I just returned from the Capitol.
After two days of lobbying and today testifying in support of the bill, the bill was defeated in the Senate Natural Resources Committee. I will write more tomorrow but am very tired and disappointed.
The good news however, is that the request for an audit of the Fish and Game Preservation Fund received a unanimous vote. The audit will take around 4 months.

Assemblyman Dave Cogdill wants to thank all of you who showed such great support for his bill and he will continue to fight for our hatcheries.
This email was sent out to supporters and explains what happened today.

Brad







I email you with a very heavy heart. AB 2280 did not receive enough votes to move out of Sen. Natural Resources, despite all the efforts by all of you, Mr. Cogdill, and his staff. The analysis written by the committee was very biased and did much harm. We found the arguments against the bill to be specious. In the same breath, the opponents say that the bill does nothing and yet it ties the hands of DFG who has already been beaten up. We are very disappointed but we don't stop here...
Yesterday, the Joint Legislative Audit Committee approved our request that the State Auditor conduct an audit of the Preservation Fund which should be completed early next year. That is a victory. Likewise, we are still rallying behind funding in the budget from the Tideland Oil pot of money, which provides the immediate fix. Mr. Cogdill is still committed to ensuring that the hatcheries are fully funded. This issue is not going away just because we suffered a defeat.
I will continue to keep you updated on any progress in any of these matters. Thanks for your continued support.
Erin M. Guerrero
Office of Assemblyman Dave Cogdill
916-319-2025

Well I can't say that I am not disappointed, but by Monday, while lobbying for the bill at the Capitol, I could see that getting the needed votes would be difficult. The biggest problem was the analysis written by the Senate Resources and Wildlife Committee.
Here it is:


Arguments in Opposition: California Trout, Trout Unlimited, and the Federation of Fly Fishers argue that the findings of three prior reports refutes the arguments offered to support this bill.

According to the reports provided to the Committee by California Trout, "only 8% of those who buy fishing licenses do so to fish for hatchery trout. These findings (refute the) information AB 2280 advocates are presenting to different legislative committees regarding this bill."

California Fly Fisher argues that "To put it simply, AB 2280 is extraordinarily bad legislation. By arbitrarily requiring one-third of fishing license revenues be used to support hatcheries, AB 2280 will necessarily force the Department of Fish and Game to reduce funding for other programs that are critical to ensuring the Californians enjoy a wide range of angling opportunities. These programs include habitat enhancement, wild-fish management, steelhead and salmon recovery?."

Comments: As written, this bill will have no effect. The bill creates the Hatcheries and Fish Planting Fund in the State Treasury, and then states that the funds dedicated to it may be used "to support other activities eligible to be funded from revenue generated by sport fishing license fees." Sport fishing license fees go into the Fish and Game Preservation Fund; DFG uses proceeds from the Fish and Game Preservation Fund to pay for almost every facet of their mission.

This means that the "other eligible activities" that could be supported by the new Hatcheries and Fish Planting Fund would be everything DFG currently does with license fees placed in the Fish and Game Preservation Fund. In other words, the new Hatcheries and Fish Planting Facilities Fund would be available to serve the same activities as the Fish and Game Preservation Fund, which, as the author notes in arguing for this bill, is spent at the discretion of DFG.

Assuming, however, that the author intends for this bill to benefit only the hatchery program, it would represent a questionable and major shift in policy. As has been noted in many other committee analyses, DFG has been under-funded for the better part of the last decade, and has suffered significant reductions in every area, including law enforcement, in the recent budget cuts. Given the magnitude of the shift in funds that the author appears to intend, it would be virtually certain to result in game wardens being pulled out of the field and losing their jobs. The Fish and Game Preservation Fund contributes one-third of DFG total budget, and over half of the wages for game wardens.


SUPPORT: California Lodging Industry Association
California State Association of Counties
California State Employees Association
California Travel Industry Association
Casitas Municipal Water District
City of Angels Camp
Inyo County Board of Supervisors
Inyo-Mono Fish and Game Advisory Commission
Merced Irrigation District
Mono County Board of Supervisors
Mono County Economic Development and Special Projects
Regional Council of Rural Counties
Sun City Roseville Rod and Reel Club
United Angers Marine Resource and Conservation Program
United Anglers of Southern California
3 Individuals

OPPOSITION: California Fly Fisher
California Fly Fishers Unlimited
California Trout
California Trout
Federation of Fly Fishers
Friends of the Tuolumne, Inc.
Shasta Mayflies
Trout Unlimited
15 Individuals



Fish and Game had a study done by Cal State Chico which found that 60% of anglers fish for hatchery trout. That doesn’t even figure in Steelhead and Salmon. Where CalTrout came up with their 8% figure is anybodies guess.

The other claim was that Game Wardens would lose their jobs as a result of passage of the bill. We had done our homework on this. There would still be money for all fishing programs and plenty of money would be left for Wardens. As you will notice, the Game Warden’s union, CAUSE, had never shown any opposition to the bill. In all the meetings Assemblyman Cogdill had with the DFG Director, this issue was never raised.

This bill would have only set aside 1/6 of the Fish and Game Preservation Fund.

In any case, we only look at this as a defeat but we will not give up the cause. This year DFG has already taken in $48 million in sportfishing license revenue and it’s only July. Last year the fishing license revenues were $48 million for the whole year.

With the audit of the Fish and Game Preservation Fund, anglers and hunters alike will see where their license fees are going. That is the good news...

Nearly 4000 anglers sent letters of support to Assemblyman Cogdill...