Existing law, the Apiary Protection Act, generally regulates bee management and beekeepers and provides various enforcement and penalty provisions for violating the act.

This bill would provide for the damages that are recoverable by a plaintiff in a civil action for the wrongful and willful taking, possessing, harboring, or transporting of a beehive, for the wrongful and willful removal of bees from their beehive, or for the wrongful and willful killing or destroying of bees.

Existing law, the Apiary Protection Act, generally regulates bee management and beekeepers and provides various enforcement and penalty provisions for violating the act.

This bill would provide for the damages that are recoverable by a plaintiff in a civil action for the wrongful and willful taking, possessing, harboring, or transporting of a beehive, for the wrongful and willful removal of bees from their beehive, or for the wrongful and willful killing or destroying of bees.

Existing law, the Apiary Protection Act, generally regulates bee management and beekeepers and provides various enforcement and penalty provisions for violating the act.

This bill would provide for the damages that are recoverable by a plaintiff in a civil action for the wrongful and willful taking, possessing, harboring, or transporting of a beehive, for the wrongful and willful removal of bees from their beehive, or for the wrongful and willful killing or destroying of bees.

Existing law, the Apiary Protection Act, generally regulates bee management and beekeepers and provides various enforcement and penalty provisions for violating the act.

This bill would provide for the damages that are recoverable by a plaintiff in a civil action for the wrongful taking, possessing, harboring, or transporting of a beehive, for the wrongful removal of bees from their beehive, or for the wrongful killing or destroying of bees.

Existing law, the Apiary Protection Act, generally regulates bee management and beekeepers and provides various enforcement and penalty provisions for violating the act.

This bill would provide for the damages that are recoverable by a plaintiff in a civil action for the wrongful taking, possessing, harboring, or transporting of a beehive, for the wrongful removal of bees from their beehive, or for the wrongful killing or destroying of bees.

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 2755

Author:

:

Vote:

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: 6-0, 6/14/16

AYES: Jackson, Moorlach, Anderson, Leno, Monning, Wieckowski

NO VOTE RECORDED: Hertzberg

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 76-0, 4/28/16 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: California State Beekeepers Association

DIGEST: This bill provides for treble damages, as specified, plus an amount in fair compensation for the time and money properly expended by the plaintiff in recovering or replacing the bees, in any civil action for: (1) the wrongful and willful taking, possessing, harboring, or transporting of a beehive; (2) the wrongful and willful removal of bees from their beehive; or (3) the wrongful and willful killing or destroying of bees without the consent of the owner or the person lawfully in possession of those bees. This bill includes legislative intent language to that end, and sets forth various legislative findings and declarations relating to bees.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Provides that for every wrong there is a remedy.
2. Provides that every person is bound, without contract, to abstain from injuring the person or property of another, or infringing upon any of his or her rights.
3. Provides that one who obtains a thing without the consent of its owner, or by a consent afterwards rescinded, or by an unlawful exaction which the owner could not at the time prudently refuse, must restore it to the person from whom it was thus obtained, unless he has acquired a title thereto superior to that of such other person, or unless the transaction was corrupt and unlawful on both sides.
4. Governs, under the Apiary Protection Act, bee management and beekeepers and establishes enforcement mechanisms and specifies various penalties for violations of the Act. Existing law finds and declares that a healthy and vibrant apiary industry is important to the economy and welfare of the people of the State of California, and that the protection and promotion of this important industry is in the interest of the people of the State of California.
5. Provides that every person who feloniously steals, takes, carries, leads, or drives away the personal property of another is guilty of theft, as specified.
6. Provides that “grand theft” is any theft where the money, labor, or real or personal property taken, or when the property is taken from the person of another is of a value exceeding $950, except as specified.
7. Provides that theft in other cases is petty theft and is punishable by a fine not exceeding $1,000, or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months, or both.

This bill:

1. Provides that in any civil action for the wrongful and willful taking, possessing, harboring, or transporting of a beehive, for the wrongful and willful removal of bees from their beehive, or for the wrongful and willful killing or destroying of bees without the consent of the owner or the person lawfully in possession of those bees, the damage caused to the plaintiff shall be three times the value of the bees at the time of the taking, possessing, harboring, transporting, destroying, or vandalizing of the bees, plus an amount in fair compensation for the time and money properly expended by the plaintiff in recovering or replacing the bees.
2. Sets forth various findings and declarations, including:

• California has the largest beekeeping industry of any state in the United States. Nearly 500,000 colonies of bees are operated by 400 commercial and semicommercial beekeepers;
• Nearly three-fourths of the country’s documented commercial honeybee crop pollination is conducted in California;
• Drastic reductions in populations of native insect pollinators have created a great need for honeybee pollination to ensure reseeding and perpetuation of wild plants. These plants serve as sources of fruits, nuts, and vegetation for consumption by various birds and mammals; and
• In recent months, there has been a significant reduction in the honeybee population due to Colony Collapse Disorder and other problems such as poor nutrition due to lack of available “bee pasture,” that is, pollen- and nectar-producing flowers. This has created a serious threat to our food supply, and this crisis threatens to wipe out production of crops dependent on bees for pollination.

1. States the intent of the Legislature to create specific civil remedies for wrongfully taking, possessing, harboring, transporting, destroying, or vandalizing bees.

Background

California law, the Apiary Protection Act, recognizes the importance of a healthy and vibrant apiary industry to the economy and welfare of the people of the State of California, and declares that the protection and promotion of this important industry is in the interest of this state. Accordingly, the Act governs bee management and beekeepers, and in doing so establishes various enforcement mechanisms and penalties for violations of the Act. (See Food & Agr. Code Sec. 29000 et seq.)

According to various reports, in recent years, thieves have been stealing commercial beehives, disrupting operations for beekeepers and almond growers (which rely on pollination). For example, an article from February of this year detailed how one California beekeeping family discovered that 280 of their beehives were missing as they were about to be moved into nearby almond orchards—a loss estimated at $100,000, which includes both pollination income and the overall value of the hives. That same article detailed that about 240 beehives were stolen from two other bee yards in Glenn County in January, and another 210 were stolen from a beekeeper in Kern County. (See Souza, AgAlert, Beehive Thefts Add to Pressures at Bloom Time (Feb. 10, 2016) <http://www.agalert.com/story/?id=9297 [as of May 19, 2016].) According to another report:

The $6 billion California almond industry wouldn't exist if honeybees weren't brought in from around the US. 90 percent of all the commercial beehives colonized in the US are rented out to the California almond industry each year. Commercial hives are brought in from Michigan to Idaho. Some hives are trucked in all the way from the East Coast. As the pollinators continue to die off each year, it's becoming harder and more expensive to sustain important crops such as the almonds.

To make matters worse, counties in California are now reporting that mass beehive thefts are on the rise. Butte County Sheriff’s Detective, Jay Freeman, says the bee hive thefts have been "picking up this year" which “could be due to the increased prices and pollination fees and also a shortage of bees coming into California as well.” At least a half dozen thefts have been reported in Glenn, Kern, Colusa and Sutter Counties. In Butte County, the thefts have become a big deal. According to the Butte County Sheriff’s Office, “information that over 500 beehives have been reported stolen in two separate incidents which took place in two neighboring counties over the last two weeks.” (Devon, Natural News, Honeybee Populations Are Collapsing So Rapidly That Bee Hive Thefts Are Now on the Rise (Feb. 19, 2016) <http://www.naturalnews.com/053031_bee_colonies_population_decline_hive_thieves.html [as of May 19, 2016].)

In 2008, AB 2849 (Evans, 2008) would have enacted a substantially identical law as proposed by this bill to provide for specified remedies that would be available in a civil action involving the wrongful and willful taking, possessing, harboring, or transporting of a beehive, for the wrongful and willful removal of bees from their beehive, or for the wrongful and willful killing or destroying of bees without the consent of the owner or the person lawfully in possession of those bees. Despite unanimous support throughout both houses, the bill was ultimately vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger for reasons unrelated to the underlying policy of the bill.

Like AB 2849, this bill seeks to allow a plaintiff to recover three times the value of the bees at the time of the taking, possessing, harboring, transporting, destroying, or vandalizing of the bees, plus an amount in fair compensation for the time and money properly expended by the plaintiff in recovering or replacing the bees, for any wrongful and willful taking, possessing, harboring, or transporting of a beehive, removal of bees from their beehive, or killing or destroying of bees without the consent of the owner or the person lawfully in possession of those bees.

Comments

As stated by the author:

Bees pollinate some of California’s most valuable crops, such as almonds. Our farmers are struggling with a dwindling bee population and increasing costs associated with crop pollination. Beekeepers throughout the state are under a tremendous amount of pressure to keep up with the demand for pollination and to overcome many environmental circumstances to maintain healthy bee hives. Bee hive thefts have been on the rise this year, therefore now is the time to protect beekeepers’ property and to keep this segment of our agricultural economy vibrant.

AB 2755 provides for civil damages of three times the value of bees that are unlawfully taken, possessed, harbored, or transported from their beehive. These civil damages [ . . . ] will dis-incentivize the theft of bees and assist in restoring the losses of bee keepers.

The sponsor of this bill, the California State Beekeepers Association writes in support that “due to the increasing costs and high demand for commercial hives, there has been a rash of beehive thefts across the state. This problem has reached epidemic levels. Since January 1, 2016, 1,734 hive thefts have been reported to the California State Beekeepers Association. The theft of 200 beehives might be a $36,000 loss up front, but the damage is often three times worse, when growers factor in what the bees could have made pollinating crops.”

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

SUPPORT: (Verified 6/17/16)

California State Beekeepers Association (source)

California Citrus Mutual

California Farm Bureau Federation

Community Alliance with Family Farmers

Sierra Club California

OPPOSITION: (Verified 6/17/16)

None received

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 76-0, 4/28/16

AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Arambula, Atkins, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Patterson, Quirk, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Rendon

NO VOTE RECORDED: Chávez, Daly, Mathis, Olsen

Prepared by:

6/17/16 15:03:48

**** END ****

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE

Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair

2015-2016 Regular Session

Bill No: AB 2755 (Author:Gallagher)

Version: April 11, 2016

Hearing Date: June 14, 2016

Fiscal: No

Urgency: No

Consultant: RD

SUBJECT

Agriculture: bees: civil remedies

DESCRIPTION

This bill would provide for treble damages, as specified, plus an amount in fair compensation for the time and money properly expended by the plaintiff in recovering or replacing the bees, in any civil action for: (1) the wrongful and willful taking, possessing, harboring, or transporting of a beehive; (2) the wrongful and willful removal of bees from their beehive; or (3) the wrongful and willful killing or destroying of bees without the consent of the owner or the person lawfully in possession of those bees. This bill would include legislative intent language to that end, and would set forth various legislative findings and declarations relating to bees.

BACKGROUND

California law, the Apiary Protection Act, recognizes the importance of a healthy and vibrant apiary industry to the economy and welfare of the people of the State of California, and declares that the protection and promotion of this important industry is in the interest of this State. Accordingly, the Act governs bee management and beekeepers, and in doing so establishes various enforcement mechanisms and penalties for violations of the Act. (See Food & Agr. Code Sec. 29000 et seq.)

According to various reports, in recent years, thieves have been stealing commercial beehives, disrupting operations for beekeepers and almond growers (which rely on pollination). For example, an article from February of this year detailed how one California beekeeping family discovered that 280 of their beehives were missing as they were about to be moved into nearby almond orchards—a loss estimated at $100,000, which includes both pollination income and the overall value of the hives. That same article detailed that about 240 beehives were stolen from two other bee yards in Glenn County in January, and another 210 were stolen from a beekeeper in Kern County. (See Souza, AgAlert, Beehive Thefts Add to Pressures at Bloom Time (Feb. 10, 2016) <http://www.agalert.com/story/?id=9297> [as of May 19, 2016].) According to another report:

The $6 billion California almond industry wouldn't exist if honeybees weren't brought in from around the US. 90 percent of all the commercial beehives colonized in the US are rented out to the California almond industry each year. Commercial hives are brought in from Michigan to Idaho. Some hives are trucked in all the way from the East Coast. As the pollinators continue to die off each year, it's becoming harder and more expensive to sustain important crops such as the almonds.

To make matters worse, counties in California are now reporting that mass beehive thefts are on the rise. Butte County Sheriff’s Detective, Jay Freeman, says the bee hive thefts have been "picking up this year" which “could be due to the increased prices and pollination fees and also a shortage of bees coming into California as well.” At least a half dozen thefts have been reported in Glenn, Kern, Colusa and Sutter counties. In Butte [C]ounty, the thefts have become a big deal. According to the Butte County Sheriff’s Office, “information that over 500 beehives have been reported stolen in two separate incidents which took place in two neighboring counties over the last two weeks.” (Devon, Natural News, Honeybee Populations Are Collapsing So Rapidly That Bee Hive Thefts Are Now on the Rise (Feb. 19, 2016) <http://www.naturalnews.com/053031_bee_colonies_population_decline_hive_thieves.html> [as of May 19, 2016].)

In 2008, AB 2849 (Evans, 2008) would have enacted a substantially identical law as proposed by this bill to provide for specified remedies that would be available in a civil action involving the wrongful and willful taking, possessing, harboring, or transporting of a beehive, for the wrongful and willful removal of bees from their beehive, or for the wrongful and willful killing or destroying of bees without the consent of the owner or the person lawfully in possession of those bees. Despite unanimous support throughout both houses, the bill was ultimately vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger for reasons unrelated to the underlying policy of the bill. (See Comment 3.)

Like AB 2849, this bill would allow a plaintiff to recover three times the value of the bees at the time of the taking, possessing, harboring, transporting, destroying, or vandalizing of the bees, plus an amount in fair compensation for the time and money properly expended by the plaintiff in recovering or replacing the bees, for any wrongful and willful taking, possessing, harboring, or transporting of a beehive, removal of bees from their beehive, or killing or destroying of bees without the consent of the owner or the person lawfully in possession of those bees.

CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW

Existing law provides that for every wrong there is a remedy. (Civ. Code. Sec. 3523.)

Existing law provides that every person is bound, without contract, to abstain from injuring the person or property of another, or infringing upon any of his or her rights. (Civ. Code Sec. 1708.)

Existing law provides that one who obtains a thing without the consent of its owner, or by a consent afterwards rescinded, or by an unlawful exaction which the owner could not at the time prudently refuse, must restore it to the person from whom it was thus obtained, unless he has acquired a title thereto superior to that of such other person, or unless the transaction was corrupt and unlawful on both sides. (Civ. Code Sec. 1712.)

Existing law, the Apiary Protection Act, governs bee management and beekeepers and establishes enforcement mechanisms and specifies various penalties for violations of the Act. (Food & Agr. Code Sec. 29000 et seq.) Existing law finds and declares that a healthy and vibrant apiary industry is important to the economy and welfare of the people of the State of California, and that the protection and promotion of this important industry is in the interest of the people of the State of California. (Food & Agr. Code Sec. 29000.)

Existing law provides that every person who feloniously steals, takes, carries, leads, or drives away the personal property of another is guilty of theft, as specified. (Pen. Code Sec. 484.)

Existing law provides that “grand theft” is any theft where the money, labor, or real or personal property taken, or when the property is taken from the person of another is of a value exceeding $950, except as specified. (Pen. Code Sec. 487(a)-(c).)

Existing law provides that theft in other cases is petty theft and is punishable by a fine not exceeding $1,000, or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months, or both. (Pen. Code Secs. 488, 490.)

This bill would provide that in any civil action for the wrongful and willful taking, possessing, harboring, or transporting of a beehive, for the wrongful and willful removal of bees from their beehive, or for the wrongful and willful killing or destroying of bees without the consent of the owner or the person lawfully in possession of those bees, the damage caused to the plaintiff shall be three times the value of the bees at the time of the taking, possessing, harboring, transporting, destroying, or vandalizing of the bees, plus an amount in fair compensation for the time and money properly expended by the plaintiff in recovering or replacing the bees.

This bill would set forth various findings and declarations, including:

• California has the largest beekeeping industry of any state in the United States. Nearly 500,000 colonies of bees are operated by 400 commercial and semicommercial beekeepers;
• nearly three-fourths of the country’s documented commercial honeybee crop pollination is conducted in California;
• drastic reductions in populations of native insect pollinators have created a great need for honeybee pollination to ensure reseeding and perpetuation of wild plants. These plants serve as sources of fruits, nuts, and vegetation for consumption by various birds and mammals; and
• in recent months, there has been a significant reduction in the honeybee population due to Colony Collapse Disorder and other problems such as poor nutrition due to lack of available “bee pasture,” that is, pollen- and nectar-producing flowers. This has created a serious threat to our food supply, and this crisis threatens to wipe out production of crops dependent on bees for pollination.

This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to create specific civil remedies for wrongfully taking, possessing, harboring, transporting, destroying, or vandalizing bees.

COMMENT

1. Stated need for the bill

According to the author:

Bees pollinate some of California’s most valuable crops, such as almonds. Our farmers are struggling with a dwindling bee population and increasing costs associated with crop pollination. Beekeepers throughout the state are under a tremendous amount of pressure to keep up with the demand for pollination and to overcome many environmental circumstances to maintain healthy bee hives. Bee hive thefts have been on the rise this year, therefore now is the time to protect beekeepers’ property and to keep this segment of our agricultural economy vibrant.

AB 2755 provides for civil damages of three times the value of bees that are unlawfully taken, possessed, harbored, or transported from their beehive. These civil damages [ . . . ] will dis-incentivize the theft of bees and assist in restoring the losses of bee keepers.

