Assembly Standing Committee on Water, Parks, and Wildlife

Good morning, Madam Chair and Subcommittee. 21. Conservation program run by the Department of Fish and Wildlife. The importance of solidifying the permanence of this program lies in the incredible impact that the North American beaver can have on the environment. According to CDFW, the beaver is, quote, both an ecosystem engineer helping to create and maintain diverse habitat throughout the state, and a keystone species, filling a critically important role in maintaining the ecosystem for the other species that depend on it.

Beavers are truly nature's little engineers, whose dam complexes help change water flow and create habitats for rare and endangered species, reduces the intensity of floods, improves soil health, reverses erosion, creates subterranean water recharge, sequesters carbon, and can help stop or reduce the severity of wildfires, something that is extremely important in my district, among others. These benefits are part of the state's climate-smart strategy and the implementation of the state's natural and working land strategy.

As noted in the Committee analysis, there's a longstanding policy of allowing landowners to receive permits to kill beavers to protect land that is being damaged or destroyed. Recognizing the environmental benefits of these animals, the Administration and DFW have prioritized beaver coexistence and nonlethal responses with the creation of the Beaver Restoration Program, which recently received $2 million for nonlethal beaver damage mitigation projects to promote and enable beaver coexistence.

AB 2196 simply codifies this important program to ensure that the leadership and effort of the last few years will continue and that California can meet its climate goals. With me to testify and support is Jennifer Fearing, representing the bill's sponsors, and Analise Rivero with CalTrout. Welcome to you both.

Thank you very much. Good morning, Madam Chair and Member. I'm Jennifer Fearing, on behalf of the Water Institute at the Occidental Arts and Ecology Center, here to urge your support for AB 2196 and to thank Assembly Member Connolly. As he said, the North American beaver, which is Castor canadensis, are what biologists call a keystone species because they create the habitat that they create, benefits many other species. Their dams improve water quantity and quality, increase late-season flow, and reduce the impacts of flooding.

Beaver bank burrows and food caches provide critical habitat for many native and endangered California species. But despite these and other benefits, up until just the past couple years, California beaver policy solely focused on recreational hunting and lethal nuisance management. And that's why more than a decade ago, we launched the bring the beaver back Bring Back the Beaver Campaign to educate citizens about the importance of beaver in order to improve water supply for humans in the environment and increase resilience to drought, wildfire, and climate change.

We have been working collaboratively, deeply collaboratively, with government and academic scientists, environmental organizations, consulting biologists, and interested Californians to support existing beaver colonies, where they are, and, where appropriate, reestablished beaver to enhance watershed restoration and salmon recovery efforts. The pace of collaborative and problem-solving change in the last two years has been extraordinary, and we want it to continue.

So across the 40 supporting organizations, we work as practitioners, land managers, farmers, advocates, tribes, and others, in ways to collaborate with the Department of Fish and Wildlife on this effort. To help ensure the full complement of California's efforts associated with beaver restoration remains a state and CDFW priority beyond the current beaver-believing administration, it is important and valuable to codify the core activities described in the BCP that created the program a couple years ago in the budget.

We appreciate that AB 2196 pursues this objective, ensuring that the leadership and effort of the last few years will continue. I'd also like to add that my other clients, San Diego Humane Society and the National Wildlife Federation, are also supportive. So I could go on, and I often do about beavers, but in the interest of time, I'll stop there and wish you a happy, belated International Beaver Day, which was Sunday. Thank you, and we appreciate your support.

Good morning, Madam Chair and Members. I'm Analise Rivero, Associate Director of Policy with CalTrout. CalTrout strongly supports AB 2196 because our scientists and partners know that firsthand the profound ecological benefits beaver provide for trout, salmon, and other freshwater fish. Beaver are remarkable animals who positively impact the environment in a myriad of ways, as described well in the findings and declarations provisions in AB 2196. Indeed, the Administration's new salmon strategy includes the following. Beaver can be important allies in salmon habitat recovery. Salmon and beaver evolved together.

Beavers create dams that in many cases allow fish passage while creating deep, cold pools of water that are ideal nurseries for juvenile salmon. For years, salmon restoration programs have supported beaver analog dams, where humans add woody debris to North Coast streams to provide salmon to improve salmon habitat. It is time to let nature's best engineers do some of this restoration work in certain areas around the state.

Beavers can help provide breeding and rearing habitat for aquatic species, sustain cold flows during summer, and reduce erosion and degradation of spawning habitat. CalTrout agrees and thinks that 2196 simple codification of the existing program is helpful to continue positive momentum for salmon, trout, and other species restoration. Thank you so much.

Excellent. Thank you so much. Beavers as engineers. Do we have anyone in the room that is in favor of the Bill? Please come forward and state your name and support.

Good morning. Abigail Schmidt, on behalf of the California State Park... Space District in support.

Good morning, Madam Chair Members. My name is Kam Bezdek with Cal Trout and I am here to give my support on behalf of the Environmental Protection Information Center, California Trout, Clean Water Action, Scott River Watershed Council, and 350 Sacramento. Thank you.

Good morning. Kim Delfino, representing Defenders of Wildlife, Audubon California, and Sonoma Land Trust, in support. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Do we have any witnesses in opposition?

Good morning, Madam Chair. I'll stand if that's okay with the Committee. My name is Bob Reeb and I'm with Reeb Government Relations and I represent the Central Valley Flood Control Association and Solano County Water Agency. Our clients are opposed unless amended. We've had good conversations with the author's staff, and Republican staff and had a delightful chance to meet with Miss Fearing this morning about the Bill. The opposition is not about beaver restoration. It's where that is being taken place.

Beavers and banks and burrows are great, but beavers and levees with burrows are not great. And so in some areas, like the delta, they pose a severe threat to the integrity of levees and that protect lives and property. Solano County Water Agency is in a unique position. They've spent tens of millions of dollars in coordination with the University of California, Davis, federal and state agencies to restore a fall-run Chinook salmon run on Lower Pewter Creek.

And that fall-run Chinook, of course, is the foundational fish for our commercial fisheries in California and the ocean. There are times when the county water agency, however, has to get into lower Pewter Creek and notch these dams because they are over 10ft tall and the returning spawners can't jump over them.

So all we're asking for is that local agencies be part of the collaborating partners in this program and that we will work on some language to try and avoid conflicts with flood protection or salmon migration. The Bill has mitigating conflicts, but frankly, when we're dealing with lives and property, we want to try and avoid those conflicts with the beaver. So we're confident that we can get there.

We have no objections to the Bill moving today, and we appreciate both the advocates and the author staff working with us. Thank you.

Excellent. Thank you so much. Anybody else in opposition? Okay, great. There is a recommendation to do pass to Appropriations and when we get a quorum, we'd be happy to take a vote.

Really appreciate it. Thank you.

Any other questions of Members, wait before I give them a chance. You wish to close?

We will look forward to, of course, working with our valued local agencies, hearing their concerns, and continue to bring us across the finish line. So thanks. Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Excellent. Thank you so much, Assembly Member Connolly. And happy belated Beaver Day to you. Well, Assembly Member Aguiar-Curry, come on down.

Thank you, Chair Papan and Members, I would like to thank the Committee staff for their thoughtful and thorough analysis of the bill. And I am happy to accept the Committee's amendments today. This bill is an important step towards securing flood control for the City of Woodland, which is in my district and a short drive from here.

Lower Cache Creek poses a significant flood risk to portions of the City of Woodland. There have been 20 flood events since the mid-1900s, and this is likely to get worse as climate change increases. While downtown Woodland has not historically flooded, it's because of flood fighting efforts and really good luck. This bill is modeled on two bills by Senator Laird to help bring the flood control project to Pajaro.

Despite the hard work of many people, the recent flooding shows that we must move quickly to improve flood control when we know communities are at risk. The City of Woodland has been trying to improve flood protection for over 20 years. This very Committee held an informational hearing in Woodland in 2005 to discuss ways to protect the community. This bill will authorize a flood control project that has already been approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Federal Government.

It will also increase the state cost share to reflect the community's economically disadvantaged status. This bill is an important step towards finally building much needed flood protection to protect the community and the critical infrastructure from flooding. With me today is Tanya Garcia-Cadena. I say it wrong every time, Tanya, mayor of the City of Woodland and Ken Hyatt, Woodland City Manager, to answer any technical questions.

Thank you. Good morning, Madam Chair and Members. My name is Tanya Garcia-Cadena and I have the honor of serving as the mayor of the City of Woodland. I am highly concerned about our city. Our city has the lowest level of flood protection of any urban city in the central region. And along with a report that was just recently released and reported on Capitol Public Radio, Yolo County is the most impoverished county in the state of California. So we are hoping to get this moved forward to protect our vulnerable citizens and our industrial area in Woodland. Thank you.

Morning, Madam Chair and Members of the Committee. Ken Hyatt, City Manager for the City of Woodland. I think the need for flood protection for our community is well articulated in the analysis as well as remarks this morning. I'm here to answer any technical questions about the status of the project. I would be remiss, though, in not acknowledging the state's consistent partnership with the city and trying to bring flood protection to our community over the last 20 years and very instrumental in securing federal participation in the project. So happy to answer any questions the Committee may have. Thank you.

Okay, great. Excellent. Before we go a moment further, let me take advantage of having a quorum and we'll ask the clerk to call the roll.

[Roll Call]

So without further ado, do I have a motion on the consent calendar? Take a vote on that so I can get that part done.

Okay. Items on the consent calendar: AB 1838, AB 2124, AB 2252, AB 2713, AB 2962, AB 3163. [Roll Call]

Excellent. Great. So do we have any other witnesses in favor? Please come forward, state name.

Madam Chair. Bob Reeb with Reeb Government Relations on behalf of the California Central Valley Flood Control Association. Apologies to the Committee. We didn't get an official letter, but we're in support of the bill. Thank you.

Anyone else? Great. Okay. Any witnesses in opposition? Seeing none. I'll bring it back to the Committee. Questions? Assembly Member Bennett.

Not a question.

Okay.

Sorry, not a question. I just want to compliment 20 years of battling by the author and representing the area. I just want to compliment her for staying after for 20 years. And I'll move the recommended action.

Thank you. Thank you. Comments, questions by anyone else? Okay. And you've already accepted Committee amendments. Thank you so much. Would you like to close?

Well, I want to thank the Committee staff. They did a great job working with my office. There's lots of things on these flood control projects. But anyway, I want to thank them, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Excellent. Great. Well, we wish you godspeed. We know it's been a long time coming. A lot of turmoil in the community. Way to stay with it. With that, we'll go ahead and take a vote.

AB 2450. Motion is do pass as amended to Appropriations. [Roll Call]

Excellent. We'll keep it open for any other add ons. But it looks like you did good.

Thank you.

Okay, Assembly Member Bennett, would you like to proceed?

Sure.

Given that we have no other authors present.

Are my witnesses present? I think we're okay. Great. Madam Chair and Members. AB 3162 is a bill to protect an intelligent sea dwelling animal from unnecessary cruelty. As octopus have gained popularity across the globe, the seafood industry has expressed interest in octopus agriculture or octopus farming. However, research tells us that, and this reason I'm stumbling here is that we've had a long conversation about. What's the plural of octopus, right? Octopi. Octopuses. There's a number of things here, but octopuses are not suited for farming.

AB 3162 oppose cruelty to octopuses, or the OCTO Act preemptively bans octopus farming and the sale of farmed octopuses across the state. And I would point out we find ourselves oftentimes after an industry is moving, trying to do something. And it's much better if it is our desire to do this, to do it before an industry has actually emerged. Octopuses are unique, highly intelligent animals. Recent studies have revealed octopuses to have the capacity to feel joy and pain, hold memory, solve problems.

California needs to ensure that this unique animal is protected from the harmful practices of farming. And I hope my witnesses walked in just now, and they did. Wonderful timing. We have with us today Amanda Fox, the Executive Director of the Animal Rights Initiative, and Tessa Gonzalez, a senior researcher of the Aquatic Life Institute. And I appreciate you being here today. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Good morning. Chair and Members of the Committee, thank you for the chance to speak in favor of Assembly Bill 3162. For the record, my name is Amanda Fox, the Executive Director of Animal Rights Initiative, the organization that worked directly with Washington state to pass similar legislation earlier this year. So a compilation of over 300 studies finds octopuses to be highly intelligent, complex, sentient creatures with an exceptional capacity to feel pain and comprehend suffering.

Concluding that high welfare farming of them is not possible. Researchers in Spain have been exploring the development of open ocean net cages and small tanks on land, with the reported intention of confining and killing 1 million octopuses every year by submerging them, fully conscious, into freezing waters. Californians have already made their opinion on preventing cruelty to farmed animals clear when 8 million residents voted to ban extreme confinement in 2008 and again in 2018.

California officials have ended crabbing season early the last two years in a row, imposing new regulations to protect humpback whales and other endangered species from being caught in crabbing gear that just went into effect yesterday, actually requiring three pounds of crab and fish to produce one pound of octopus. Crabbing would need to be intensified, killing millions of more animals per year.

The vast amounts of waste generated from such a voracious diet will inevitably cause algal blooms and dead zones in the water and will suffocate local wildlife to death. California and the entire west coast has previously passed legislation to protect wildlife by banning net pen farming. An octopus are known to escape, making them more likely than any other aquacultured species to spread disease, parasites, and genetic mutations on farms into wild populations.

Assembly Bill 3162 is the chance to extend these laws to octopus farming and ensure that lack of regulation does not give opportunity for quick expansion. And California will be resounding to the world that the ethical treatment of animals and biosecurity are not compromisable. Thanks for your support.

Hello. Good morning, Madam Chair and Committee Members. My name is Tessa Gonzalez. I'm the Senior Researcher at Aquatic Life Institute, a leading organization involved with the prohibition of octopus farms since 2022, when we submitted a comprehensive report to the government of the Canary Islands during their review of a company seeking operational permits. Because the company had failed to consider concerns regarding environment, wildlife, and public health, their permit was recently denied. Octopus farming would require substantial inputs, placing additional demand on already strained natural resources.

All species of octopus are venomous and active carnivores that depend on other fish for feed ingredients, which only amplifies pressure on wild fish populations. The concentrated waste that would be produced by octopus farms could have detrimental effects on surrounding waterways. These are types of intensive production systems that would mimic confined animal feeding operations and agriculture. The increased exploitation of octopus in the seafood system has already led to a corresponding growth in processing industries and the subsequent generation of large amounts of waste.

The processing of octopus discharges substantial amounts of solid and liquid waste byproducts such as skin, cuttlebone, ink, and internal organs. Escaped farmed octopuses would be positioned to wreak havoc on wild populations, and if any escapes were to occur due to mechanical errors or natural disasters. Diseases and pathogens such as worms and nematodes that could affect humans would be discharged.

Recognized seafood certification programs have already condemned the idea of octopus farming and public objections, raising concerns over the commercial farming of octopuses and the negative welfare impact it could have. The case against octopus farming is clear and compelling. Aquatic Life Institute urges you to consider the ethical imperative and ecological necessity of this legislation. The potential for environmental degradation, disease outbreaks and reputational harm far outweigh any perceived benefits.

Excellent. And we'll keep the roll open for addition for add ons. With that. I see Assemblymember Friedman, come on down. Good morning.

By supporting a ban on octopus farming and farmed octopus importation, Californians can send a powerful message that they value compassion over cruelty, sustainability over exploitation, and stewardship over short term gain. Thank you all for your time and attention. And thank you, Assemblymember Bennett, for offering this bill.

Thank you so much. Do we have any other witnesses in favor? Come on forward.

Good morning, Madam Chair and Member Sosin Madonnat here on behalf of Animal Legal Defense Fund and social compassion and legislation. Proud sponsors of of the bill. Thank you.

Excuse me. Good morning, Madam Chair. Matt Robinson with Schaw Yoder Antwih Schmelzer and Lange, on behalf of the Humane Society of the United States in support.

Okay. Seeing no one else. Any witnesses opposed? Please come forward. Lucky for you, Mister Bennett, we got no one. So let's bring it back to the Committee and see if there are any comments or questions from the Committee.

Great. Okay with that, we'll go ahead and take a roll call vote. You want to close?

Respectfully, I ask for an aye vote.

Number 15, AB 3162. Motion is due. Pass to appropriations. [Roll Call]

I want to thank the Committee and the Committee Staff for their excellent and thorough analysis. A wetland is an area of land saturated with water which may be wet year-round or only seasonally, and is often distinguished by the presence of aquatic plants which adapt to live in saturated soil. Wetlands provide critical habitat for endangered species and many other resident wildlife and fish populations.

They're also important to local communities as they serve as natural water purifiers that absorb pollutants to keep the water in inland lakes and streams clean. By storing water, wetlands also operate as natural flood control to protect local communities from flooding and drought and to help buffer communities from a changing climate. Historical filling and development projects have reduced California wetlands to a mere 10% of their original extent. The loss of coastal wetlands is even more alarming.

95% of formerly abundant lagoons and marshes along California's 1,100-mile coastline have been destroyed. In 1993, Governor Pete Wilson issued Executive Order W-5993, establishing a state policy of no net loss and long term gain of wetlands. Since then, however, California has continued to lose more wetland acreage than it replaces through restoration and mitigation. The Federal Clean Water Act is considered the most powerful tool for safeguarding water quality wetlands and riparian habitat.

However, starting in 2001, in a series of decisions, federal courts have limited the type of water bodies and wetlands that receive federal protection. In 2023, the US Supreme Court issued a ruling in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, that has enormous ramifications for the health of the nations and for California's wetlands and waterways because it excluded many types of state waters, including certain wetlands, from the Clean Water Act. The Sackett decision also upheld states authority to address water pollution via regulation of land and water use.

