Nongame mammals: depredators.
Summary
(1) Existing law provides that red fox squirrels, among other specified species, that are found to be injuring growing crops or other property may be taken at any time or in any manner in accordance with the Fish and Game Code and regulations adopted pursuant to that code by the owner or tenant of the premises or by employees and agents in immediate possession of written permission from the owner or the tenant. Existing law prohibits the sale of raw furs that are taken pursuant to these provisions. Existing law also requires that traps used pursuant to these provisions be inspected and all animals in the traps be removed at least once daily. A violation of the Fish and Game Code or any regulation adopted pursuant to this code is a misdemeanor. This bill would revise these provisions to provide that nonnative fox squirrels (Sciurus niger) , instead of red fox squirrels, may be taken as specified above. The bill would also prohibit the barter of raw furs, and would require that all animals in the traps be removed within 24 hours of the setting of a trap instead of at least once daily. The bill would require that nontargeted species be released unharmed and not taken. The bill would make other nonsubstantive changes to these provisions. (2) Existing law authorizes the Department of Fish and Wildlife to enter into cooperative agreements with any agency of the state or the United States for the purpose of controlling harmful nongame mammals and authorizes the department to take any mammal which, in its opinion, is unduly preying upon any bird, mammal, or fish. This bill would instead authorize the department to take any mammal that it determines is unduly preying on any bird, mammal, or fish. (3) Because a violation of the Fish and Game Code or any regulation adopted pursuant to that code is a misdemeanor, the bill would create new crimes, and thus, impose a state-mandated local program. (4) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Bill status
failed
1 of 4 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2014
Committee Review
Floor Vote
Governor
Introduced Feb 20, 2014
Last action Nov 30, 2014
Floor votes
How they voted
No floor votes recorded yet.
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
4
Key actions
1
Committee
2
Mar 6, 2014
Committee
Referred to Com. on W.,P. & W.
lower
Feb 21, 2014
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 23.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
DW
Das Williams
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 2210
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 2210. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline