Date of Hearing: May 1, 2019

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Lorena Gonzalez, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 527

Author:(Voepel) – As Amended Ver:April 22, 2019

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill extends for ten years the existing provision that permits the commercial importation, possession with intent to sell and sale in California of the dead body, or parts and products from the dead body, of an alligator or crocodile. Additionally, this bill:

1. States it does not authorize the importation or sale of any alligator or crocodile, or the products thereof, listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act, or that would be in violation of any federal law or international treaty.
2. Requires all specified alligator or crocodile products sold in the state prior to January 1, 2030, to be accompanied by a disclosure that reads: this product was made using materials that were sourced in full compliance with the provisions of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).

FISCAL EFFECT:

1. Unknown annual increased Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW) costs. It is difficult to determine the cost of this bill, because the point of enforcement is confusing in the disclosure provision. It will likely cost in the range of $400,000 to $1 million (two to five additional DFW wardens). However, this may be an under-estimate.

As an example, when the bill to ban ivory (SB 96, Chapter 475, Statutes of 2015) was moving through the Legislature, costs were estimated to be $1 million per year. However, when the bill was enacted, DFW hired 10 additional wardens at a cost double the estimate.

2) Unknown, potential increased revenue resulting from increased enforcement and penalties.

COMMENTS:

1) Purpose. According to the author:

My AB 527 supports the successful nature conservancy efforts for crocodilians species throughout the world, by recognizing and supporting the symbiotic relationship between sustainable farming efforts and wildlife conservation efforts which directly benefit wild animals and humans, and create economies in poor countries which provide livelihoods for indigenous people.

2) Support and Opposition. Supporters argue the industry is well regulated and contributes significantly to the conservation of alligator and crocodile species. They point to sustainable utilization programs in Louisiana and Zimbabwe that have been lauded for having helped species recover while providing economic opportunities to families and communities. Supporters note that no other state or country bans alligator and crocodile trade, which is valued at approximately $1 billion per year. Additionally, supporters contend a ban would prevent valuable medical research and drug development using alligator and crocodile blood and protein.

Opponents assert crocodiles and alligators are under serious threat due to loss of habitat from climate change, human development, automobile collisions and poaching. They note significant amounts of illegally traded wildlife products seized are sourced from wild crocodiles and caimans. In shipments from Latin America seized in the United States, caiman and crocodile species were two of the five most illegally traded animals. Opponents also assert the farming and slaughter of these reptiles are conducted using cruel, barbaric and inhumane methods.

3) Prior Legislation.

1. SB 1485 (Hollingsworth), Chapter 660, Statutes of 2006, repealed the prohibition on the importation for commercial purposes, possession with intent to sell or sale within the state of alligators and crocodiles. It also reinstated the prohibition effective January 1, 2010.
2. SB 609 (Hollingsworth), Chapter 15, Statutes of 2009, extended the sunset allowing the importation, possession and sale of alligator and crocodile products in California for five years, until 2015.
3. AB 2075 (Alejo), Chapter 464, Statutes of 2014, extended the sunset on provisions of existing law allowing the importation, possession and sale of alligator and crocodile products in California for five years, until 2020.

Analysis Prepared by: Jennifer Galehouse / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: April 9, 2019

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON WATER, PARKS, AND WILDLIFE

Eduardo Garcia, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 527 (

Author:Voepel) – As Amended Ver:April 3, 2019

SUBJECT: Importation, possession, or sale of endangered wildlife

SUMMARY: Would allow the commercial importation, possession, and sale of parts and products from non-endangered alligator and crocodile in California to continue until 2030. Specifically, this bill:

1. Extends for ten years, until January 1, 2030, the existing provision that permits the commercial importation, possession with intent to sell, and sale in California of the dead body, or parts and products from the dead body, of an alligator and crocodile.
2. Does not authorize the importation or sale of any alligator or crocodile, or the products thereof, that is listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act, or that would be in violation of any federal law or international treaty.
3. Makes several findings and declarations regarding the following:
   1. Louisiana’s and other countries’ conservation efforts for alligators and crocodiles that involved the commercial farming of the species;
   2. The successful recovery of several alligator and crocodile species populations;
   3. The current protections for endangered alligator and crocodile species and enforcement efforts of national and international agencies; and,
   4. Research into the possible development medicines for a variety of viruses and bacteria for both humans and agricultural applications, based on the immune systems of alligators and crocodiles.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Makes it unlawful to import into the state for commercial purposes, to possess with intent to sell, or to sell within the state, the dead body, or any part or product thereof, of specified wild animal species that are not native to California. Violation of this prohibition is punishable as a misdemeanor subject to a fine of not less than $1,000 and not more than $5,000, or six months imprisonment, or both. [Penal Code (PEN) §653(o)]
2. Makes it unlawful, commencing January 1, 2020, to import into this state for commercial purposes, to possess with intent to sell, or to sell within the state, the dead body, or any part or product thereof, of a crocodile or alligator. Importation, possession, and sale of such products are currently allowed in California until that date, except that the law does not authorize importation or sale of any alligator or crocodilian species, or any products thereof, that are listed as endangered under the federal Endangered Species Act, or where such action would be in violation of any federal law or international treaty to which the United States is a party. (PEN §653o)

FISCAL EFFECT: This bill was keyed by Legislative Counsel as non-fiscal.

COMMENTS: This bill would extend the sunset provision that allows the commercial importation, possession, and sale of alligator and crocodile parts and products for ten years. Such activities, which were permitted in 2006, would be allowed in California until 2030 provided the species are not endangered or protected under international treaty.

Author’s Statement:

Every reasonable person wants to protect our natural resources, and assure the humane and ethical treatment of animals. The State of Louisiana has championed balanced scientific based policies and practices related to alligators, and has done so in ways which preserve natural habitats, dramatically increased wild alligator populations, and sustain the economic well-being of its residents who rely upon a vibrant alligator industry.

Louisiana’s approach to protecting alligators has been so successful that the World Trade Organization, United Nations’ CITES treaty, and thousands of conservation scientists from groups including the International Union for Conserving Nature, have lauded the alligator model as the example to follow, and have sought to implement that model for thousands of threatened or endangered species of animals.

But now an old California law, which has been on the books for decades, jeopardizes the successful global conservation and population management programs which have worked so well. This old California law is outdated, does not consider the many scientific advancements made in support of crocodilian population management, and stands in the way of many veterans, members of the LGBTQ community, elderly, and other medical patients receiving dozens of new medicines which are derived from the immune systems of crocodilians.

My AB 527 supports the successful nature conservancy efforts for crocodilians species throughout the world, by recognizing and supporting the symbiotic relationship between sustainable farming efforts and wildlife conservation efforts which directly benefit wild animals and humans, and create economies in poor countries which provide livelihoods for indigenous people.

Background: The American alligator is one species of the reptile order crocodilia, which includes crocodiles and caimans, that is commercially traded for both its hide and meat. Because of the threatened or endangered status of some crocodilians, both domestic and international trade are highly regulated and monitored. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), through the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and other wildlife laws, monitors state programs and inspects all shipments of hides that are exported. Individual state agencies regulate both wild harvest and farm production activities. Foreign importers of alligator and crocodile hides are subject to the regulations of a treaty known as the Convention for the International Trade of Endangered Species (CITES).

History of the Sunset. In 2006, former Governor of Louisiana Kathleen Blanco sponsored SB 1485 (Hollingsworth), which lifted the ban on importation and sale of alligator and crocodile products in California. The state of Louisiana argued that permitting the sale of alligator products in California would encourage sustainable use management of alligator populations in Louisiana, benefit local communities and economic recovery in that state after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, and encourage conservation of wetlands. The Legislature agreed to lift the ban but added a sunset date of 2010 in response to concerns that allowing importation could encourage increased production, putting increased pressure on wild stocks, or lead to more harvesting of endangered or threatened species that resemble species taken legally.