California has law, the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, to protect the wetlands that the Federal Government can no longer protect. Governor Newsom's 2024 proposed budget includes funding aimed to have the state take on the role that has been conducted by the US Army Corps of Engineers and the US Environmental Protection Agency, but will no longer be due to the Sackett decision. AB-2875 is not creating new protections or programs or providing for more enforcement authority.

It's not meant to stop new housing or development from happening. The Bill will merely put into statute what is already the policy of the state, which is to protect, conserve, and restore wetlands. By enshrining this requirement into statute, we are making it clear that the state must take actions and advance policies to benefit wetlands, which has not always been the case. Testifying on behalf of our sponsor, Audubon California, is Kevin Huntington. And we also have Kim Delfino from Defenders of Wildlife.

And I would request an aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair, Committee Members, it's a pleasure to be here again. My name is Kevin Huntington. I'm representing Audubon California. Audubon California has about 120,000 members statewide, spanning over 40 chapters, really, from all walks of life, and its mission is to protect bird and wildlife habitat for future generations.

We're proud to be sponsor of AB-02875 and as was previously mentioned, it would put into law, the state's longstanding policy to ensure no net loss and long term gain of wetlands at a time when California's wetlands are at serious risk. The author mentioned the Supreme Court's recent decision that, really, combined with the far reaching impacts of climate change and a variety of other factors, have come together to jeopardize the few remaining wetlands that California has.

While California does have a no net loss policy, as was mentioned since 1993, really that remains an elusive goal. According to a recent report by the US Fish and Wildlife Service, wetland loss continues in California and has really accelerated between 2009 and 2019. So establishing long term net gain law would be an important step towards reversing this trend, just from an Audubon California standpoint. Historically, California Central Valley had more than 4 million acres of wetlands.

You heard previously that about 90% of these wetlands have been lost, with about 200,000 acres of wetlands remaining today. So this loss has a profound impact on wildlife populations, and especially on migratory birds. Experts estimate that historically, more than 60 million birds were migrating to California's wetlands each year, including approximately 35 to 40 million ducks and geese. When the eminent ornithologist Frank Chapman visited Los Spaniels in 1903, he wrote, I've never seen birds more abundant.

Today, waterfowl populations in California have declined to approximately five to 6 million ducks and geese that rely on these wetlands for resting and feeding during migration. Even though diminished, these California populations still comprise about 60% of the pacific flyways waterfowl population and about 20% of the continental population. Similarly, shorebirds, songbirds, amphibians, and mammals, virtually most wildlife in California depend on wetlands, and they also continue to endure significant population declines. Many of these wetland dependent species are imperiled because of the wetland loss in California.

Overall, wetlands provide values that no other ecosystem can, values that are even more critical as California experiences the intensifying impacts of climate change. Wetlands are among the most productive ecosystems in the world, comparable to rainforests and coral reefs. And in the context of one of the most diverse bird and wildlife regions on our planet, they are particularly important here. It is in the state's best interest to conserve these wetland habitats. As California strives to achieve its adopted 30 by 30 goal.

That is, to conserve 30% of our land base and waters by 2030. Of the most effective actions will be to ensure there's no loss of important habitats like wetlands. And when it comes to conservation of wetlands and really all wildlife habitat, the most cost effective means to conserve them is to protect the remaining habitat that we already have. AB-2875 provides important leadership for other states and and provides a model for using state law to shield wetland resources from efforts to erode federal protections.

By codifying this policy, we will demonstrate our commitment to science based wetland conservation that benefits our public health and biodiversity and supports our efforts to combine climate change. Thank you.

Good morning, Madam Chair and Members of the Committee. I'm Kim Delfino, representing Defenders of Wildlife, and I'm pleased to provide support in favor of AB-2875. Defenders of Wildlife is a national nonprofit conservation organization dedicated protecting all wild animals and plants in their natural communities. AB-2875 comes at a time when it's critical for California to double down on protecting its last remaining wetlands and recommit to restoring wetlands.

We must repair the damage done to our natural systems at a time when we are increasingly feeling the impacts from climate change. 100 years ago, wetlands were considered worthless. However, as we have heard, they serve a very important purpose. They provide replenishing of aquifers. They serve as natural stormwater detention basins. Mountain meadows will hold snowpacks and allow water to release slowly, which is going to become incredibly important to us. They are natural water filters, and in coastal areas, they provide buffers against wind and wave action.

The fact is that as California grapples with climate change and sea level rise, wetlands will become increasingly important as the ultimate green infrastructure. And as we heard earlier, and one of the best engineers to create wetlands are beavers. Unfortunately, the Sackett decision has made it clear that we cannot rely upon the Federal Clean Water Act any longer to protect our wetlands, and that California must utilize its existing authorities to conserve, protect, restore, and enhance our natural wetlands.

By codifying California's no net loss and net gain policy, AB-2875 will show that California is stepping up and not stepping back from its commitment to protect one of our most important and most threatened natural resources. And for these reasons, we urge, and aye vote, thank you.

Thank you so much. Do we have any folks in favor in the audience?

Good morning, Members. Gabriela Facio, with Sierra Club California. In support.

Good morning. Isabella González Potter, with the Nature Conservancy. In support. Thank you.

Adam Harper, California Construction and Industrial Materials Association. I support if amended.

Hi. Abigail Smet, representing the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District and the California State Parks Foundation. In support.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Mark Fenstermaker for The Wildlands Conservancy, California Council of Land Trusts, and the Bolsa Chica Land Trust. In support.

Excellent. Anyone else? Okay. Do we have witnesses in opposition? Not seeing any. I'll bring it back to the Committee. Questions? Comments? Okay, great. Would you like to close?

I would request and aye vote. And if we can protect more of our California wetlands, we'll all have done a great thing.

Totally agree. I come from the Bay Area. We've got some very nice bird hotels by way of our wetlands. So the recommendation is do-pass. I think you're going to appropriations. Lucky you. And so, let's take a roll call vote, please.

Okay. Item number 12. AB-2875. Motion do-pass to appropriations. [Roll Call]

Excellent. Great. I'll keep it open for add ons. Wish you the best. Thank you. Oh, have another one.

