Home/Bills/SB 1305California · 2025–2026 Regular Session

Senate BillPassed first houseFish and Game

SB 1305: Wildlife: bears.

California · Senate · 2025–2026 Regular Session · last verified August 15, 2026

What SB 1305 does, verified August 15, 2026

<blockquote> <p>This bill amends existing wildlife management laws to exclude grizzly bears from current regulations on taking black and brown or cinnamon bears. It requires the Department of Fish and Wildlife to develop and publish a roadmap by June 30, 2030, evaluating the feasibility and advisability of reintroducing grizzly bears in California, including ecological benefits and community impacts. The bill prohibits reintroduction until completion of this roadmap, scientific determinations on biological viability, and consultation with Native American tribes and affected communities.</p> </blockquote>

Bill journey

✓IntroducedComplete

✓In CommitteeComplete

✓First Chamber FloorComplete

4Second ChamberCurrent

5GovernorPending

6ChapteredPending

Last action: August 13 hearing: Held in committee and under submission. (2026-08-13)Alert me

Author and sponsors

Sen. Laura RichardsonAuthor · California State Senate

Full contact details, staff, and committees with Connect, $16/moUnlock

Coauthors

Akilah Weber PiersonCatherine BlakespearHenry SternRick Chavez Zbur

Recent actions20 total · showing 5

Aug. 13, 2026	August 13 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.
Aug. 05, 2026	August 5 set for first hearing. Placed on suspense file.
Jul. 02, 2026	Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
Jul. 01, 2026	From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 2.) (June 30).
Jun. 04, 2026	Referred to Com. on W., P., & W.

Full action history, 15 earlier actionsConnect Plus

Latest bill textAmended version, July 2, 2026 · 4,138 words

Amended IN Assembly July 02, 2026

Amended IN Senate May 14, 2026

Amended IN Senate April 16, 2026

CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE— 2025–2026 REGULAR SESSION

Senate Bill

No. 1305

Introduced by Senator Richardson
(Coauthors: Senators Blakespear, Stern, and Weber Pierson)
(Coauthor: Assembly Member Zbur)

February 20, 2026

An act to ~~amend Sections 3011, 3950, 4181, 4181.1, and 4185 of, to add Section 4764 to, and to~~ add Chapter 9.5 (commencing with Section 4775) to Part 3 of Division 4 ~~of,~~ of the Fish and Game Code, relating to wildlife.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST

SB 1305, as amended, Richardson. Wildlife: bears.

Existing law classifies “black and brown or cinnamon bears (genus Euarctos)” as a game mammal for purposes of managing, taking, or hunting that species. Existing law makes it unlawful to take a bear using a firearm, trap, or bow and arrow without first procuring a tag authorizing the taking. Existing law also makes it unlawful for a person to take a bear with an iron or steel-jawed or any type of metal-jawed traps. In any part of a district within the Counties of San Bernardino and Riverside, existing law authorizes the taking of bears at any time with traps within a good and substantial fence surrounding beehives, as specified.
~~This bill would exclude grizzly bear from the application of the above-described provisions.~~

Existing law establishes the Department of Fish and Wildlife in the Natural Resources Agency. Under existing law, the department has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species.

This bill would require the department to develop and make publicly available a roadmap that evaluates whether, and under what conditions, reintroduction of the grizzly bear is feasible and advisable, and the extent to which the ecological functions once provided by the grizzly bear may be restored through human-mediated landscape restoration, including through reintroduction of the species. The bill would also require the department, by June 30, 2030, to submit the roadmap document to relevant budget and policy committees of the Legislature, the Legislative Analyst’s Office, and the Fish and Game Commission. The bill would prohibit reintroduction of the grizzly bear in the state until the department or others have carried out various actions, including, among other things, completion of the roadmap, determinations, based on the best available science, that establishment of a self-sustaining grizzly population in the state is biologically viable, and a consultation with California Native American tribes and engagement with communities, as specified. The bill would make implementation of these provisions contingent upon an appropriation, except as specified.

Vote: MAJORITY Appropriation: NO Fiscal Committee: YES Local Program: NO

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1.

This act shall be known, and may be cited, as the California Grizzly Recovery Assessment Act.

SEC. 2.

