Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutF&G - Notice of Proposed Changes in Regulations - Use of Dogs for Pursuit-Take of Mammals or for Dog Training Commissioners STATE OF CALIFORNIA Valerie Termini,Executive Director Eric Sklar,President Edmund G.Brown Jr.,Governor 1416 Ninth Street,Room 1320 Saint Helena Sacramento,CA 95814 Jacque Hostler-Carmesin,Vice President (916)653-4899 McKinleyville Fish and Game Commission www,fgc.ca.gov Anthony C.Williams,Member Huntington Beach Russell Bums,Member BU"j Napa iixs' AD,4II,N T I, Peter Silva,Member Chula Vista SEP i 5017 Wildlife Heritage and Conservation ORQVILLE,CA1,II: TITLE 14. Fish and Game Commission Notice of Proposed Changes in Regulations NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Fish and Game Commission (Commission), pursuant to the authority vested by Sections: 200, 202, 203, 3960, 3960.2 and 3960.4 of the Fish and Game Code and to implement, interpret or make specific Sections 3960, 3960.2 and 3960.4 of said Code, proposes to amend.subsection 265(d), Title 14, California Code of Regulations, relating to Use of Dogs for Pursuit/Take of Mammals or for Dog Training Informative DipestIPoli2y Statement Overview Amend,Section 265, Title 14, CCR, by deleting subsections (d)(1) and (d)(2). The current regulations prohibit the use of treeing switches and GPS collar equipment for dogs used in the taking of mammals. Recent changes to statutes have restricted the use of dogs by hunters to only the taking of wild pigs and deer. The prohibition on the use oftreeing switches is therefore unnecessary. Allowing the use of GPS collar equipment-will improve a hunter's ability to find and retrieve downed game and lost dogs. Benefits of the Proposed Regulations The regulation eliminates unnecessary-language regarding the prohibition on the use of treeing switches; and, permits GPS equipped-collars increasing the hunter's ability to find and retrieve downed wild pigs and deer as well as lost dogs. Consistency and Compatibility with Existing Regulations The Fish and Game Commission, pursuant to Fish and Game Code Sections 200, 202 and 203, has the sole authority to regulate hunting in California. Commission staff has searched the California Code of Regulations and has found no other agency with the authority to regulate the use of dogs for hunting mammals. Therefore the Commission has determined that the proposed amendments are neither inconsistent nor incompatible with existing State regulations. NOTICE IS GIVEN that any person interested may present statements, orally or in writing, relevant-to this action at a hearing to be held in Spring Hill Suites by Marriott, 900 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA, on Wednesday, October 11, 2017, at 8:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard. NOTICE IS ALSO GIVEN that any person interested may present statements, orally or in writing,. relevant to this action at a hearing to be held at the Handlery Hotel, 950 Hotel Circle North, San Diego, CA, on Wednesday December 6, 2017, at 8:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard. It is requested, but not required, that written comments be submitted on or before 5:00 p.m., November 22, 2017, at the address given below, or by email to FGC a0_fac.ca.gov. Written comments mailed, or emailed to the Commission office, must be received before 12:00 noon on December 1, 2017. All comments must be received no later than December 6,-2017, at the hearing in San Diego, CA. If you would like copies of any modifications to this proposal, please include your name and mailing address. Mailability of Documents Copies of the Notice of Proposed Action, the Initial Statement of Reasons, and the text of the regulation in underline and strikeout format can be accessed through the'Commission's website at www.fac.ca.gov. The regulations as well as all related documents upon which the proposal is based (rulemaking file), are on file and available for public review from the agency representative, Valerie Term!ni,•Executive Director, Fish and Game Commission, 1416..Ninth Street, Box 944209, Sacramento,..Caiiforn.ia 94244-2090,.phone (916)_653-489.9. .. Please direct requests for the above mentioned documents and inquiries concerning the regulatory process to Valerie Termini or Jon Snellstrom at the preceding address or phone r number. Jesse Garcia, Wildlife Branch, Departmen.t'of Fish and Wildlife, 916-445-3515, has been designated to respond to questions on the substance of the proposed regulations. Availability of Modified Text If the regulations adopted by the Commission differ from but are sufficiently related to the action proposed, they will be available to the public for at least 15 days prior to the date of adoption, Circumstances beyond the control of the Commission (e.g., timing of Federal regulation adoption, timing of resource data collection, timelines do not allow, etc.) or changes made to be responsive to public recommendation and comments during the regulatory process-may preclude full compliance with the 15-day comment period, and the Commission will exercise its powers under Section 265 of the Fish and Game Code. Regulations adopted pursuant to this section are not subject to the time periods•for adoption, amendment or repeal of regulations prescribed in Sections 11343.4, 11346.4 and 11346.8 of the Government Code. Any person interested may obtain.a copy of said regulations prior to the date of adoption by contacting the agency representative named herein. If the regulatory proposal is adopted, the final statement of reasons may be obtained from the address above when it has been received from the agency program staff. Impact of Regulatory Action/Results of the Economic Impact Assessment The Department assessed the potential for significant statewide adverse economic impacts that might result from the proposed regulatory action, and made the following initial determinations relative to the required statutory categories: (a) Significant Statewide Adverse Economic Impact Directly Affecting Businesses, Including the Ability of California Businesses to Compete with Businesses in Other States: The proposed action will not have a significant statewide adverse economic impact directly affecting business, including the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other states. Removing outdated prohibitions on treeing switches and GPS collars is not anticipated to affect current levels of hunting effort for species that,can legally be pursued with dogs. (b) Impact on the Creation or Elimination of Jobs Within the State, the Creation of New Businesses or the Elimination of Existing Businesses, or the Expansion of Businesses in California; Benefits of the Regulation to the Health and Welfare of California Residents, Worker Safety, and the State's Environment: The Commission anticipates benefits to the health and welfare of California residents. Hunting provides opportunities for multi-generational family activities and promotes respect for California's'environment by the future stewards of the State's resources. The Commission anticipates benefits to the State's environment in the sustainable management of natural resources. The proposed action will not have significant impacts on jobs or business within California and does not provide benefits to worker safety. (c) Cost Impacts on Representative Private Persons/Business: The Commission is not aware of any cast impacts that a representative private person or business would necessarily incur in reasonable compliance with the proposed action. (d) Costs or Savings to State Agencies or Costs/Savings in Federal Funding to the State: None. 2 (e) Other Nondiscretionary Costs/Savings to Local Agencies: None. (f) Programs Mandated on Local Agencies or School Districts: None. (g) Costs Imposed on Any Local Agency or School District that is Required to be Reimbursed under Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4: None. (h) Effect on Housing Costs: None. Effect on Small Business It has been determined that the adoption of these regulations may affect small business. The Commission has drafted the regulations in Plain English pursuant to Government Code Sections 11342.580 and 11346.2(a)(1). Consideration of Alternatives In view of information currently possessed, no reasonable alternative considered would be more effective in carrying out the purpose for which the regulation is proposed, would be as effective and less burdensome to affected private persons than the proposed regulation, or would be more cost effective to affected private persons,and equally effective in implementing the statutory policy or other provision of law. FISH AND GAME COMMISSION Valerie Termini Dated: September 11, 2017 Executive Director 3