Thank you. I want to again thank the Committee and the Committee staff for their work on this Bill. Wolverines, once abundant in California, have been nearly wiped out due to human activity. Due to their tenuous status. The wolverine has been a designated fully protected species under the Fish and Game code since 1970, and have been listed as a threatened species under the California Endangered Species Act since 1971.

In 2023, a single male wolverine was spotted in the eastern Sierra Nevada mountains, sparking much excitement and curiosity about the species. Considering the rare sighting, AB 2722 would direct CDFW to conduct a feasibility study on a supplementation or reintroduction program of the wolverine, and thus will provide the Legislature with essential data to take a step forward towards recovering wolverines in California.

In 2023, the California Legislature passed SB 147, which requires CDFW to develop a plan by July 12024 to assess the population status of each fully protected species. It also reaffirmed the wolverines place on the fully protected species list, AB 2720. Twos feasibility study would be conducted as part of the planned status assessment for the wolverine pursuant to 2023's SB 147, which passed last year.

Testifying in support this afternoon on behalf of our sponsors, the Center for Biological Diversity is Owen Lewis and Hara Lindgren. This Bill has no opposition that we know of, and I respectfully request an aye vote.

Chair Papin. Members of the Committee, my name is Owen Lewis. I'm a law student at McGeorge School of Law, and I'm here on behalf of the Center for Biological Diversity in support of AB 2722. Over 45 organizations and tribes support this Bill, which represents a first step towards restoration of a Wolverine population. This is a goal that fully aligns with our state's commitment to protecting biodiversity. Historically, Wolverines were abundant in California, mostly up in the Sierra Nevada.

However, in the early 20th century, fur trapping and poisoning led them to the brink of extirpation. Last June, as the assemblywoman just pointed out, we had a remarkable occurrence where a male wolverine was spotted in Yosemite National park. This was an exciting occurrence that rekindled some hope for reintroduction. However, it also highlighted the urgent need for active conservation measures. That's because female wolverines do not make the same dispersal trips that male wolverines make, so a natural recolonization is a highly unlikely occurrence.

However, this is what AB 272.2 seeks to address, and that is to propose a reintroduction feasibility study where we can plan a careful and responsible reintroduction or supplementation program of all the lost species in California. Wolverines are an ideal candidate for reintroduction because their high elevation habitat in the Sierra Nevada is already naturally protected by a series of state parks, national parks and wilderness areas. Thus, there's the possibility for reintroduction without human conflict and livestock conflict as well. AB 2722 is an important first step towards restoring wolverines, and we ask for your support.

Madam Chair and Committee Members, I am Jerry Lindgren. I am a third year law student at McGeorge School of Law, here on behalf of the Sponsor Center Biological Diversity, in strong support of this Bill. This is legally a simple Bill. Last year's SB 147 requires CDFW to develop a plan to assess the population status of each fully protected species, the wolverine being one of them.

AB 2722 would direct CDFW as part of the population assessment for the wolverine, per SB 140, Seven's plan to include a feasibility study looking at the possibility of a reintroduction for this species. We recognize that due to the state's current fiscal status, fully funding a feasibility study this year is unlikely. However, this Bill, like SB 147, to which it is tethered, requires this funding to come from a separate future legislative act. This Bill would make the status assessment eventually done under SB 147 more meaningful.

Unfortunately, we already know the status population of the wolverine in California. Likely, there is only one. I have lovingly named him Hugh Jackman, and he has come. And as you heard, he came all the way from Idaho because his instincts told him that there should be a viable population of mates for him to choose from here, however, there will not be unless we reintroduce them. The wolverine has been on the fully protected species list and the California threatened endangered species list since the 1970s.

And last year, it was just placed on the federal endangered species list. While the California Endangered Species Act carries a mandate to restore listed species, in the over five decades since the wolverines were first protected, no real efforts to bring them back have been undertaken. This Bill would lay the first steps on a long journey to bring them home. Thank you for your time. And we strongly support an. I vote for AB 2722. Okay, great. Thank you so much. Do we have witnesses in support?

Good morning again, Madam Chair. Members Sosan Madanat with W Strategies here on behalf of Animal Legal Defense Fund and Social Compassion in Legislation in support.

Thank you, Madam Chair again, Matt Robinson with the Humane Society of the United States in support.

Kim Delfino with Defenders of Wildlife in support.

Any witnesses in opposition. Any Members of the public in opposition. Everyone loves wolverines. That's what I am concluding. Okay. Do we have any questions or comments from the Members of the Committee? Thank you. Okay, great. With that, we'll take a. You want to close?

This is, you know, Tinder. For that wolverine, we need to. We need to reintroduce. This is a population that's not going to be in conflict with humans.

And it was once an iconic species in our state, and it needs our help. Thank you. Thank you so much to Assembly Member Friedmen. With that, we'll take a vote. [Roll Call] We'll keep it open. Thank you so much. Assembly Member McKinner, come on down.

This will be AB 2214 instead of RBK.

Thank you Madam Chair and Members, I am proud to present AB 2214, a joint effort between my colleague Assemblymember Bauer-Kahan and I. We are faced with an urgent and pervasive threat to both our environment and our health: microplastics. These tiny particles, which stubbornly resist degradation, have been observed in Monterey Bay, San Francisco, Lake Tahoe, and Southern California waterways. Microplastics have been detected in breast milk and baby feces to the Antarctica snow and even human lungs.

A global study by WWF International found that, on average, people could be ingesting approximately 5 grams of plastic every week, equivalent to the weight of a credit card. Recognizing the severity of the situation, the Ocean Protection Council, mandated by statute, developed a statewide microplastic strategy. This comprehensive plan, published in early 2022, outlines 22 recommendations aimed at reducing and managing microplastic pollution across California.

AB 2214 builds on this initiative by mandating the OPC to lead an interagency coordination group to identify and recommend necessary statutory changes to implement the recommendation outlined in the statewide microplastic strategy to the Legislature by December 1st, 2025. With me and support is Jennifer Fearing, on behalf of the Ocean Conservancy. Thank you.

Good morning again, Madam Chair and Members. Jennifer Fearing. I'm here on behalf of Ocean Conservancy as well as the Monterey Bay Aquarium. We are pleased to be among nearly two dozen organizations urging you to vote aye on AB 2214 to leverage the diverse expertise of our state agency staff to collaboratively address the urgent issue of microplastic pollution. Absent urgent interventions, microplastics will continue to pose a threat to our environment, wildlife, and public health.

The distinct types of tiny fragments in the microplastic family come from varying sources and thus require different interventions to address. There are microplastics that fragment from durable goods and packaging, microplastics derived from synthetic textiles, which are often called microfibers, and microplastics designed to be tiny pre-production plastic pellets called nurdles that account for an annual global leakage of 230,000 metric tons.

Round plastic beads called microbeads are intentionally included in specific consumer products such as cosmetics, household and industrial detergents, and cleaning products, and are regularly discharged into our wastewater systems and aquatic and marine ecosystems because there is no point of capture. And plastic microfibers, the most abundant and widespread form of microplastic pollution, are pervasive in the environment, drinking water, and food supplies, and they are posing potential health risks to humans.

Most of you supported Assemblywoman McKinnor's Bill last year to implement a key microplastics prevention recommendation that was included in that statewide microplastic strategy. AB 1628 would have required washing machine manufacturers to include filters that reduce up to 90% of the microfibers released into wastewater and ultimately, the environment. Unfortunately, Governor Newsom vetoed that Bill, noting ongoing waterboard assessments and asking the author to develop incentives.

We support this continued effort to enroll the state's agencies and their experts in the development of workable and practical options to address the cross sectoral issue of microplastic pollution comprehensively. We need teamwork. AB 2214 focuses on two key recommendations within the strategy. Expanding the statewide microbead ban to include microplastics that are intentionally added to consumer products and determining the best way to promote the sale and use of Energy Star dryers and washing machines equipped with microfiber filters.

Bringing the state government experts together to identify explicit ways to address the proliferation of microplastics in our environment is the path that AB 2214 is pursuing, hoping that California will continue its leadership on a global level to effectively manage and mitigate the adverse impacts of plastic pollution. We urge your support and thank you.

Thank you. Any other members of the public in favor?

Isabella Gonzalez Potter with the Nature Conservancy in support. Thank you.

Kim Delfino with Audubon California in support.

Marquis King Mason with California Environmental Voters in support. Thanks.

Great. Do we have any witnesses in opposition? Not seeing any. No members of the public in opposition. We have a motion. Do we have a second? Any comments or questions from the Committee? Seeing none. Would you like to close?

Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. AB 2214 leverages our state agency's expertise and authority to engage in complimentary efforts to reduce microplastics population and achieve a goal of zero plastic pollution entering our state waters by 2030. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Excellent. With that, let's take a vote.

Item number four, AB 2214. Motion is do pass to EnvironmentalSafety and Toxic Materials. [Roll call]

Great. We'll leave the roll open. Thank you so much. Mister Hart, you're on. Going to start with 2285?

Yeah.

Okay, great.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm pleased to present this bill for Speaker Emeritus Rendon today. I'd like to begin with accepting the amendments recommended in Comment Three of the Committee analysis. This bill encourages the State of California and its land conservation efforts to recognize the importance of investments in urban nature-based solution interventions, understandably the path of least resistance in reaching land conservation goals as investments in rural and suburban California where real estate is attainable and affordable.

While it's important to conserve those lands as the state works to reach its 30 by 30 goal, it's also important to conserve lands in highly urbanized areas. Bringing nature to people and the rewilding of urban areas to the extent possible should be a coequal goal, and we as a body embrace, and AB 2285 binds us to that commitment. This bill asks us to reconcile and balance funding and policy decisions as they relate to our actions to protect, conserve, and restore nature in all settings.

By taking the type of comprehensive approach envisioned in this bill, we're making a stronger commitment to protecting vulnerable communities and providing greater access to nature across California. With me today to speak in support of the bill is Doug Houston, representing the California Park and Recreation Society.

Good morning, Madam Chair and Members. Doug Houston, representing the California Park and Recreation Society, also here in support of the County of Los Angeles, and first wanted to commend Committee staff for working with us to make what I thought was the flawless bill even more flawless. So, in taking our cue from the First Partner's Outdoor for All Initiative, this bill seeks to elevate the awareness of how to go about reducing poverty, nature poverty in the State of California.

And the operational premise associated with this bill is that how can we as a state bring nature to our urban--reintroduce nature to our urban areas here in California? So along with codifying Outdoors for All, AB 2285--it's a statement bill asking policymakers to recognize the coequal goals of 30 by 30 and nature-based investment in our decision making going forward. And again, we're asking for your support on this bill.

Outdoor sprawl.

Yo.

I like it. Do we have any members of the public in favor?

Abigail Smet, on behalf of the East Bay Regional Parks District and the California State Parks Foundation, in support.

Eddie Carromero, on behalf of the California Association of Local Conservation Corps, in support.

Thank you.

Okay, do we have any witnesses in opposition? No members of the public in opposition. Bring it back to the--oh, sorry. Nope? We have a motion and a second. No questions, no comments. Would you like to close?

I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Great. And the recommendation, I think, sends you to Approps, so let's take a vote.

Item Number Six: AB 2285: motion: 'do pass as amended to Appropriations.' [Roll Call].

We'll keep the roll open. Thank you so much. Okay. Assembly Member Hart.

Thank you again.

I'm pleased to present this Bill for Speaker Emeritus Rendon today, AB 3036 instructs the San Gabriel and lower Los Angeles rivers and Mountains Conservancy and the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy to collaborate with the Department of Parks and Recreation, the California Conservation Corps, and the State Lands Commission to develop a permanent Los Angeles river Ranger program. The program is based on the one created by AB 1558 of 2017 by assemblymember Christina Garcia.

This Bill will build on the work done to foster connections between communities, agencies and resources and promoting equitable usage and stewardship of the La river to support ecological, social, and recreational opportunities. Furthermore, the River Ranger program will help residents experience the river as a safe and inviting place and allow them to participate in the river's enhancement through volunteer or employment programs. Here to speak in support of the Bill is Erica Romero, on behalf of the California Association of Local Conservation Corps.

Good morning chair and Members Erica Romero, again here on behalf of the California Association of Local Conservation Corps, which represents the 14 corps working across the state to improve our environment and provide opportunities for young people to engage in those projects. As Assemblymember Hart mentioned, in 2017, the Legislature allowed the development of a pilot program to develop a network of river rangers that would support the urban river restoration in the watershed of the Los Angeles river.

Since then, this program has empowered governing agencies to work together to increase river corridor improvements while supporting outdoor access and workforce development opportunities to typically underserved communities who have historically lacked access to nature.

For example, the Conservation Corps of Long beach implemented the initial pilot of the River Ranger program for the San Gabriel and lower La River Conservancy along a five mile stretch of the lower La river at the confluence of the Rio Ondo river, which required collaboration not just with the conservancies, but also with the cities of Southgate, Downey, Bell Gardens, and unincorporated areas of La County.

This partnership has resulted in restoration of adjacent river habitat, litter and debris removal, ecological restoration education research surveys, and emergency response, while providing outdoor access and workforce opportunities for the over 50 core Members that participated in the program. In fact, many of those corps Members moved on to careers at local parks and rec and code enforcement agencies, as well as moving on to education, secondary education, and even working for national programs.

AB 3036 would help make this program permanent so that surrounding communities can continue to experience the river and work together to restore and maintain it. For these reasons, we respectfully urge your aye vote, thank you.

Thank you. Any Members of the public in favor? Okay. Seeing none. Any witnesses in opposition? Seeing none. Any questions or comments from the Committee? I'll move the Bill second. Excellent. Would you like to close?

Just respectfully request an aye vote, thank you.

Okay, then. This has a recommendation to do pass to natural resources. So let's go ahead and take a vote. Item number 14. AB 3036, motion do pass to natural resources. [Roll Call] We'll go ahead and keep the roll open. Assignment Member Irwin.

Good morning, Chair, and Members, I'm pleased to present AB 2320 today. In 2020, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N 8220, creating the 30 by 30 initiative to conserve 30% of our lands and coastal waters by 2030. A key part of 30 by 30 initiative is the nature based solutions, the use of nature based solutions to address climate change. AB 2320 would require California Natural Resources Agency to identify wildlife corridors and fish passage restoration projects and include them in its annual report to the Legislature.

This Bill would further require the Wildlife Conservation Board to prioritize projects that protect and create new wildlife corridors. Wildlife connectivity is a critical step in protecting California's rich biodiversity. Last year, BB 12, the first bear known to live in the Santa Monica mountains in nearly a decade, was fatally struck by a vehicle while crossing highway 101.

He had successfully crossed California freeways at least five times and was killed 16 miles from the ongoing construction of the largest wildlife crossing in the country, that Walter Annenberg Wildlife Crossing, which is in my district. Stories such as those of BB 12 and the beloved mountain lion, P 22 are a testament to the fact that we must increase habitat connectivity for California's wildlife.

With me to testify today are the Bill sponsors Candice Meneghin with the Coastal Ranches Conservancy and Abigail Smet on behalf of the Friends of the Santa Clara River.

Good morning, Chair Papan and Committee Members. My name is Candice Meneghin and I'm the Executive Director of Coastal Ranches Conservancy. Corresponds of AB 2320. For years, we've been a fierce advocate of reducing wildlife collisions along the Gaviota Coast and particularly the Gaviota Pass on highway 101 in Santa Barbara County. Fragmentation of natural areas is a number one cause of species decline in California, and wildlife corridors and habitat connectivity are critically important to wildlife movement and species adaptation in times of climate change.

While California has protected natural areas throughout the state, less work has been focused on protecting and restoring wildlife corridors and fish passage. Conservation experts agree that the top priority of biodiversity conservation is protecting and restoring wildlife corridors and connecting them. In 2010, the Department of Fish and Wildlife and Caltrans produced the state Essential Habitat Connectivity report that identified key locations where wildlife corridors and crossings are needed.

And our 2020 Gaviota Wildlife Corridor project identified locations of high densities of roadkill across a Gaviota Pass, with mammals being disproportionately impacted. Between 2to 300 individual mammals of all sizes are killed here every year. This data was instrumental in prompting a solution, and in December 2023, Caltrans was awarded an $8 million grant under the federal bipartisan infrastructure law.

Thankfully, Congressman Salud Carbajal champion for funding year to safeguard our local wildlife, but similar needs exist along the I5 in La County and the Canaya Grade in Ventura County. In addition to the Gaviota Pass, the Gaviota Creek also has 14 fish passage barriers and that impacts Southern California steelhead and we are working with Caltrans to help prioritise those remediation actions. AB 2320 is a push to implement these well known priorities in these reports by adding wildlife connectivity actions within the 30 by 30 initiative.

Connectivity is an essential for biodiversity resilience, bolstering 30 by 30 objectives and the governor's salmon strategy for a hot to dry future. I'm happy to answer any questions and respectfully request your aye vote today.

Good morning Madam Chair and Members. Abigail Smet on behalf of the Friends of the Santa Clara River, one of the proud sponsors of AB 2320 wildlife corridors promote biodiversity by allowing species to continue to travel when habitats have been fragmented by roads or developments. With increasing habitat fragmentation across the state, many of California's iconic flora and fauna are facing genetic isolation, leading to declining populations and and seriously threatening the state's biodiversity.

As mentioned in previous testimony, this Bill would make it a priority for the state to address these severe habitat fragmentations as a part of achieving the 30 by 30 goal. The Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Department of Transportation have already assessed the most serious barriers across the state in a series of surveys and maps last updated in 2022.

This Bill would simply highlight the need to address these key barriers while pursuing the 30 by 30 goal and require the Natural Resources Agency to include updates on that progress in their annual report to the Legislature on progress towards reaching the 30 by 30 goal. Establishing wildlife connectivity as a part of 30 by 30 planning and reporting will ensure a comprehensive approach to conservation and supports the already established goals of protecting biodiversity across the state.

We really appreciate assemblymember Irwin's dedication to this important goal and respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much. Do we have any Members of the public in favor?

Erica Romero again, on behalf of the California State Parks Foundation, the Land Trust of Santa Cruz County, Mid Peninsula Regional Open Space District and Semperviren Funds in strong support.

Good morning, Jennifer Fearing, on behalf of the San Diego Humane Society in support.

Marquis Mason with California Environmental Voters in support. Thank You

Gabriela Facio, Sierra Club California, in support.

Kim Delfino with Defenders of Wildlife, Audubon California and Sonoma Land Trust, in support.

Adam Harper, California Construction Industrial Materials Association. Support if amended.

Melissa Sparks-Kranz with the League of California Cities in support.

Do we have any witnesses that are here in opposition? No, members of the public in opposition? You do accept the amendments? The technical amendment? From the city? From the Committee. Great. Bring you back to the Committee. Any questions? Comments? Do we have a motion? Right.

Would you like to close?

Just respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Great. So this is do pass, as amended. Natural resources. Let's go ahead and take a vote.

Roll Call

We'll leave the roll open. Assembly Member. Great. Assembly Member Garcia, you have excellent timing. Would you like to add on?

Sure.

You have a Bill to present?

I do. Can I?

Come on and do it. All right.

Madam Chair, colleagues, good to see you all. Good to be here. Thank you to the Committee staff for the analysis. I'm going to get straight to the point. This Bill, narrowly crafted, will help protect the overall water supply reliability in Southern California, while at the same time helping us draw down $175 million in federal funds needed to continue critical environmental projects out at the Salton Sea. We've been working with environmental organizations to ensure that all the environmental protections are in place.

As I mentioned, very narrowly crafted Bill. Joining me here today to provide testimony in support of the Bill and answer any questions is Johanna Smith Hoff from IID, Imperial Irrigation District. Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, madam. Chair and Members, good morning. My name is Joanna Smith Hoff, Deputy General Counsel for imperial Irrigation District. First, let me begin by thanking Assemblymember Garcia for his leadership and advocacy efforts on this important issue. In short, AB 2610 is needed to continue critical water conservation projects in Southern California. Just this past year, our federal partners at the US Bureau of Reclamation launched the lower Colorado River Basin System Conservation and Efficiency program to help address the drought crisis in the Colorado river basin.

The water conservation efforts implemented under that program are funded by the federal bipartisan Infrastructure law. IID is currently negotiating a system conservation implementation agreement with reclamation under that program to conserve a cumulative target of 800,000 acre feet of water during the years of 2024 through 26. This conserved water would be generated by agricultural water users voluntarily participating in conservation programs within and administered by IID.

Any water conserved by IID pursuant to this agreement would be in addition to existing conservation efforts tied to the 2003 quantification settlement Agreement. The narrowly focused amendments proposed in AB 2610 create a path forward for IID to request and receive a take permit from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife if it's deemed necessary for its water conservation programs during the temporary period of three years.

As Assemblymember Garcia also mentioned, the agreement triggers the release of 175 million federal dollars earmarked for the Salton Sea environmental projects under the state Salton Sea management program. Working with our state and federal partners, IID is committed to doing its part to support the precious water supplies from the Colorado river that helps sustain agriculture, as well as millions of people across Southern California. Glad to answer any questions from the Committee, and we respectfully ask for an aye vote .

Thank you so much. Any Members of the audience wish to come forward in support?

Madam Chair Members Oracio Gonzalez, on behalf of the Salton Sea Authority, we are a joint powers authority consisting of the Coachella Valley Water District, the Imperial Irrigation District, the County of Riverside, the County of imperial, and the Torres Martinez Desert Kaweah, a tribal people that have inhabited the Salton Sea region since time immemorial. We are in strong support of this measure and urge you to support. Thank you.

Hello, Keeley Morris with Edelstein, Gilbert, Robeson, and Smith on behalf of the California Municipal Utilities Association in support.

Okay, do we have any witnesses? In opposition. Many Members of the public? In opposition. Okay, we'll bring some of the Member Bonta.

Thank you. I just wanted to clarify specifically what the take that we're talking about is. So I guess there are 37 fully protected species that may not be taken or possessed with limited exceptions, of the 37 species currently designated as fully protected, eight are also listed as threatened and 19 are also listed as endangered. And so this specifically would allow for creating allowance for what number of species.

So we would request and go through the permitting process, but we anticipate it to be two species. It would be the California black rail and Yuma ridgeways rail, and those would be the only two that we anticipate needing to pursue a permit for under this legislation.

And those currently are fully protected, right?

Correct.

Any other questions? Okay, would you like to close? Yeah.

Colleagues, thank you. Again, this Committee has done tremendous amount of work on the issue of the Salton Sea. Historically, it's important, and it was mentioned in our key witnesses testimony. The QSA, the quantification settlement agreement that was passed in the early two thousands, was one of the largest water transfer agreements that the State of California ever engaged in. Water transferred from the imperial county to the San Diego region for urban usage.

The State of California committed to being liable for any environmental impacts when it came to protecting the region of imperial county as a result of that water transfer, the environmental impacts have been extremely devastating, with the Salton Sea dying, the air quality impacts, the eco habitat impacts, and that's where these types of legislative efforts, the type of investments that the state has made over the last few years towards mitigating those impacts have been extremely important throughout this legislative session, you'll hear more about why we need to continue to move in that direction again, because the state made a commitment through that agreement.

And so this is one way of continuing to live up to that settlement agreement by also holding our Federal Government partners accountable to doing their part. And so thank you so much for your attention on this matter and respectfully ask for your. I vote.

Thank you so much. And do you do accept the Committee amendments? Yes.

Committee Members are accepted.

[Roll Call]

Thank you.

[Roll Call]

Thank you. Let's do that again on the consent calendar. [Roll Call] Great with that. Thank you so much. We'll be adjourned. It.