The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:

(a) The grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) is was a California keystone species known for its powerful influence on ecosystem structure and function. Through their ecological interactions, grizzly bears ~~promote~~ promoted biodiversity and ecosystem heterogeneity by modifying vegetation composition and structure, regulating trophic dynamics, accelerating geomorphic processes, enriching soils with marine and terrestrial nutrients, dispersing seeds, and initiating secondary ecological processes. Prior to their deliberate extirpation from California in the 20th century, grizzly bears inhabited the majority of California’s ecoregions, except the hottest and most arid portions of the state. Contemporary conservation and indigenous science recognize the integral role of grizzly bears in maintaining healthy, functioning ecosystems across their range. Their removal from California ecosystems contributed to cascading ecological effects that altered landscape structure, shifted species composition, and contributed to an overall loss of biodiversity in the state.

(b) California grizzly bears coexisted with the ancestors of contemporary California Native American tribes for thousands of years, forming longstanding ecological and cultural relationships. Though extirpated from California more than a century ago, the grizzly bear holds enduring cultural, religious, spiritual, and ceremonial significance for many California Native American tribes. Within the indigenous knowledge systems of California Native American tribes, the grizzly bear is recognized as a vital and honored relative, and its presence is reflected in the oral histories, cosmologies, teachings, traditional medicine, place names, governance structures, and traditional lifeways.

(c) Following the Gold Rush, widespread killing of grizzly bears by settlers, miners, ranchers, and government agents led to the complete extirpation of the species from California by 1924. This deliberate extermination represents one of the most significant and widespread losses of a native species in the state’s history and continues to have lasting adverse impacts by eliminating key ecological functions, reducing ecosystem resilience, and impacting California Native American tribes’ abilities to sustain cultural relationships, uphold traditional practices, and maintain reciprocal stewardship of the land.

(d) California has since become a global leader in biodiversity science and conservation, recovering iconic native species such as the California condor, tule elk, humpback whale, southern sea otter, northern elephant seal, gray wolf, and the North American beaver from near or complete extirpation. The recovery and restoration of extirpated native species is consistent with the state’s and state agencies’ public trust and statutory obligations to conserve, protect, and restore California’s endangered, threatened, and sensitive species. These species hold inherent, ecological, cultural, and social value.

(e) Historical California grizzlies, Ursus arctos californicus, were previously described as an endemic subspecies and their presumed extinction by 1924 precluded consideration of reintroduction as a wildlife management option. Recent genomic research has determined that California grizzlies were not a distinct subspecies, but part of the broader North American grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) population, which is currently distributed across Idaho, Montana, Washington, Wyoming, and much of western Canada. This genetic continuity provides a scientifically supported source population from which potential restoration efforts may draw.

(f) Evaluating whether the reintroduction of the grizzly bear in particular areas of the state may be feasible and advisable, as a means of restoring historical ecological functions, is consistent with the objectives of the California Endangered Species Act (Chapter 1.5 (commencing with Section 2050) of Division 3), the State Wildlife Action Plan, and the state’s biodiversity and climate resilience strategies, including the 30x30 goal established in Executive Order No. N-82-20.

(g) The grizzly bear holds enduring cultural, historical, ecological, and symbolic significance as a vital relative to many California Native American tribes, the emblem on the California State Flag, and the official state animal of California. Evaluating whether reintroduction may be feasible and advisable in particular areas of the state is also consistent with the state’s policy to maintain and restore healthy, natural ecosystems that sustain communities, support the economy, provide for recreation, and preserve California’s history, culture, and traditions, while recognizing the historical and ongoing harms inflicted on wildlife, natural systems, and California Native American tribes.

(h) Development and implementation of the roadmap, assessments, consultations, and coexistence and stewardship frameworks pursuant to Section 3 of this act, including assessment of the grizzly bear’s historical ecology and ecological roles in California, and evaluation of the extent to which the ecological functions once provided by the grizzly bear may be restored through human-mediated landscape restoration, may also benefit habitat restoration, species recovery, and human-wildlife coexistence initiatives within and surrounding reintroduction areas evaluated, regardless of whether reintroduction is ultimately undertaken.

