 | 49 | ||
| 50 | 50 | ## The people of the State of California do enact as follows: | |
| 51 | 51 | ||
| 52 | - | SECTION 1. This | |
| 52 | + | SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:(a) During the 197172 Regular Session, Assembly Bill 660 was passed and signed into law, placing a four-year moratorium on the hunting of mountain lions.(b) At that time, there was great debate over the health of mountain lion populations, but the Department of Fish and Wildlife had no factual evidence on the health of the species.(c) At that time, the popular estimate of 600 mountain lions in the state had been in use since 1919, and was based on the formula of one mountain lion to each township of mountain lion habitat within Californias boundaries.(d) Assembly Bill 660 had two major project goals: first, the establishment of a population estimate for the mountain lion in California; and second, the production of a science-based mountain lion management plan based on life history information.(e) Assembly Bill 660 temporarily prohibited the lethal hunting of mountain lions, but it did not prohibit the Department of Fish and Wildlife from issuing permits for the nonlethal pursuit of the species by hound handlers with purpose-bred scent hounds, also known as houndspersons.(f) During this period, the depredation of livestock by mountain lions and human encounters with mountain lions was nearly nonexistent.(g) The temporary moratorium placed on mountain lion hunting by the passage of Assembly Bill 660 was extended several times.(h) Eighteen years later, although mountain lion populations were still considered stable and healthy by most biologists in our state, the species was designated as a specially protected mammal via the narrow passage of Proposition 117, an initiative measure approved by the electors at the June 5, 1990, statewide primary election. As the state wildlife laboratory noted in a published paper, this special protection was a political designation, with no basis in population abundance or trend.(i) The passage of Proposition 117 in 1990 prohibited the taking, injury, possession, or sale of mountain lion parts in California in perpetuity. By extension, Proposition 117 also banned the nonlethal pursuit and treeing of mountain lions with hounds.(j) For the first five years following the passage of Proposition 117, both mountain lion depredation on livestock and attacks on humans dramatically escalated, including two human fatalities. In response, the Department of Fish and Wildlife increased the issuance of lethal depredation permits, which diminished the rate of mountain lion encounters for the next 15 years.(k) On July 10, 2020, the Department of Fish and Wildlife implemented a Statewide Mountain Lion Depredation Approach that required the issuance of often multiple nonlethal depredation permits for a problem mountain lion before the issuance of a lethal depredation permit. Concomitant with this new depredation policy, attacks on humans again quickly escalated, including the midday fatal attack on a 21-year-old man in the County of El Dorado in March 2024.(l) The absence of houndspersons placing nonlethal pressure on mountain lions for the past 35 years has resulted in changes in their behavior. Traditionally nocturnal hunters and highly elusive, mountain lions now lack a fear of humans and domestic dogs, and are commonly sighted during the middle of the day, frequently around residential areas, resulting in substantially heightened public safety concerns and an exponential increase in the depredation of livestock and pets.(m) In the County of El Dorado, well over 200 domestic animals were killed by mountain lions in 2024 alone, and daytime mountain lion sightings are commonly occurring in every community on the western slope, including suburban neighborhoods and school yards.(n) In 2024, mountain lions were sighted on the campus of two of the three high schools on the County of El Dorados western slope.(o) The citizens and leadership of the County of El Dorado are doing everything possible to mitigate the remarkable increase in mountain lion activity and livestock loss by implementing all the traditional methods of deterring mountain lion conflict, including keeping livestock in fully fenced enclosures, bringing animals in at night, not leaving doors open so pets can go in and out at night, and the use of trained dogs, lights, and radios. Yet mountain lion encounters continue to escalate.(p) Recent peer-reviewed and published scientific studies have documented that preemptive or proactive pressure via nonlethal hound pursuit is the most effective method for hazing mountain lions and strongly reinforces their historic tendency to avoid humans and domestic dogs.(q) Current state policy on the issuance of depredation permits for dealing with problem mountain lions only allows hazing of mountain lions by government trappers after the first kill and typically requires multiple kills on the same parcel before issuing a lethal depredation permit. The implementation of this strict after the damage is done state policy has further escalated the changing mountain lion dynamics in the County of El Dorado, leading to the crisis county residents are currently experiencing.(r) In the County of El Dorado, the recent fatal human attack, combined with the ongoing increase in mountain lion sightings, their aggressive behavior, and daytime attacks on domestic animals and pets, is causing a swell of grief, anger, and fear throughout the public.(s) The County of El Dorado has become a hot spot for mountain lion encounters, and escalating public safety concerns require a special management strategy that is regionalized and tailored to address these unique circumstances.(t) Since the passage of Proposition 117, the lack of any preemptive, nonlethal pursuit of the species by houndspersons with scent hounds to restore mountain lion fear of humans and dogs has substantially promoted an upsurge in their willingness to confront humans, livestock, and pets, resulting in an increase in the legal, lethal taking of problem mountain lions via depredation permit, and likely the illegal removal of many more.(u) We must learn from the past, particularly during the 18 years in that California did not allow lethal-take mountain lion hunting, but did authorize permitted, experienced houndspersons with trained dogs to pursue, tree, and then release mountain lions. Reestablishing a fear of humans and dogs in mountain lions by reinstating their proactive, nonlethal pursuit by qualified and permitted houndspersons with hounds will substantially mitigate rapidly increasing public safety concerns, the loss of livestock and pets, and save the lives of countless mountain lions in the future. | |
| 53 | 53 | ||
| 54 | - | SECTION 1. This | |
