May 5, 2025

Golden State Follies: Bear Bill Backburnered for the Year

Article Contact: Barry Snell,

Why It Matters: California is a beautiful western state with a long tradition of rugged individualism, including the most ancient human pursuit of fish and game. Our hunting traditions go back hundreds of years in California, a state many sportsmen and women often associate with bad ideas these days – many of which have now limited or restricted certain types of hunting.  . In turn, these restrictions have led to massive, virtually unchecked bear population growth, in turn leading to violent and sometimes lethal human-wildlife conflicts in the Golden State. The question is not if, but when California will be forced to return to its roots to get their bear population under control again, just as New Jersey did recently.

Highlights:

  • In 2012, California banned the use of dogs when hunting bears, leading to massive population growth. Harvest fell over 50% in 2013, and 2012 is the last year the low bear quota was met.
  • California Assembly Bill 1038 (AB 1038) seeks to allow houndsmen to once again use dogs to haze bears away from human population centers, as a first step towards loosening bear hunting regulations.
  • AB 1038 initially died in the Assembly Water, Parks, and Wildlife Committee by a single vote, however, was granted reconsideration later that day.
  • Approximately 80 sportsmen and women were present during the committee hearing, with several testifying and over 60 filing positions of support. Only a handful of people showed up to oppose the measure.

Monday, April 28 was an interesting day in Sacramento, California. AB 1038, a bill that would once again allow dogs to be used to merely haze bears in the hopes of avoiding dangerous conflicts, was heard in the Assembly Water, Parks, and Wildlife Committee. This bill is a first step towards loosening up the current rigid restrictions on bear hunting, including the 2012 prohibition against using dogs, which have led to the black bear population exploding from just 10,000 a few decades ago to an astonishing estimated 60,000 or more bears today.

Given these restrictions, the annual harvest quota has not been met since 2012, the year the new restrictions went into effect. The quota currently stands at 1,700 bears per year, but without the use of dogs to most effectively sex and age bears, the number of bears actually harvested each year is just a fraction of that. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) biologists have estimated that a full 16% of the bear population could be harvested each year—approximately 8,000 bears annually—and a healthy population at the appropriate management level could still be sustained. As things stand now, less than 3% of the state’s bears are taken each year, which is not enough to moderate population growth. The bear problem is bad enough that CDFW was effectively forced into revising the state’s bear management plan, which they just released recently.

Around 80 sportspeople showed up at the California Capitol for the hearing, many of them testifying in favor, and over 60 filing a position of support. Only a handful of opponents showed up, but the few that did proved to be rather entertaining. These individuals made a wide variety of absurd suggestions regarding deterring bears, including honking your car horn at them, shooting them with paint ball guns, and best of all, throwing a pinecone at their head to make them run away. Apparently, all Californians need to protect themselves from the literal bear invasion is carry a vehicle with them at all times, as well as a paint ball gun in a state that is hostile to guns, and Nolan Ryan with a sack of pinecones.

To the man who made the pinecone comment, one baffled Assemblyman asked, “Excuse me?”, thinking perhaps he had misheard the suggestion. Unfortunately, he did not. CSF maintains that the best way to prevent the ongoing explosion of dangerous wildlife-human encounters in California is to diminish the population and keep it under control using hunting as the primary means of scientific management. AB 1038 would be a big step back towards that ultimate objective.

Unfortunately, the bill was lost by a single vote. However, just a few hours later, it was put up for reconsideration. That means that the Assembly cannot rehear it this year, but it will be eligible again next year. When the session begins again in January 2026, CSF and our in-state partners will have 21 days to get it through the Water, Parks, and Wildlife Committee. In the meantime, that means a large educational effort will be underway to get a couple legislators on that committee on the side of common sense and proven, science-based wildlife management practices.

As always, the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation (CSF) will remain engaged on this issue, and the many others we face in California, and we’ll report back.

States Involved: