Committee advances AB 1319 to give state agencies an expedited path if federal ESA protections are reduced
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
AB 1319 would establish a process for California to evaluate and, if needed, expedite protections for native species that lose federal endangered species protections; the committee passed the bill as amended amid debate about timing and workload for California Fish and Wildlife.
The Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee advanced Assembly Bill 1319, a bill that would create a structured, expedited process for the California Fish and Game Commission and Department of Fish and Wildlife to evaluate native California species that lose federal endangered species protections and, when appropriate, make them candidates for listing under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA).
Assemblymember Schultz said the bill responds to federal proposals that could narrow the scope of federal ESA protections. The measure would require quarterly reports identifying federal changes that decrease protections for listed species; the Fish and Game Commission could then consider emergency rulemaking to make a species a candidate under state law and proceed through the state’s standard listing process.
Supporters including Defenders of Wildlife, Audubon California and the Center for Biological Diversity said AB 1319 provides an orderly way for the state to preserve protections for species if federal standards are rolled back. They argued the bill would reduce uncertainty for species, local agencies and project proponents by clarifying when and how the state would step in.
Opponents, including multiple water agencies and trade groups, expressed concerns that mandatory review and emergency listing authority would produce legal uncertainty and impose heavy workload and fiscal burdens on the Department of Fish and Wildlife, which stakeholders said is already understaffed. Opponents asked for narrower triggers — for example limiting mandatory review to an actual federal delisting rather than all federal actions that could decrease protections.
Committee members split along familiar lines over balancing conservation with permitting and infrastructure needs; the motion to advance the bill carried and the measure was left on call.