| 54 | + | SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:(a) During the 197172 Regular Session, Assembly Bill 660 was passed and signed into law, placing a four-year moratorium on the hunting of mountain lions.(b) At that time, there was great debate over the health of mountain lion populations, but the Department of Fish and Wildlife had no factual evidence on the health of the species.(c) At that time, the popular estimate of 600 mountain lions in the state had been in use since 1919, and was based on the formula of one mountain lion to each township of mountain lion habitat within Californias boundaries.(d) Assembly Bill 660 had two major project goals: first, the establishment of a population estimate for the mountain lion in California; and second, the production of a science-based mountain lion management plan based on life history information.(e) Assembly Bill 660 temporarily prohibited the lethal hunting of mountain lions, but it did not prohibit the Department of Fish and Wildlife from issuing permits for the nonlethal pursuit of the species by hound handlers with purpose-bred scent hounds, also known as houndspersons.(f) During this period, the depredation of livestock by mountain lions and human encounters with mountain lions was nearly nonexistent.(g) The temporary moratorium placed on mountain lion hunting by the passage of Assembly Bill 660 was extended several times.(h) Eighteen years later, although mountain lion populations were still considered stable and healthy by most biologists in our state, the species was designated as a specially protected mammal via the narrow passage of Proposition 117, an initiative measure approved by the electors at the June 5, 1990, statewide primary election. As the state wildlife laboratory noted in a published paper, this special protection was a political designation, with no basis in population abundance or trend.(i) The passage of Proposition 117 in 1990 prohibited the taking, injury, possession, or sale of mountain lion parts in California in perpetuity. By extension, Proposition 117 also banned the nonlethal pursuit and treeing of mountain lions with hounds.(j) For the first five years following the passage of Proposition 117, both mountain lion depredation on livestock and attacks on humans dramatically escalated, including two human fatalities. In response, the Department of Fish and Wildlife increased the issuance of lethal depredation permits, which diminished the rate of mountain lion encounters for the next 15 years.(k) On July 10, 2020, the Department of Fish and Wildlife implemented a Statewide Mountain Lion Depredation Approach that required the issuance of often multiple nonlethal depredation permits for a problem mountain lion before the issuance of a lethal depredation permit. Concomitant with this new depredation policy, attacks on humans again quickly escalated, including the midday fatal attack on a 21-year-old man in the County of El Dorado in March 2024.(l) The absence of houndspersons placing nonlethal pressure on mountain lions for the past 35 years has resulted in changes in their behavior. Traditionally nocturnal hunters and highly elusive, mountain lions now lack a fear of humans and domestic dogs, and are commonly sighted during the middle of the day, frequently around residential areas, resulting in substantially heightened public safety concerns and an exponential increase in the depredation of livestock and pets.(m) In the County of El Dorado, well over 200 domestic animals were killed by mountain lions in 2024 alone, and daytime mountain lion sightings are commonly occurring in every community on the western slope, including suburban neighborhoods and school yards.(n) In 2024, mountain lions were sighted on the campus of two of the three high schools on the County of El Dorados western slope.(o) The citizens and leadership of the County of El Dorado are doing everything possible to mitigate the remarkable increase in mountain lion activity and livestock loss by implementing all the traditional methods of deterring mountain lion conflict, including keeping livestock in fully fenced enclosures, bringing animals in at night, not leaving doors open so pets can go in and out at night, and the use of trained dogs, lights, and radios. Yet mountain lion encounters continue to escalate.(p) Recent peer-reviewed and published scientific studies have documented that preemptive or proactive pressure via nonlethal hound pursuit is the most effective method for hazing mountain lions and strongly reinforces their historic tendency to avoid humans and domestic dogs.(q) Current state policy on the issuance of depredation permits for dealing with problem mountain lions only allows hazing of mountain lions by government trappers after the first kill and typically requires multiple kills on the same parcel before issuing a lethal depredation permit. The implementation of this strict after the damage is done state policy has further escalated the changing mountain lion dynamics in the County of El Dorado, leading to the crisis county residents are currently experiencing.(r) In the County of El Dorado, the recent fatal human attack, combined with the ongoing increase in mountain lion sightings, their aggressive behavior, and daytime attacks on domestic animals and pets, is causing a swell of grief, anger, and fear throughout the public.(s) The County of El Dorado has become a hot spot for mountain lion encounters, and escalating public safety concerns require a special management strategy that is regionalized and tailored to address these unique circumstances.(t) Since the passage of Proposition 117, the lack of any preemptive, nonlethal pursuit of the species by houndspersons with scent hounds to restore mountain lion fear of humans and dogs has substantially promoted an upsurge in their willingness to confront humans, livestock, and pets, resulting in an increase in the legal, lethal taking of problem mountain lions via depredation permit, and likely the illegal removal of many more.(u) We must learn from the past, particularly during the 18 years in that California did not allow lethal-take mountain lion hunting, but did authorize permitted, experienced houndspersons with trained dogs to pursue, tree, and then release mountain lions. Reestablishing a fear of humans and dogs in mountain lions by reinstating their proactive, nonlethal pursuit by qualified and permitted houndspersons with hounds will substantially mitigate rapidly increasing public safety concerns, the loss of livestock and pets, and save the lives of countless mountain lions in the future. | |
| 55 | 55 | ||
| 56 | - | SECTION 1. | |
| 56 | + | SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following: | |
| 57 | 57 | ||
| 58 | 58 | ### SECTION 1. | |
| 59 | - | ||