In sponsor of this bill, the California State Beekeepers Association writes in support that “due to the increasing costs and high demand for commercial hives, there has been a rash of beehive thefts across the state. This problem has reached epidemic levels. Since January 1, 2016, 1,734 hive thefts have been reported to the California State Beekeepers Association. The theft of 200 beehives might be a $36,000 loss up front, but the damage is often three times worse, when growers factor in what the bees could have made pollinating crops.”

2. Treble damages

While the theft of bees already constitutes the criminal act of petty or grand theft, this bill seeks to further deter such acts by way of civil liability that allows for a victim to recover three times the value of the bees at the time of the taking, possessing, harboring, transporting, destroying, or vandalizing of the bees, plus an amount in fair compensation for the time and money properly expended by the plaintiff in recovering or replacing the bees.

Generally, the authorization of treble damages permits a court to triple the amount of the actual/compensatory damages to be awarded to a prevailing plaintiff, in part to punish the losing party for willful conduct. Notably, treble damages are a multiple of, and not an addition to, actual damages. Thus, where a person received an award of $100 for an injury, a court applying treble damages would raise the award to $300. To this end, staff notes that this bill’s authorization for treble damages appropriately applies only to the “wrongful and willful” killing of bees. Additionally, while the bill also allows the plaintiff to be awarded an additional amount to compensate for the time and money expended in recovering or replacing the bees, this bill limits that recovery to fair compensation and to the time and money that was properly (i.e., reasonably) expended.

Arguably, under existing law, while criminal charges can be accompanied by not only jail time, but also fines, such consequences might not sufficiently outweigh the potential profit to the thief. Additionally, even assuming that the thief is caught and successfully prosecuted and punished, this does not adequately compensate the victim beekeeper whose property has been stolen and potentially irreparably damaged, and needs to be replaced. These beekeepers suffer the loss of not only the value of the hives, including the honey production that would come from those hives, but also the investment put into building and caring for those hives and those costs of replacing those hives. Indeed, the sponsor of this bill, the California State Beekeepers Association, asserts that the damage is often three times worse than the loss up front, once the grower factors in what the bees could have made pollinating crops. (See Comment 1, above.)

In support of the bill, the California Farm Bureau Federation (CFBF) writes about the importance of honeybees to California crops, without which production levels would be significantly diminished. “Unfortunately,” CFPF writes, “the importance of pollination services has not gone without notice by criminals looking for financial gain. Just this year, more than 1,700 hives have been reported stolen. This theft impacts not only the beekeepers who owned them, but the farmers depending on their pollination.” Furthermore, CFPF also notes that the bill’s approach to this problem by allowing for treble damages “is not without precedent in California law. Food and Agriculture Code Section 21855 provides cattle owners with damages in the amount of four times the value of their cattle in addition to money expended in pursuit of the cattle. Livestock owners are eligible to receive twice the value of livestock killed by dogs from the dog’s owner, pursuant to Food and Agriculture Code Section 31501.”

3. Governor’s veto message of AB 2849

As noted in the Background, this bill is substantially identical to AB 2849 (Evans, 2008) which was ultimately vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger. In vetoing AB 2849, Governor Schwarzenegger stated that he was forced to prioritize the bills sent for his consideration because of the “historic delay in passing the 2008-2009 State Budget”:

Given the delay, I am only signing bills that are the highest priority for California. This bill does not meet that standard and I cannot sign it at this time. 

Support: California Citrus Mutual; California Farm Bureau Federation; Community Alliance with Family Farmers; Sierra Club California

Opposition: None Known

HISTORY

Source: California State Beekeepers Association

Related Pending Legislation: None Known

Prior Legislation: None Known

Prior Vote:

Assembly Floor (Ayes 76, Noes 0)

Assembly Judiciary Committee (Ayes 10, Noes 0)

Assembly Agriculture Committee (Ayes 9, Noes 0)

**************

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 2755

Author:(Gallagher)

As Amended Ver:

Majority vote

SUMMARY: Would provide increased civil penalties for the knowing and willful destruction or thefts of beehives of three times the value of the beehives and bees, plus compensation for time and money replacing the bees.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Creates the Apiary Protection Act, which regulates bee management and beekeepers and provides various enforcement and penalty provisions for violating the act.
2. Allows for specific civil penalties for loss or damage to property in numerous instances.

FISCAL EFFECT: None

COMMENTS: California has the largest beekeeping industry of any state in the nation. Nearly three-quarters of the country's documented commercial honeybee crop pollination is conducted in California, adding over $6 billion to the value of California agricultural products. Nearly 500,000 colonies of bees are operated by 400 commercial and semi-commercial beekeepers. The state is also the leader in honey production.

The bee population has been decreasing due to Colony Collapse Disorder and other factors associated with a lack of adequate bee forage. This decline has increased the costs of pollination. At the peak of the California pollination season beehive rental can reach almost $200 per hive, which is five time the cost of beehive rentals from a decade ago.

Recent news articles report the tightening of supply coincides with an increased incidence of beehive thefts that is occurring across the state. One beekeeper in Yuba City reported a loss of beehives valued at $100,000, which includes both foregone pollination income and the value of the hives. Since January 1, 2016, 1,734 hive thefts have been reported to the California State Beekeepers Association.

This bill will provide for increased civil damages of three times the value of bees that are stolen or damaged. Supporters believe the increased civil penalties will dis-incentivize the theft of bees and assist in restoring the losses of bee keepers. Furthermore, supporters explain that this bill is not without precedent, pointing out that current law provides cattle owners with damages in the amount of four times the value of their cattle in addition to money expended in pursuit of the cattle, and livestock owners are eligible to receive twice the value of livestock killed by dogs from the dog's owner.

There is no opposition on file.

Related Legislation: AB 2849 (Evans) of 2008 would have provided for triple damages recoverable by a plaintiff in a civil action for the wrongful taking, possessing, harboring, or transporting of a beehive, for the wrongful removal of bees from their beehive, or for the wrongful killing or destroying of bees. AB 2849 was vetoed by the Governor.

Analysis Prepared by: Victor Francovich / AGRI. / (916) 319-2084 FN: 0002795

Date of Hearing:

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON

, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:

Author:() – As Ver:

SUBJECT:

KEY ISSUE: In order to better protect california's disappearing but vitally important honeybee population, should a person who wrongfully and willfully steals, removes, kills, or destroys bees be subject to civil damages equal to three times the value of the bees?

SYNOPSIS

This measure addresses a serious problem. A troubling decline in California's honeybee population has raised the value of bees which, in turn, has led to a corresponding rise in beehive thefts. To cite just one example, thieves in Butte County stole over 500 beehives in two separate incidents over a two-week period. The impacts of these crimes go beyond the affected beekeeper. Honeybees not only produce an important agricultural product, they also pollinate wild and domestic plants as well as many farm crops. These plants, in turn, provide food for birds and mammals, including the human variety. Stealing bees is already a crime, whether viewed as grand theft or petty theft, but apparently the existing criminal penalties are not an effective deterrent. As one Riverside County Sheriff observed, bee theft is hard to prove. This especially true in light of the fact that prosecutors must meet the criminal standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt." Local district attorneys may be reluctant to prosecute an action unless they are certain that this burden can be met. This bill, therefore, would permit a person who is harmed to seek treble damages in a civil action for the wrongful and willful taking of a beehive, the wrongful and willful removal of bees from their hive, or the wrongful and willful killing of bees without the consent of the owner or the person lawfully in possession of the bees. This bill is sponsored by the California State Beekeepers Association and is supported by the Sierra Club and several farm groups. In 2008, a similar measure (AB 2849, Evans) passed unanimously in both houses of the Legislature, only to be vetoed by then-Governor Schwarzenegger. In that year the Governor vetoed hundreds of bills that he deemed "less significant," not because he necessarily disagreed with them, but because of his dispute with the Legislature during a 2008 budget impasse.

Although there is no opposition to this bill, representatives of the pest control industry have expressed concerns about the bill, fearing that it could somehow subject them to treble damages when they are hired to eradicate bee colonies. However, for reasons stated in the analysis, this fear does not seem very well-founded, given that the treble damages only apply to "wrongful and willing" actions done without the consent of the owner or other person in lawful possession of the bees. This bill passed out of the Assembly Agriculture Committee on a 9-0 vote, with one member not voting.

SUMMARY: Permits a person who is harmed by the stealing or killing of bees, or the destruction of beehives, to recover treble damages in a civil action. Specifically, this bill:

1. Makes findings and declarations about the commercial and environmental benefits of beekeeping, the drastic reduction in the state's bee populations, and the rising number of thefts of bees and beehives in California, and states the intent of the Legislature to create civil remedies for wrongfully taking, possessing, harboring, transporting, destroying, or vandalizing bees.
2. Provides that in a civil action for the wrongful and willful taking, possessing, harboring, or transporting of a beehive, for the wrongful and willful removal of bees from their beehive, or for the wrongful and willful killing or destroying of bees without the consent of the owner or the person lawfully in possession of those bees, the damage caused to the plaintiff shall be three times the value of the bees at the time of the taking, possessing, harboring, transporting, destroying, or vandalizing of the bees, plus an amount in fair compensation for the time and money properly expended by the plaintiff in recovering or replacing the bees.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Regulates, under the Apiary Protection Act, bee management and beekeepers and establishes enforcement mechanisms and penalties for violations of the Act. (Food and Agriculture Code Sections 29000-29321.)
2. Defines "grand theft" as any theft where the money, labor, or real or personal property taken is of a value exceeding $400, or when the property is taken from the person of another. However, provides that theft of certain agricultural and aqua-cultural products shall be deemed grand theft if their value exceeds $100. Provides that theft in other cases is petty theft, and is punishable as a misdemeanor. (Penal Code Sections 487 (a)-(c), 488, and 490.)

FISCAL EFFECT: As currently in print this bill is keyed non-fiscal.

COMMENTS: Though little known beyond the agricultural and environmental communities, California has witnessed a troubling decline in its honeybee population. Declining numbers has raised the market value of bees and beehives, and this in turn has created a powerful incentive for bee theft. According to the California State Beekeepers Association, there have been 1,734 thefts reported to the Association since January 1, 2016. Honeybees not only produce an important agricultural product, they also play a vital role in the pollination of many important farm crops, and they also pollinate many wild and domestic plants that provide food for other critters. Stealing bees, like stealing anything else, is a crime; but the crime is hard to prove and the current criminal penalties do not provide an adequate deterrent. This bill would entitle a person who is harmed by the wrongful taking, possessing, harboring, transporting, destroying, killing, or vandalizing of bees to bring a civil action and recover treble damages against the thief.

The Advantages of Civil Actions: While stealing bees is already a crime under the Penal Code, whether viewed as grand or petty theft, the criminal penalties are apparently an ineffective deterrent. As one Riverside County Sheriff observed, bee theft is often very difficult to prove. (http://abc7.com/news/bee-hive-thefts-on-the-rise-in-riverside-county--/229261/). Moreover, prosecutors must meet the criminal law's highest burden of "proof beyond a reasonable doubt." Local district attorneys may be reluctant to prosecute an action unless they are certain that this burden can be met. In light of the inadequacy of criminal penalties, this bill would appropriately allow a person who is harmed to bring a civil action for wrongful and willful taking of a beehive, the wrongful and willful removal of bees from their hive, or the wrongful and willful killing or destroying of bees without the consent of the owner or the person lawfully in possession of the bees. The bill would specify that the damage caused to the plaintiff in such a civil action would be three times the value of the bees at the time of the wrongful and willful act. Not only would treble economic damages provide a stronger deterrent, but a plaintiff in a civil action would only need to meet the civil law's "preponderance of evidence" standard – a much easier burden than the criminal standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt." Perhaps most importantly, a civil action allows the injured party to engage in self-help by lawful judicial means, instead of relying upon public prosecutors who might not view bee theft as a top priority.

Concerns brought up by the pest control industry may be exaggerated. Although it has not submitted a formal letter of opposition or concern, the Pest Control Operators of California informed the Committee that it has concerns about the bill and would like an exemption for its industry. Specifically, the pest control industry fears that it could be subject to the civil action and treble damages if it were to kill or eradicate bees in the normal course of its business operations. However, this does not seem likely. The bill quite clearly states that treble damages only apply to the “wrongful and willful” killing of bees, and it does not apply to anyone acting with the consent of the owner or any other person in lawful possession of the bees. It is difficult to see how a pest control company that was hired to eradicate bees would be deemed to have committed a “wrongful and willful” act. In addition, unless the pest control company killed bees of someone other than the person who hired the company, it would have acted with the consent of the owner or person in lawful possession of the bees and thus would not be liable under this bill. It is conceivable that a pest control company could be hired to eradicate pests on a neighboring person’s property and accidentally kill the bees next door. But by definition an accidental killing is not a “willful” killing. If a pest control company negligently killed bees on neighboring property, it would not be liable for the treble damages under this bill, although it would be, and probably should be, liable for actual damages proximately caused by its negligence.

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: The California Farm Bureau Federation (Farm Bureau) supports this bill because it will "help create further disincentives against theft." The Farm Bureau notes that "California agriculture thrives with the help of managed honeybees," estimating the value of honeybee pollination services at "between $4 and $11 billion." The Farm Bureau argues that the treble damages provided for in this bill are not unreasonable, noting that Food and Agriculture Code Section 21855 allows a victim of cattle theft to recover four times the market value of the animals.

The California Alliance with Family Farmers (CAFF), a statewide organization that represents both farmers and non-farm urban residents who support sustainable food and farm policies, support AB 2755 because it will "protect the beekeepers who make pollination possible." While CAFF deplores all theft from farming operations, they "find it particularly galling that theft of beehives is increasing at the same time as bees themselves are under such stress from a variety of sources." CAFF concludes by reminding us that "many crops in California rely on pollinators to make production possible."

California Citrus Mutual (CCM) supports this bill. Even though the citrus industry does not require pollination, many citrus growers have arrangements with commercial beekeepers to allow hives to be placed adjacent to citrus groves. According to CCM, in most cases "there is no monetary or cultural benefit to this arrangement for the citrus grower. It is an act of good will by one segment of agriculture to another." Beekeepers benefit from this arrangement as honeybees have access to citrus nectar. CCM claims that agricultural crime is on the rise in general, and that bee theft is just one aspect of this problem. CCM applauds this bill and its author for addressing "this serious issue and for castling light on the greater challenge of agricultural crime and theft in California."

The Sierra Club supports this bill because it will provide a greater deterrent to vandals engaged in the willful destruction and killing of bees. The Sierra Club notes that bees play "a significant role in the pollination of fruits and nuts and California produces 20,000,000 pounds of them each year. Bees are dying at an alarming rate due to colony collapse, pesticides, and parasites. This poses a major threat to the species as well as our economy."

Related Legislation: AB 2849 (Evans, 2008) would have also provided for treble damages recoverable by a plaintiff in a civil action for the wrongful taking, possessing, harboring, or transporting of a beehive, for the wrongful removal of bees from their beehive, or for the wrongful killing or destroying of bees. Despite the fact that AB 2849 did not receive a single negative vote in any committee or floor vote, the bill was vetoed by then-Governor Schwarzenegger, one of hundreds of "less significant" bills that the Governor refused to sign during the budget impasse in 2008.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

California Beekeepers Association (sponsor)

California Citrus Mutual

California Farm Bureau Federation

Community Alliance with Family Farmers

Sierra Club

Opposition

None on file

Analysis Prepared by:

Date of Hearing: March 30, 2016

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE

Bill Dodd, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2755 (

Author:Gallagher) – As amended Ver:March 28, 2016

SUBJECT: Agriculture: bees: civil remedies.

SUMMARY: This bill would provide increased civil penalties for the destruction or thefts of beehives of three times the value of the beehives and bees, plus compensation for time and money replacing the bees.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Creates the Apiary Protection Act, which regulates bee management and beekeepers and provides various enforcement and penalty provisions for violating the act.
2. Allows for specific civil penalties for loss or damage to property in numerous instances.

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown.

COMMENTS: California has the largest beekeeping industry of any state in the nation. Nearly three-quarters of the country’s documented commercial honeybee crop pollination is conducted in California, adding over six billion dollars to the value of California agricultural products. Nearly 500,000 colonies of bees are operated by 400 commercial and semi-commercial beekeepers. The state is also the leader in honey production.

The bee population has been decreasing due to Colony Collapse Disorder and other factors associated with a lack of adequate bee forage. This decline has increased the costs of pollination. At the peak of the California pollination season beehive rental can reach almost $200 per hive, which is five time the cost of beehive rentals from a decade ago.

Recent news articles report the tightening of supply coincides with an increased incidence of beehive thefts that is occurring across the state. One beekeeper in Yuba City reported a loss of beehives valued at $100,000, which includes both foregone pollination income and the value of the hives. Since January 1, 2016, 1,734 hive thefts have been reported to the California State Beekeepers Association.

AB 2755 will provide for increased civil damages of three times the value of bees that are stolen or damaged. Supporters believe the increased civil penalties will dis-incentivize the theft of bees and assist in restoring the losses of bee keepers. Furthermore, supporters explain that AB 2755 is not without precedent, pointing out that current law provides cattle owners with damages in the amount of four times the value of their cattle in addition to money expended in pursuit of the cattle, and livestock owners are eligible to receive twice the value of livestock killed by dogs from the dog’s owner.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

California State Beekeepers Association

California Farm Bureau Federation

Opposition

None on file.

Analysis Prepared by: Victor Francovich / AGRI. / (916) 319-2084