In 2009, the sunset was extended for another five years to 2015 with the passage of SB 609 (Hollingsworth). The state of Louisiana again sponsored the measure, and asserted that the opening up of the California market had helped to support a sustainable use program that generated significant annual economic revenue for coastal Louisiana. They cited that CITES had recognized Louisiana’s management program as a world-wide model for sustainable conservation. In 2014, the law was extended five more years to 2020 with the passage of AB 2075 (Alejo) sponsored by the California Retailers Association.

Global Trade and CITES Regulations. Of the 23 species in the order crocodilia, seven are endangered and four are vulnerable according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s (IUCN) Red List, which assesses the conservation status of species at a global level. Crocodiles and alligators are found in international trade for the leather, for meat, and as live animals for breeding operations, the pet industry, and zoos. According to the UN Environment World Conservation Monitoring Centre’s (UNEP-WCMC) 2018 report on international trade in crocodilian skins, ten species are legally traded commercially. Alligators comprise nearly 40 percent of global trade. They and two other species, the Nile crocodile and the Brown Caiman, account for 85 percent of trade. All three are listed as least concerned by the IUCN. Two traded species are listed as endangered or vulnerable, but these exports are reported as farm-raised and account for two percent of global trade. More than 1.4 million skins are exported globally. Most meat is consumed or used locally but over 1.2 million pounds of meat are still exported globally each year.

All crocodilians are listed in either Appendix I (endangered) or Appendix II (threatened or similar in appearance to threatened species) of CITES. Under CITES, all hides sold commercially are required to be tagged to distinguish them from listed species that are not permitted to be legally traded. However, the products made from the hide are not required to carry tags. A 1987 USFWS ruling noted “small parts and products of crocodilian leather are nearly impossible to distinguish when made into goods, thus hampering the identification of legal alligator products from those of endangered or threatened crocodilians. Problems with identification could increase illegal trade in endangered crocodilian products” (Federal Register: 52 FR 21059-21064). All countries are also required to submit annual reports on the alligators and crocodiles harvested to CITES. The US has filed all required annual reports, but several countries important to the global crocodile products trade including Australia, Bangladesh, Botswana, Israel, Papua New Guinea, Panama, South Africa, and Tanzania fail to do so despite new enforcement regulations. The UNEP-WCMC report also notes that the accuracy of data as well as the quality and consistency of some annual reports further limit analysis of the trade. CITES attempts to improve accuracy by cross matching import data with original export permit information. The report summarizes: “Significant improvement in reporting of crocodilian trade continues; however, absence of annual reports from some countries continues to be a hindrance to timely analysis of the trade.”

History of Alligators in Louisiana. In response to a declining alligator population due to over hunting and loss of habitat, Louisiana banned alligator hunting in 1962. Alligators gained federal protection in 1967, and were listed as endangered in 1973 with the passing of ESA. As the population started recovering, Louisiana reopened a limited hunting season in certain areas of the state in 1972 and then expanded it statewide in 1981. In the 1970s, the Louisiana Department of Fisheries and Wildlife (LDFW) also developed a program of regulated commercial harvest and farming. The intent of the program was to convince private landowners, who own the majority of Louisiana’s wetlands (roughly two million acres of alligator habitat), to view alligators as a resource rather than a liability, to maintain habitats, and to provide long-term benefits to the survival of the species. In 1975 alligators were downlisted under the ESA to “threatened” and were deemed recovered by 1987. The LDFW’s 2017 summer survey estimated that there were 50,989 wild alligator nests, down 12 percent from 2016 due to Tropical Strom Cindy but up over 650 percent from the 1971 survey. From this survey, the LDFW estimates there are currently two million wild alligators in Louisiana.

Louisiana is one of nine southern states that has a regulated alligator hunt and one of four that have commercial alligator farming (the others are Texas, Georgia, and Florida). Louisiana accounts for over 90 percent of total annual farm-raised production and over 60 percent of wild alligator harvests. Florida accounts for eight percent of farm-raised alligators and nearly 35 percent of wild alligator harvests. Louisiana and Florida also rely on private certified hunters to deal with, annually, over 10,000 nuisance alligators— alligators that pose a threat to people or property. Hunters are allowed to process the meat and skin of the nuisance alligator for commercial sale as compensation.