| 60 | - | SECTION 1.SEC. 2. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:(a) During the 197172 Regular Session, Assembly Bill 660 was passed and signed into law, placing a four-year moratorium on the hunting of mountain lions.(b) At that time, there was great debate over the health of mountain lion populations, but the Department of Fish and Wildlife had no factual evidence on the health of the species.(c) At that time, the popular estimate of 600 mountain lions in the state had been in use since 1919, and was based on the formula of one mountain lion to each township of mountain lion habitat within Californias boundaries.(d) Assembly Bill 660 had two major project goals: first, the establishment of a population estimate for the mountain lion in California; and second, the production of a science-based mountain lion management plan based on life history information.(e) Assembly Bill 660 temporarily prohibited the lethal hunting of mountain lions, but it did not prohibit the Department of Fish and Wildlife from issuing permits for the nonlethal pursuit of the species by hound handlers with purpose-bred scent hounds, also known as houndspersons.(f) During this period, the depredation of livestock by mountain lions and human encounters with mountain lions was nearly nonexistent.(g) The temporary moratorium placed on mountain lion hunting by the passage of Assembly Bill 660 was extended several times. times due to assessing the mountain lion populations and developing the management plan proving to be more complex and time-consuming than originally anticipated.(h) Eighteen years later, although mountain lion populations were still considered stable and healthy by most biologists in our state, the species was designated as a specially protected mammal via the narrow passage of Proposition 117, an initiative measure approved by the electors at the June 5, 1990, statewide primary election. As the state wildlife laboratory noted in a published paper, this special protection was a political designation, with no basis in population abundance or trend.(i) The passage of Proposition 117 in 1990 prohibited the taking, injury, possession, or sale of mountain lion parts in California in perpetuity. By extension, Proposition 117 also banned the nonlethal pursuit and treeing of mountain lions with hounds.(j) For the first five years following the passage of Proposition 117, both mountain lion depredation on livestock and attacks on humans dramatically escalated, including two human fatalities. In response, the Department of Fish and Wildlife increased the issuance of lethal depredation permits, which diminished the rate of mountain lion encounters for the next 15 years.(k) On July 10, 2020, the Department of Fish and Wildlife implemented a Statewide Mountain Lion Depredation Approach that required the issuance of often multiple nonlethal depredation permits for a problem mountain lion before the issuance of a lethal depredation permit. Concomitant with this new depredation policy, attacks on humans again quickly escalated, including the midday fatal attack on a 21-year-old man in the County of El Dorado in March 2024.(l) The absence of houndspersons placing nonlethal pressure on mountain lions for the past 35 years has resulted in changes in their behavior. Traditionally nocturnal hunters and highly elusive, mountain lions now lack a fear of humans and domestic dogs, and are commonly sighted during the middle of the day, frequently around residential areas, resulting in substantially heightened public safety concerns and an exponential increase in the depredation of livestock and pets.(m) In the County of El Dorado, well over 200 domestic animals were killed by mountain lions in 2024 alone, and daytime mountain lion sightings are commonly occurring in every community on the western slope, including suburban neighborhoods and school yards.(n) In 2024, mountain lions were sighted on the campus of two of the three high schools on the County of El Dorados western slope.(o) The citizens and leadership of the County of El Dorado are doing everything possible to mitigate the remarkable increase in mountain lion activity and livestock loss by implementing all the traditional methods of deterring mountain lion conflict, including keeping livestock in fully fenced enclosures, bringing animals in at night, not leaving doors open so pets can go in and out at night, and the use of trained dogs, lights, and radios. Yet mountain lion encounters continue to escalate.(p) Recent peer-reviewed and published scientific studies have documented that preemptive or proactive pressure via nonlethal hound pursuit is the most effective method for hazing mountain lions and strongly reinforces their historic tendency to avoid humans and domestic dogs.(q) Current state policy on the issuance of depredation permits for dealing with problem mountain lions only allows hazing of mountain lions by government trappers after the first kill and typically requires multiple kills on the same parcel before issuing a lethal depredation permit. The implementation of this strict after the damage is done state policy has further escalated the changing mountain lion dynamics in the County of El Dorado, leading to the crisis county residents are currently experiencing.(r) In the County of El Dorado, the recent fatal human attack, combined with the ongoing increase in mountain lion sightings, their aggressive behavior, and daytime attacks on domestic animals and pets, is causing a swell of grief, anger, and fear throughout the public.(s) The County of El Dorado has become a hot spot for mountain lion encounters, and escalating public safety concerns require a special management strategy that is regionalized and tailored to address these unique circumstances.(t) Since the passage of Proposition 117, the lack of any preemptive, nonlethal pursuit of the species by houndspersons with scent hounds to restore mountain lion fear of humans and dogs has substantially promoted an upsurge in their willingness to confront humans, livestock, and pets, resulting in an increase in the legal, lethal taking of problem mountain lions via depredation permit, and likely the illegal removal of many more.(u) We must learn from the past, particularly during the 18 years in that California did not allow lethal-take mountain lion hunting, but did authorize permitted, experienced houndspersons with trained dogs to pursue, tree, and then release mountain lions. Reestablishing a fear of humans and dogs in mountain lions by reinstating their proactive, nonlethal pursuit by qualified and permitted houndspersons with hounds will substantially mitigate rapidly increasing public safety concerns, the loss of livestock and pets, and save the lives of countless mountain lions in the future. | |
| 61 | - | ||
| 62 | - | SECTION 1.SEC. 2. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:(a) During the 197172 Regular Session, Assembly Bill 660 was passed and signed into law, placing a four-year moratorium on the hunting of mountain lions.(b) At that time, there was great debate over the health of mountain lion populations, but the Department of Fish and Wildlife had no factual evidence on the health of the species.(c) At that time, the popular estimate of 600 mountain lions in the state had been in use since 1919, and was based on the formula of one mountain lion to each township of mountain lion habitat within Californias boundaries.(d) Assembly Bill 660 had two major project goals: first, the establishment of a population estimate for the mountain lion in California; and second, the production of a science-based mountain lion management plan based on life history information.(e) Assembly Bill 660 temporarily prohibited the lethal hunting of mountain lions, but it did not prohibit the Department of Fish and Wildlife from issuing permits for the nonlethal pursuit of the species by hound handlers with purpose-bred scent hounds, also known as houndspersons.(f) During this period, the depredation of livestock by mountain lions and human encounters with mountain lions was nearly nonexistent.(g) The temporary moratorium placed on mountain lion hunting by the passage of Assembly Bill 660 was extended several times. times due to assessing the mountain lion populations and developing the management plan proving to be more complex and time-consuming than originally anticipated.(h) Eighteen years later, although mountain lion populations were still considered stable and healthy by most biologists in our state, the species was designated as a specially protected mammal via the narrow passage of Proposition 117, an initiative measure approved by the electors at the June 5, 1990, statewide primary election. As the state wildlife laboratory noted in a published paper, this special protection was a political designation, with no basis in population abundance or trend.(i) The passage of Proposition 117 in 1990 prohibited the taking, injury, possession, or sale of mountain lion parts in California in perpetuity. By extension, Proposition 117 also banned the nonlethal pursuit and treeing of mountain lions with hounds.(j) For the first five years following the passage of Proposition 117, both mountain lion depredation on livestock and attacks on humans dramatically escalated, including two human fatalities. In response, the Department of Fish and Wildlife increased the issuance of lethal depredation permits, which diminished the rate of mountain lion encounters for the next 15 years.(k) On July 10, 2020, the Department of Fish and Wildlife implemented a Statewide Mountain Lion Depredation Approach that required the issuance of often multiple nonlethal depredation permits for a problem mountain lion before the issuance of a lethal depredation permit. Concomitant with this new depredation policy, attacks on humans again quickly escalated, including the midday fatal attack on a 21-year-old man in the County of El Dorado in March 2024.(l) The absence of houndspersons placing nonlethal pressure on mountain lions for the past 35 years has resulted in changes in their behavior. Traditionally nocturnal hunters and highly elusive, mountain lions now lack a fear of humans and domestic dogs, and are commonly sighted during the middle of the day, frequently around residential areas, resulting in substantially heightened public safety concerns and an exponential increase in the depredation of livestock and pets.(m) In the County of El Dorado, well over 200 domestic animals were killed by mountain lions in 2024 alone, and daytime mountain lion sightings are commonly occurring in every community on the western slope, including suburban neighborhoods and school yards.(n) In 2024, mountain lions were sighted on the campus of two of the three high schools on the County of El Dorados western slope.(o) The citizens and leadership of the County of El Dorado are doing everything possible to mitigate the remarkable increase in mountain lion activity and livestock loss by implementing all the traditional methods of deterring mountain lion conflict, including keeping livestock in fully fenced enclosures, bringing animals in at night, not leaving doors open so pets can go in and out at night, and the use of trained dogs, lights, and radios. Yet mountain lion encounters continue to escalate.(p) Recent peer-reviewed and published scientific studies have documented that preemptive or proactive pressure via nonlethal hound pursuit is the most effective method for hazing mountain lions and strongly reinforces their historic tendency to avoid humans and domestic dogs.(q) Current state policy on the issuance of depredation permits for dealing with problem mountain lions only allows hazing of mountain lions by government trappers after the first kill and typically requires multiple kills on the same parcel before issuing a lethal depredation permit. The implementation of this strict after the damage is done state policy has further escalated the changing mountain lion dynamics in the County of El Dorado, leading to the crisis county residents are currently experiencing.(r) In the County of El Dorado, the recent fatal human attack, combined with the ongoing increase in mountain lion sightings, their aggressive behavior, and daytime attacks on domestic animals and pets, is causing a swell of grief, anger, and fear throughout the public.(s) The County of El Dorado has become a hot spot for mountain lion encounters, and escalating public safety concerns require a special management strategy that is regionalized and tailored to address these unique circumstances.(t) Since the passage of Proposition 117, the lack of any preemptive, nonlethal pursuit of the species by houndspersons with scent hounds to restore mountain lion fear of humans and dogs has substantially promoted an upsurge in their willingness to confront humans, livestock, and pets, resulting in an increase in the legal, lethal taking of problem mountain lions via depredation permit, and likely the illegal removal of many more.(u) We must learn from the past, particularly during the 18 years in that California did not allow lethal-take mountain lion hunting, but did authorize permitted, experienced houndspersons with trained dogs to pursue, tree, and then release mountain lions. Reestablishing a fear of humans and dogs in mountain lions by reinstating their proactive, nonlethal pursuit by qualified and permitted houndspersons with hounds will substantially mitigate rapidly increasing public safety concerns, the loss of livestock and pets, and save the lives of countless mountain lions in the future. | |
| 63 | - | ||
| 64 | - | SECTION 1.SEC. 2. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following: | |
| 65 | - | ||
| 66 | - | ### SECTION 1.SEC. 2. | |
| 67 | 59 | ||
| 68 | 60 | (a) During the 197172 Regular Session, Assembly Bill 660 was passed and signed into law, placing a four-year moratorium on the hunting of mountain lions. | |
| 69 | 61 | ||
| 70 | 62 | (b) At that time, there was great debate over the health of mountain lion populations, but the Department of Fish and Wildlife had no factual evidence on the health of the species. | |
| 71 | 63 | ||
| 72 | 64 | (c) At that time, the popular estimate of 600 mountain lions in the state had been in use since 1919, and was based on the formula of one mountain lion to each township of mountain lion habitat within Californias boundaries. | |
| 73 | 65 | ||
| 74 | 66 | (d) Assembly Bill 660 had two major project goals: first, the establishment of a population estimate for the mountain lion in California; and second, the production of a science-based mountain lion management plan based on life history information. | |
| 75 | 67 | ||
| 76 | 68 | (e) Assembly Bill 660 temporarily prohibited the lethal hunting of mountain lions, but it did not prohibit the Department of Fish and Wildlife from issuing permits for the nonlethal pursuit of the species by hound handlers with purpose-bred scent hounds, also known as houndspersons. | |
| 77 | 69 | ||
| 78 | 70 | (f) During this period, the depredation of livestock by mountain lions and human encounters with mountain lions was nearly nonexistent. | |
| 79 | 71 | ||
| 80 | - | (g) The temporary moratorium placed on mountain lion hunting by the passage of Assembly Bill 660 was extended several times. | |
| 72 | + | (g) The temporary moratorium placed on mountain lion hunting by the passage of Assembly Bill 660 was extended several times. | |
| 81 | 73 | ||
| 82 | 74 | (h) Eighteen years later, although mountain lion populations were still considered stable and healthy by most biologists in our state, the species was designated as a specially protected mammal via the narrow passage of Proposition 117, an initiative measure approved by the electors at the June 5, 1990, statewide primary election. As the state wildlife laboratory noted in a published paper, this special protection was a political designation, with no basis in population abundance or trend. | |
| 83 | 75 | ||
| 84 | 76 | (i) The passage of Proposition 117 in 1990 prohibited the taking, injury, possession, or sale of mountain lion parts in California in perpetuity. By extension, Proposition 117 also banned the nonlethal pursuit and treeing of mountain lions with hounds. | |
| 85 | 77 | ||
| 86 | 78 | (j) For the first five years following the passage of Proposition 117, both mountain lion depredation on livestock and attacks on humans dramatically escalated, including two human fatalities. In response, the Department of Fish and Wildlife increased the issuance of lethal depredation permits, which diminished the rate of mountain lion encounters for the next 15 years. | |
| 87 | 79 | ||
| 88 | 80 | (k) On July 10, 2020, the Department of Fish and Wildlife implemented a Statewide Mountain Lion Depredation Approach that required the issuance of often multiple nonlethal depredation permits for a problem mountain lion before the issuance of a lethal depredation permit. Concomitant with this new depredation policy, attacks on humans again quickly escalated, including the midday fatal attack on a 21-year-old man in the County of El Dorado in March 2024. | |
| 89 | 81 | ||
| 90 | 82 | (l) The absence of houndspersons placing nonlethal pressure on mountain lions for the past 35 years has resulted in changes in their behavior. Traditionally nocturnal hunters and highly elusive, mountain lions now lack a fear of humans and domestic dogs, and are commonly sighted during the middle of the day, frequently around residential areas, resulting in substantially heightened public safety concerns and an exponential increase in the depredation of livestock and pets. | |
| 91 | 83 | ||
| 92 | 84 | (m) In the County of El Dorado, well over 200 domestic animals were killed by mountain lions in 2024 alone, and daytime mountain lion sightings are commonly occurring in every community on the western slope, including suburban neighborhoods and school yards. | |
| 93 | 85 | ||
| 94 | 86 | (n) In 2024, mountain lions were sighted on the campus of two of the three high schools on the County of El Dorados western slope. | |
| 95 | 87 | ||
| 96 | 88 | (o) The citizens and leadership of the County of El Dorado are doing everything possible to mitigate the remarkable increase in mountain lion activity and livestock loss by implementing all the traditional methods of deterring mountain lion conflict, including keeping livestock in fully fenced enclosures, bringing animals in at night, not leaving doors open so pets can go in and out at night, and the use of trained dogs, lights, and radios. Yet mountain lion encounters continue to escalate. | |
| 97 | 89 | ||
| 98 | 90 | (p) Recent peer-reviewed and published scientific studies have documented that preemptive or proactive pressure via nonlethal hound pursuit is the most effective method for hazing mountain lions and strongly reinforces their historic tendency to avoid humans and domestic dogs. | |
| 99 | 91 | ||
| 100 | 92 | (q) Current state policy on the issuance of depredation permits for dealing with problem mountain lions only allows hazing of mountain lions by government trappers after the first kill and typically requires multiple kills on the same parcel before issuing a lethal depredation permit. The implementation of this strict after the damage is done state policy has further escalated the changing mountain lion dynamics in the County of El Dorado, leading to the crisis county residents are currently experiencing. | |
| 101 | 93 | ||
| 102 | 94 | (r) In the County of El Dorado, the recent fatal human attack, combined with the ongoing increase in mountain lion sightings, their aggressive behavior, and daytime attacks on domestic animals and pets, is causing a swell of grief, anger, and fear throughout the public. | |
| 103 | 95 | ||
| 104 | 96 | (s) The County of El Dorado has become a hot spot for mountain lion encounters, and escalating public safety concerns require a special management strategy that is regionalized and tailored to address these unique circumstances. | |
| 105 | 97 | ||
| 106 | 98 | (t) Since the passage of Proposition 117, the lack of any preemptive, nonlethal pursuit of the species by houndspersons with scent hounds to restore mountain lion fear of humans and dogs has substantially promoted an upsurge in their willingness to confront humans, livestock, and pets, resulting in an increase in the legal, lethal taking of problem mountain lions via depredation permit, and likely the illegal removal of many more. | |
| 107 | 99 | ||
| 108 | 100 | (u) We must learn from the past, particularly during the 18 years in that California did not allow lethal-take mountain lion hunting, but did authorize permitted, experienced houndspersons with trained dogs to pursue, tree, and then release mountain lions. Reestablishing a fear of humans and dogs in mountain lions by reinstating their proactive, nonlethal pursuit by qualified and permitted houndspersons with hounds will substantially mitigate rapidly increasing public safety concerns, the loss of livestock and pets, and save the lives of countless mountain lions in the future. | |
| 109 | 101 | ||
| 110 | - | SEC. 2 | |
| 102 | + | SEC. 2. Section 4801.6 is added to the Fish and Game Code, to read:4801.6. (a) The department shall, no later than January 1, 2027, develop a pilot program to collect data on the efficacy of authorizing permitted private houndspersons to proactively haze mountain lions deemed to be a potential threat to public safety, livestock, or other domestic animals by the department, animal damage control officer, or local enforcement agency.(b) The pilot program described in subdivision (a) shall be known and may be refereed to as Tree and Free, and shall be limited to the County of El Dorado. The pilot program shall be operative for five years from the date that it commences.(c) In developing the pilot program, the department shall collaborate with appropriate leadership and enforcement personnel of the County of El Dorado in order to define the area within the county that the pilot program shall be authorized.(d) (1) At the conclusion of the pilot program, the department shall, no later than January 1, 2033, provide a report to the Legislature and the Fish and Game Commission on the efficacy of permitted houndspersons proactively hazing mountain lions as a nonlethal deterrent for reducing threats to public safety, livestock, and domestic animals. The report shall also evaluate the feasibility and cost of expanding the program to other areas experiencing an increased risk of encounters with problem mountain lions.(2) The requirement for submitting a report imposed under paragraph (1) is inoperative on January 1, 2037, pursuant to Section 10231.5 of the Government Code.(3) A report to be submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code.(e) As used in this section, qualified individuals shall include any authorized or permitted houndsperson, as described in Section 4808. | |
| 111 | 103 | ||
| 112 | - | SEC. 2 | |
| 104 | + | SEC. 2. Section 4801.6 is added to the Fish and Game Code, to read: | |
| 113 | 105 | ||
| 114 | - | ### SEC. 2. | |
| 106 | + | ### SEC. 2. | |
| 115 | 107 | ||
| 116 | - | 4801.6. (a) The department shall, no later than January 1, 2027, develop a pilot program to collect data on the efficacy of authorizing permitted private houndspersons to proactively haze mountain lions deemed to be a potential threat to public safety, livestock, or other domestic animals by the department, animal damage control officer, or local enforcement agency.(b) The pilot program described in subdivision (a) shall be known and may be refereed | |
| 108 | + | 4801.6. (a) The department shall, no later than January 1, 2027, develop a pilot program to collect data on the efficacy of authorizing permitted private houndspersons to proactively haze mountain lions deemed to be a potential threat to public safety, livestock, or other domestic animals by the department, animal damage control officer, or local enforcement agency.(b) The pilot program described in subdivision (a) shall be known and may be refereed to as Tree and Free, and shall be limited to the County of El Dorado. The pilot program shall be operative for five years from the date that it commences.(c) In developing the pilot program, the department shall collaborate with appropriate leadership and enforcement personnel of the County of El Dorado in order to define the area within the county that the pilot program shall be authorized.(d) (1) At the conclusion of the pilot program, the department shall, no later than January 1, 2033, provide a report to the Legislature and the Fish and Game Commission on the efficacy of permitted houndspersons proactively hazing mountain lions as a nonlethal deterrent for reducing threats to public safety, livestock, and domestic animals. The report shall also evaluate the feasibility and cost of expanding the program to other areas experiencing an increased risk of encounters with problem mountain lions.(2) The requirement for submitting a report imposed under paragraph (1) is inoperative on January 1, 2037, pursuant to Section 10231.5 of the Government Code.(3) A report to be submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code.(e) As used in this section, qualified individuals shall include any authorized or permitted houndsperson, as described in Section 4808. | |
| 117 | 109 | ||
| 118 | - | 4801.6. (a) The department shall, no later than January 1, 2027, develop a pilot program to collect data on the efficacy of authorizing permitted private houndspersons to proactively haze mountain lions deemed to be a potential threat to public safety, livestock, or other domestic animals by the department, animal damage control officer, or local enforcement agency.(b) The pilot program described in subdivision (a) shall be known and may be refereed | |
| 110 | + | 4801.6. (a) The department shall, no later than January 1, 2027, develop a pilot program to collect data on the efficacy of authorizing permitted private houndspersons to proactively haze mountain lions deemed to be a potential threat to public safety, livestock, or other domestic animals by the department, animal damage control officer, or local enforcement agency.(b) The pilot program described in subdivision (a) shall be known and may be refereed to as Tree and Free, and shall be limited to the County of El Dorado. The pilot program shall be operative for five years from the date that it commences.(c) In developing the pilot program, the department shall collaborate with appropriate leadership and enforcement personnel of the County of El Dorado in order to define the area within the county that the pilot program shall be authorized.(d) (1) At the conclusion of the pilot program, the department shall, no later than January 1, 2033, provide a report to the Legislature and the Fish and Game Commission on the efficacy of permitted houndspersons proactively hazing mountain lions as a nonlethal deterrent for reducing threats to public safety, livestock, and domestic animals. The report shall also evaluate the feasibility and cost of expanding the program to other areas experiencing an increased risk of encounters with problem mountain lions.(2) The requirement for submitting a report imposed under paragraph (1) is inoperative on January 1, 2037, pursuant to Section 10231.5 of the Government Code.(3) A report to be submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code.(e) As used in this section, qualified individuals shall include any authorized or permitted houndsperson, as described in Section 4808. | |
| 119 | 111 | ||
| 120 | - | 4801.6. (a) The department shall, no later than January 1, 2027, develop a pilot program to collect data on the efficacy of authorizing permitted private houndspersons to proactively haze mountain lions deemed to be a potential threat to public safety, livestock, or other domestic animals by the department, animal damage control officer, or local enforcement agency.(b) The pilot program described in subdivision (a) shall be known and may be refereed | |
| 112 | + | 4801.6. (a) The department shall, no later than January 1, 2027, develop a pilot program to collect data on the efficacy of authorizing permitted private houndspersons to proactively haze mountain lions deemed to be a potential threat to public safety, livestock, or other domestic animals by the department, animal damage control officer, or local enforcement agency.(b) The pilot program described in subdivision (a) shall be known and may be refereed to as Tree and Free, and shall be limited to the County of El Dorado. The pilot program shall be operative for five years from the date that it commences.(c) In developing the pilot program, the department shall collaborate with appropriate leadership and enforcement personnel of the County of El Dorado in order to define the area within the county that the pilot program shall be authorized.(d) (1) At the conclusion of the pilot program, the department shall, no later than January 1, 2033, provide a report to the Legislature and the Fish and Game Commission on the efficacy of permitted houndspersons proactively hazing mountain lions as a nonlethal deterrent for reducing threats to public safety, livestock, and domestic animals. The report shall also evaluate the feasibility and cost of expanding the program to other areas experiencing an increased risk of encounters with problem mountain lions.(2) The requirement for submitting a report imposed under paragraph (1) is inoperative on January 1, 2037, pursuant to Section 10231.5 of the Government Code.(3) A report to be submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code.(e) As used in this section, qualified individuals shall include any authorized or permitted houndsperson, as described in Section 4808. | |
| 121 | 113 | ||
| 122 | 114 | ||
| 123 | 115 | ||
| 124 | 116 | 4801.6. (a) The department shall, no later than January 1, 2027, develop a pilot program to collect data on the efficacy of authorizing permitted private houndspersons to proactively haze mountain lions deemed to be a potential threat to public safety, livestock, or other domestic animals by the department, animal damage control officer, or local enforcement agency. | |
| 125 | 117 | ||
| 126 | - | (b) The pilot program described in subdivision (a) shall be known and may be refereed | |
