HOUSE BILL REPORT
HB 1226
BYRepresentatives Bumgarner, Sutherland, Allen, Walker, Beck, L. Smith, Fuhrman, Doty, Winsley, Meyers, C. Smith, Betrozoff, S. Wilson, Taylor, Moyer, Ferguson, D. Sommers, Brooks, Rayburn, Bristow, Chandler, Silver, Miller, Sayan, Haugen, K. Wilson, Braddock, Baugher, Amondson, Day, B. Williams, Lewis, May, Zellinsky, Schoon and Vekich
Revising provisions on game management.
House Committe on Natural Resources
Majority Report: The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass. (15)
Signed by Representatives Sutherland, Chair; K. Wilson, Vice Chair; Basich, Beck, Bumgarner, Butterfield, Dorn, Fuhrman, Hargrove, Haugen, Meyers, Sayan, C. Smith, Spanel and S. Wilson.
House Staff:Bill Koss (786-7129
AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES FEBRUARY 4, 1988
BACKGROUND:
Fifty-eight and one-tenth percent of the Department of Wildlife's financial support comes primarily from the purchase of licenses, tags, stamps, and punchcards by sports hunters and anglers; 12.6 percent from the General Fund; and 23.9 percent from federal sources. For the current biennium, this means an agency budget of approximately $63 million; about $37 million from the Wildlife Fund.
In several states, the fees from out-of-state hunters make up a large segment of the hunting and fishing agency budget. In Colorado, the sale of licenses and tags to non-resident hunters adds $12 million to the state game fund. This occurs in places known for quality in hunting experience, such as Idaho, Montana, Colorado and Wyoming. In Colorado, for example, non-residents pay over $12 million in hunting fees. These states also produce what many people term "trophy quality" animals.
Washington does not have a mechanism to compensate landowners for allowing hunter access to their property, nor does the state have a method of compensating landowners for producing big game. The ability of individuals to propagate big game is very limited -- only zoos may propagate and sell wildlife and only for the cost of production.
SUMMARY:
SUBSTITUTE BILL: A special category of hunt is created -- the controlled trophy hunt. In certain geographic areas, the Department of Wildlife may issue a limited number of permits to take a specific number of trophy quality animals. Trophy quality standards are established for big horn sheep, Rocky Mountain goats, pronghorn antelope, deer, elk, and moose.
A hunter may obtain a controlled trophy hunt permit in one of two ways. First, the hunter may apply to be one of the individuals selected at a random drawing. Up to 75 percent of the permits will be awarded in this manner. Second, 25 percent or more of the permits will be awarded based on the highest sealed bid submitted. Sealed bid applicants not chosen on the basis of their bid shall be entered in the random drawing. If selected in the random drawing, the applicant's sealed bid shall be accepted. If not drawn in the random drawing, the sealed bid applicant may have his/her bid returned or donated to the Big Game Habitat Fund.
The Big Game Habitat Fund receives the proceeds of all accepted sealed bids. The fund is a nonappropriated fund authorized for three purposes: (1) propagating big game populations to support controlled trophy hunts, (2) providing hunter access during a controlled trophy hunt, and (3) defraying department and landowner expenses in managing big game.
Up to seventy-five percent of the fund proceeds are earmarked for distribution to persons propagating and releasing wildlife to support controlled trophy hunts. For each trophy quality animal the propagator releases, the propagator will receive compensation from the fund in an amount determined as follows (for each specie): 75 percent of the fund's revenue from accepted sealed bids divided by the number of sealed bid permits.
Up to twenty-five percent of the fund proceeds are earmarked to compensate landowners who allow controlled trophy hunt permit holders to hunt on their land. For each trophy quality animal taken, the landowner shall be compensated as follows (for each specie): 25 percent of the fund revenue from accepted sealed bids times the total number of trophy quality animals taken on the landowner's property divided by the total number of controlled hunt permits.
Any remaining funds may be used for big game grazing leases, payment of damage claims, winter feeding programs, or purchase of fences to protect agricultural crops. Up to 20 percent of the fund may be used to market the state's trophy quality hunting and fishing.
Big game propagators must comply with rules adopted by the Department. Propagated animals may only be released in accordance with a Department-approved management plan. If the propagator receives brood stock from the Department, the propagator must release propagated female animals in an amount equal to 150 percent of the quantity of brood stock received. After this repayment is completed, the propagator may supply brood stock to other propagators.
Not less than 10 percent of the state's streams and rivers shall be managed for trophy quality fishing. This shall include catch and release requirements and single fish catch limits. The lakes and rivers selected shall be distributed throughout the state.
Privately-owned wildlife bred in captivity is excluded from the state law making all wildlife state property.
By February 28 of each year, the Department will report to the appropriate legislative committees concerning the harvest data and revenue generated from the controlled trophy hunts.
By 1991 the department shall fully implement the program. By July 1988 the department shall develop the rules under which the program will operate.
SUBSTITUTE BILL COMPARED TO ORIGINAL: Directs the Department of Wildlife to fully implement the program by 1991. The provision allowing hunting in state parks is deleted.
Fiscal Note: Requested January 21, 1988.
House Committee ‑ Testified For: Representative Bumgarner; Craig Voegle, Boise Cascase; Terry Bair, citizen. Bob Ace, King County Sportsmen's Council, neither opposed nor supported, but suggested additional work on the subject. Rich Poelker, Department of Wildlife, neither expressly supported nor opposed the bill, but indicated the Department had some concerns.
House Committee - Testified Against: Terry Karro, Wildlife Commission; John Stone, Washington State Sportsmen's Council; Paul Telford, citizen; and Mike Reed, State Parks Commission.
House Committee - Testimony For: In order to develop more wildlife in the state, private landowners need to become more involved in the production. This means compensating them for providing wildlife habitat, access to hunters, and for producing wildlife. Creating a situation that encourages the production of trophy quality animals will induce individuals to enhance wildlife habitat. The bill makes more money available for private development of wildlife and wildlife habitat.
House Committee - Testimony Against: When the Legislature passed ESHB 758 in 1987, it required the Wildlife Commission to report back by November, 1988 with recommendations on ways to employ innovative management and increase revenues. This legislation shortcuts the process. The legislation appears to allocate more than 100 percent of the available revenues to various tasks. Many of the hunters will not want to bid for the opportunity to hunt. The bill does not provide any revenue for the Department to use in administering the program of controlled trophy hunts. Any time wildlife is raised in captivity, it increases the opportunities for poaching.