In order to export alligator hides and meat, the state of Louisiana is required by USFWS and CITES regulations to certify annually that the harvest programs will not be detrimental to the survival of the species. The LDFW sets hunting and egg harvest quotas for different habitat areas based upon the annual nest surveys as to not negatively impact populations at any location. Alligator eggs collected from the wild are then grown in captivity on alligator farms. The LDWF requires a certain percentage, similar to wild survival rates, of juvenile alligators hatched from the eggs be returned to the wild within two years of hatching, and the released alligators are tagged for follow-up monitoring. The return requirement is 10 percent, down from a 20 percent return requirement in the early 1990s as the population has recovered. During the 2017 hunting season, a total of 15,052 wild alligators were harvested (down from 34,234 in 2016), 387,373 wild alligator eggs were collected, and 49,112 farm raised alligators were returned to the wild. Louisiana has 57 licensed alligator farms with a total of 857,728 alligators. These farms harvested 382,039 alligators and over a million pounds of meat in 2017 with an estimated worth of $70 million.

Concerns over Farm Conditions and Slaughter. In recent years, issues have been raised regarding appropriate humane methods for slaughter of farm-raised alligators. In 2011, to address the issues, the LDFW and the Louisiana State University School of Veterinary Medicine developed a document entitled “Best Management Practices for Louisiana Alligator Farming.” The document details recommended practices to ensure animal welfare of captive reared alligators in Louisiana, including egg collection, hatching, rearing, release to the wild, and euthanasia. This document was updated in January 2016 as new information regarding euthanasia was investigated. The recommended methods have been approved by the American Veterinary Medicine Association. There are, however, ongoing concerns regarding the implementation of these kinds of guidelines and regulations particularly in countries where enforcement may not be as robust. Past media reports have pointed to abuse and inhumane slaughtering of crocodiles at farms in Vietnam and a small alligator farm in Texas.

Need for a Sunset. Past legislation extended the sunset twice rather than eliminating it citing the vulnerability of these species. One of the key concerns for alligators and crocodiles is habitat loss. Low lying wetlands and marshes are some of the most vulnerable habitats susceptible to a combination of threats including rising sea levels, human development, and landfalling hurricanes. Past analyses also noted ongoing concerns regarding enforcement of CITES and the ESA as well as ensuring humane treatment and slaughter of alligators and crocodiles. Extending the sunset for ten years would signal that such concerns have been adequately addressed. A shorter sunset may help to ensure that efforts to improve harvesting and compliance continue and that populations continue to thrive. Others note that sunsets can create economic uncertainty for businesses and that existing laws like the ESA would protect these species if they became threatened again.

Prior and Related Legislation:

SB 1485 (Hollingsworth), Chapter 660, Statutes of 2006, repealed the prohibition on the importation for commercial purposes, possession with intent to sell, or sale within the state, of alligators and crocodiles. Reinstates the prohibition effective January 1, 2010.

SB 609 (Hollingsworth), Chapter 15, Statutes of 2009, extended the sunset allowing the importation, possession and sale of alligator and crocodile products in California for five years until 2015.

AB 2075 (Alejo), Chapter 464, Statutes of 2014, extended the sunset on provisions of existing law allowing the importation, possession and sale of alligator and crocodile products in California for five years until 2020.

AB 1260 (Maienshein, 2019), would ban the importation, possession and sale of parts and products from caimans, amongst other animals. The bill is currently in the Assembly Water, Parks, and Wildlife Committee.

Supporting Arguments: Supporters argue that the industry is well regulated and contributes significantly to the conservation of alligator and crocodile species. They point to sustainable utilization programs in Louisiana and Zimbabwe that have been lauded for having helped species recover while providing economic opportunities to families and communities. Those in support also cite rigorous regulations and guidelines to prevent cruelty to farm-reared alligators and crocodiles and to ensure that only legal hides enter the market. Supporters note that no other state or country bans alligator and crocodile trade, which is valued at approximately $1 billion per year. They portend that such a ban may be unconstitutional under federal supremacy rules. They argue that these products have played a significant role in California manufacturing, retail, and other fashion and design jobs with California accounting for more than 15 percent of the global market. Additionally, supporters contend that a ban would prevent valuable medical research and drug development using alligator and crocodile blood and protein.

Opposing Arguments: Opponents assert that crocodiles and alligators are under serious threat due to loss of habitat due to climate change, human development, automobile collisions, and poaching. They note significant amounts of illegally traded wildlife products seized are sourced from wild crocodiles and caimans. In shipments from Latin America seized in the US, caiman and crocodile species were two of the five most illegally traded animals. Since finished products made from alligator or crocodile hides do not carry tags, opponents argue that it is difficult to determine whether these products come from legally traded hides or from illegally harvested critically endangered animals. Opponents also assert that the farming and slaughter of these reptiles are conducted using cruel, barbaric, and inhumane methods. Thus, opponents contend that the law could therefore end up threatening endangered or threatened species or contribute to the inhumane treatment of animals.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Abjamo, LLC

Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources

Alexandra Knight Inc

Amtan Louisiana LLC

Beverly Hills Chamber of Commerce

Black Cross Leather

Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Burns Cowboy Shop

Caimanes y Cocodrilos de Chiapas

California Retailers Association

California Sportsman's Lobby, Inc.

Cocodrilos Maya

Crocodile Farmers Association of Zimbabwe

Crocodilian Innovations, LLC

D&T Crawfish, LLC

Ecocaimán S.A.S.

Faggioli s.r.l.

Federation of the Swiss Watch Industry FH

Ferrel Leather Co.

Francesco Skins Corp

Gator & Company

GEARYS Beverly Hills

Giovacchini Inc. DBA Belvedere

Honorable Bill Cassidy, M.D., United States Senate

Honorable Cedric Richmond, Member of Congress

Honorable Clay Higgins, Member of Congress

Honorable Garret Graves, Member of Congress

Honorable John Kennedy, United States Senate

Honorable Mike Johnson, Member of Congress

Honorable Ralph Abraham, M.D., Member of Congress

Honorable Steve Scalise, Member of Congress

House of Bijan

International Union for Conserving Nature (IUCN)-SSC Crocodile Specialist Group

Italven pelli s.r.l.

Izintaba Crocodile Farm

JL & Co. Ltd, John Lobb Americas

jPardue Handmade Leather Goods

JT Shea Properties LLC

Knight & Vinyard Properties, L.L.C.

Lacerta Life Sciences

Law Offices Of Sharretts, Paley, Carter & Blauvelt P.C.

Lirica S.A.S.

Los Angeles County Business Federation (BizFed)

Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries

Louisiana Landowners Association, Inc.

Mercury Leather Works

Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Parks

Mitchel Primrose LLC

Monk Made Goods

MwaLeatherGoods

Outdoor Sportsmen's Coalition of California

Pan American Leathers, Inc.

Parlier Associates Inc.

Pellegrini Group S.r.l.

Productores de Cocodrilos en México a.c.

Proveeduria Mundial, S.A. de C.V.

Proyecto Balamakú SPR de RL

Safari Club International - California Chapters

Second Time Around Watch Company

Silver King

Stefano Ricci

Taxpayers for Improving Public Safety (TiPS)

UNIC-Italian Tanneries

United Leather Product Co., Ltd.

Wall's Gator Farm II, L.L.C.

White Line s.r.l.

Zambia Crocodile Farmers Association

Individuals (7)

Opposition

Center for Biological Diversity

Compassionate Bay

Defenders of Wildlife

Food Empowerment Project

Natural Resources Defense Council

PawPAC

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA)

Sierra Club California

Social Compassion in Legislation

Individuals (624)

Analysis Prepared by: Jared Ferguson / W., P., & W. / (916) 319-2096