| 118 | + | (b) The pilot program described in subdivision (a) shall be known and may be refereed to as Tree and Free, and shall be limited to the County of El Dorado. The pilot program shall be operative for five years from the date that it commences. | |
| 127 | 119 | ||
| 128 | - | (c) In developing the pilot program, the department shall collaborate with appropriate leadership and enforcement personnel of the County of El Dorado in order to define the area within the county that | |
| 120 | + | (c) In developing the pilot program, the department shall collaborate with appropriate leadership and enforcement personnel of the County of El Dorado in order to define the area within the county that the pilot program shall be authorized. | |
| 129 | 121 | ||
| 130 | 122 | (d) (1) At the conclusion of the pilot program, the department shall, no later than January 1, 2033, provide a report to the Legislature and the Fish and Game Commission on the efficacy of permitted houndspersons proactively hazing mountain lions as a nonlethal deterrent for reducing threats to public safety, livestock, and domestic animals. The report shall also evaluate the feasibility and cost of expanding the program to other areas experiencing an increased risk of encounters with problem mountain lions. | |
| 131 | 123 | ||
| 132 | 124 | (2) The requirement for submitting a report imposed under paragraph (1) is inoperative on January 1, 2037, pursuant to Section 10231.5 of the Government Code. | |
| 133 | 125 | ||
| 134 | 126 | (3) A report to be submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code. | |
| 135 | 127 | ||
| 136 | 128 | (e) As used in this section, qualified individuals shall include any authorized or permitted houndsperson, as described in Section 4808. | |
| 137 | 129 | ||
| 138 | - | SEC. 3 | |
| 130 | + | SEC. 3. Section 4808 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:4808. (a) As used in this chapter, agent means the agent or employee of the owner of the damaged or destroyed property, any county or city predator control officer, any employee of the Animal Damage Control Section of the United States Department of Agriculture, any departmental personnel, or any authorized or permitted houndsman houndsperson registered with the department as possessing the requisite experience and having no prior conviction of any provision of this code or regulation adopted pursuant to this code. A plea of nolo contendere is a conviction for purposes of this section.(b) The department shall collaborate with federal, state, and county trapping experts and interested nonprofit organizations that have goals and objectives directly related to the interests of houndspersons in developing the criteria and procedure for registering authorized or permitted houndspersons.(c) In order to participate in the pilot program authorized pursuant to Section 4801.6, houndspersons permitted and registered with the department shall purchase an annual hazing permit. The department shall determine the cost of the permit, not to exceed the cost of implementing the pilot program authorized pursuant to Section 4801.6. | |
| 139 | 131 | ||
| 140 | - | SEC. 3 | |
| 132 | + | SEC. 3. Section 4808 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read: | |
| 141 | 133 | ||
| 142 | - | ### SEC. 3. | |
| 134 | + | ### SEC. 3. | |
| 143 | 135 | ||
| 144 | - | 4808. (a) As used in this chapter, agent means the agent or employee of the owner of the damaged or destroyed property, any county or city predator control officer, any employee of the Animal Damage Control Section of the United States Department of Agriculture, any departmental personnel, or any authorized or permitted houndsperson registered with the department as possessing the requisite experience and having no prior conviction of any provision of this code or regulation adopted pursuant to this code. A plea of nolo contendere is a conviction for purposes of this section.(b) The department shall collaborate with federal, state, and county trapping experts and interested nonprofit organizations that have goals and objectives directly related to the interests of houndspersons in developing the criteria and procedure for registering authorized or permitted houndspersons.(c) In order to participate in the pilot program authorized pursuant to Section 4801.6, houndspersons permitted and registered with the department shall purchase an annual hazing permit. The department shall determine the cost of the permit, not to exceed the cost of implementing the pilot program authorized pursuant to Section 4801.6. | |
| 136 | + | 4808. (a) As used in this chapter, agent means the agent or employee of the owner of the damaged or destroyed property, any county or city predator control officer, any employee of the Animal Damage Control Section of the United States Department of Agriculture, any departmental personnel, or any authorized or permitted houndsman houndsperson registered with the department as possessing the requisite experience and having no prior conviction of any provision of this code or regulation adopted pursuant to this code. A plea of nolo contendere is a conviction for purposes of this section.(b) The department shall collaborate with federal, state, and county trapping experts and interested nonprofit organizations that have goals and objectives directly related to the interests of houndspersons in developing the criteria and procedure for registering authorized or permitted houndspersons.(c) In order to participate in the pilot program authorized pursuant to Section 4801.6, houndspersons permitted and registered with the department shall purchase an annual hazing permit. The department shall determine the cost of the permit, not to exceed the cost of implementing the pilot program authorized pursuant to Section 4801.6. | |
| 145 | 137 | ||
| 146 | - | 4808. (a) As used in this chapter, agent means the agent or employee of the owner of the damaged or destroyed property, any county or city predator control officer, any employee of the Animal Damage Control Section of the United States Department of Agriculture, any departmental personnel, or any authorized or permitted houndsperson registered with the department as possessing the requisite experience and having no prior conviction of any provision of this code or regulation adopted pursuant to this code. A plea of nolo contendere is a conviction for purposes of this section.(b) The department shall collaborate with federal, state, and county trapping experts and interested nonprofit organizations that have goals and objectives directly related to the interests of houndspersons in developing the criteria and procedure for registering authorized or permitted houndspersons.(c) In order to participate in the pilot program authorized pursuant to Section 4801.6, houndspersons permitted and registered with the department shall purchase an annual hazing permit. The department shall determine the cost of the permit, not to exceed the cost of implementing the pilot program authorized pursuant to Section 4801.6. | |
| 138 | + | 4808. (a) As used in this chapter, agent means the agent or employee of the owner of the damaged or destroyed property, any county or city predator control officer, any employee of the Animal Damage Control Section of the United States Department of Agriculture, any departmental personnel, or any authorized or permitted houndsman houndsperson registered with the department as possessing the requisite experience and having no prior conviction of any provision of this code or regulation adopted pursuant to this code. A plea of nolo contendere is a conviction for purposes of this section.(b) The department shall collaborate with federal, state, and county trapping experts and interested nonprofit organizations that have goals and objectives directly related to the interests of houndspersons in developing the criteria and procedure for registering authorized or permitted houndspersons.(c) In order to participate in the pilot program authorized pursuant to Section 4801.6, houndspersons permitted and registered with the department shall purchase an annual hazing permit. The department shall determine the cost of the permit, not to exceed the cost of implementing the pilot program authorized pursuant to Section 4801.6. | |
| 147 | 139 | ||
| 148 | - | 4808. (a) As used in this chapter, agent means the agent or employee of the owner of the damaged or destroyed property, any county or city predator control officer, any employee of the Animal Damage Control Section of the United States Department of Agriculture, any departmental personnel, or any authorized or permitted houndsperson registered with the department as possessing the requisite experience and having no prior conviction of any provision of this code or regulation adopted pursuant to this code. A plea of nolo contendere is a conviction for purposes of this section.(b) The department shall collaborate with federal, state, and county trapping experts and interested nonprofit organizations that have goals and objectives directly related to the interests of houndspersons in developing the criteria and procedure for registering authorized or permitted houndspersons.(c) In order to participate in the pilot program authorized pursuant to Section 4801.6, houndspersons permitted and registered with the department shall purchase an annual hazing permit. The department shall determine the cost of the permit, not to exceed the cost of implementing the pilot program authorized pursuant to Section 4801.6. | |
| 140 | + | 4808. (a) As used in this chapter, agent means the agent or employee of the owner of the damaged or destroyed property, any county or city predator control officer, any employee of the Animal Damage Control Section of the United States Department of Agriculture, any departmental personnel, or any authorized or permitted houndsman houndsperson registered with the department as possessing the requisite experience and having no prior conviction of any provision of this code or regulation adopted pursuant to this code. A plea of nolo contendere is a conviction for purposes of this section.(b) The department shall collaborate with federal, state, and county trapping experts and interested nonprofit organizations that have goals and objectives directly related to the interests of houndspersons in developing the criteria and procedure for registering authorized or permitted houndspersons.(c) In order to participate in the pilot program authorized pursuant to Section 4801.6, houndspersons permitted and registered with the department shall purchase an annual hazing permit. The department shall determine the cost of the permit, not to exceed the cost of implementing the pilot program authorized pursuant to Section 4801.6. | |
| 149 | 141 | ||
| 150 | 142 | ||
| 151 | 143 | ||
| 152 | - | 4808. (a) As used in this chapter, agent means the agent or employee of the owner of the damaged or destroyed property, any county or city predator control officer, any employee of the Animal Damage Control Section of the United States Department of Agriculture, any departmental personnel, or any authorized or permitted houndsperson registered with the department as possessing the requisite experience and having no prior conviction of any provision of this code or regulation adopted pursuant to this code. A plea of nolo contendere is a conviction for purposes of this section. | |
| 144 | + | 4808. (a) As used in this chapter, agent means the agent or employee of the owner of the damaged or destroyed property, any county or city predator control officer, any employee of the Animal Damage Control Section of the United States Department of Agriculture, any departmental personnel, or any authorized or permitted houndsman houndsperson registered with the department as possessing the requisite experience and having no prior conviction of any provision of this code or regulation adopted pursuant to this code. A plea of nolo contendere is a conviction for purposes of this section. | |
| 153 | 145 | ||
| 154 | 146 | (b) The department shall collaborate with federal, state, and county trapping experts and interested nonprofit organizations that have goals and objectives directly related to the interests of houndspersons in developing the criteria and procedure for registering authorized or permitted houndspersons. | |
| 155 | 147 | ||
| 156 | 148 | (c) In order to participate in the pilot program authorized pursuant to Section 4801.6, houndspersons permitted and registered with the department shall purchase an annual hazing permit. The department shall determine the cost of the permit, not to exceed the cost of implementing the pilot program authorized pursuant to Section 4801.6. | |
| 157 | 149 | ||
| 158 | - | SEC. 4 | |
| 150 | + | SEC. 4. The Legislature finds and declares that a special statute is necessary and that a general statute cannot be made applicable within the meaning of Section 16 of Article IV of the California Constitution because of the severity of mountain lion attacks that have occurred in the County of El Dorado. | |
| 159 | 151 | ||
| 160 | - | SEC. 4 | |
| 152 | + | SEC. 4. The Legislature finds and declares that a special statute is necessary and that a general statute cannot be made applicable within the meaning of Section 16 of Article IV of the California Constitution because of the severity of mountain lion attacks that have occurred in the County of El Dorado. | |
| 161 | 153 | ||
| 162 | - | SEC. 4 | |
| 154 | + | SEC. 4. The Legislature finds and declares that a special statute is necessary and that a general statute cannot be made applicable within the meaning of Section 16 of Article IV of the California Constitution because of the severity of mountain lion attacks that have occurred in the County of El Dorado. | |
| 163 | 155 | ||
| 164 | - | ### SEC. 4. | |
| 156 | + | ### SEC. 4. | |
| 165 | 157 | ||
| 166 | - | SEC. 5 | |
| 158 | + | SEC. 5. The Legislature finds and declares that the amendments made by this act are consistent with, and further the purposes of, the California Wildlife Protection Act of 1990. | |
| 167 | 159 | ||
| 168 | - | SEC. 5 | |
| 160 | + | SEC. 5. The Legislature finds and declares that the amendments made by this act are consistent with, and further the purposes of, the California Wildlife Protection Act of 1990. | |
| 169 | 161 | ||
| 170 | - | SEC. 5 | |
| 162 | + | SEC. 5. The Legislature finds and declares that the amendments made by this act are consistent with, and further the purposes of, the California Wildlife Protection Act of 1990. | |
| 171 | 163 | ||
| 172 | - | ### SEC. 5. | |
| 164 | + | ### SEC. 5. |