SEC. 3.Section 3011 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:
3011.
(a)A person, including employees of the state, federal, or county government, shall not take bear with iron or steel-jawed or any type of metal-jawed traps, and no provision of this code or any other law shall be construed to authorize, or to permit the authorizing of, the use of iron or steel-jawed or any type of metal-jawed traps to take bear.
~~(b)This section shall not apply to grizzly bear.~~
SEC. 4.Section 3950 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:
3950.
(a)Game mammals are: deer (genus Odocoileus), elk (genus Cervus), prong-horned antelope (genus Antilocapra), black and brown or cinnamon bears (genus Euarctos), mountain lions (genus Felis), jackrabbits and varying hares (genus Lepus), cottontails, brush rabbits, and pygmy rabbits (genus Sylvilagus), and tree squirrels (genus Sciurus and Tamiasciurus).
~~(b)Nelson bighorn sheep (subspecies Ovis canadensis nelsoni) are game mammals only for the purposes of sport hunting described in subdivision (b) of Section 4902.~~
~~(c)The grizzly bear is not a game mammal.~~
~~(d)This section shall become operative on July 1, 2024.~~
SEC. 5.Section 4181 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:
4181.
(a)Except as provided in Section 4181.1, any owner or tenant of land or property that is being damaged or destroyed or is in danger of being damaged or destroyed by elk, bear, bobcat, beaver, wild pig, wild turkeys, or gray squirrels may apply to the department for a permit to kill the animals. Subject to the limitations in subdivisions (b) and (d), the department, upon satisfactory evidence of the damage or destruction, actual or immediately threatened, shall issue a revocable permit for the taking and disposition of the animals under regulations adopted by the commission. The permit shall include a statement of the penalties that may be imposed for a violation of the permit conditions. Animals so taken shall not be sold or shipped from the premises on which they are taken except under instructions from the department. An iron-jawed or steel-jawed or any type of metal-jawed trap shall not be used to take any bear or bobcat pursuant to this section. Poison of any type shall not be used to take any gray squirrel or wild turkey pursuant to this section. The department shall designate the type of trap to be used to ensure the most humane method is used to trap gray squirrels. The department may require trapped squirrels to be released in parks or other nonagricultural areas. It is unlawful for any person to violate the terms of any permit issued under this section.
~~(b)The permit issued for taking bears or bobcats pursuant to subdivision (a) shall contain the following facts:~~
~~(1)Why the issuance of the permit was necessary.~~
~~(2)What efforts were made to solve the problem without killing the bears or bobcats.~~
~~(3)What corrective actions should be implemented to prevent a reoccurrence.~~
(c)With respect to wild pigs, the department shall provide an applicant for a depredation permit to take wild pigs or a person who reports taking wild pigs pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 4181.1 with written information that sets forth available options for wild pig control, including, but not limited to, depredation permits, allowing periodic access to licensed hunters, and holding special hunts authorized pursuant to Section 4188. The department may maintain and make available to these persons lists of licensed hunters interested in wild pig hunting and lists of nonprofit organizations that are available to take possession of depredating wild pig carcasses. The department shall not limit the number of wild pigs to be taken under a depredation permit or based on the sex of the wild pig.
~~(d)With respect to elk, the following procedures shall apply:~~
~~(1)Before issuing a depredation permit pursuant to subdivision (a), the department shall do all of the following:~~
~~(A)Verify the actual or immediately threatened damage or destruction.~~
~~(B)Provide a written summary of corrective measures necessary to immediately alleviate the problem.~~
~~(C)Determine the viability of the local herd, and determine the minimum population level needed to maintain the herd.~~
~~(D)Ensure the permit will not reduce the local herd below the minimum.~~
~~(E)Work with affected landowners to develop measures to achieve long-term resolution while maintaining viability of the herd.~~
(2)After completing the statewide elk management plan pursuant to Section 3952, the department shall use the information and methods contained in the plan to meet the requirements of subparagraphs (C), (D), and (E) of paragraph (1).
~~(e)This section shall not apply to grizzly bear.~~
SEC. 6.Section 4181.1 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:
4181.1.
(a)Any bear that is encountered while in the act of inflicting injury to, molesting, or killing, livestock may be taken immediately by the owner of the livestock or the owner’s employee if the taking is reported no later than the next working day to the department and the carcass is made available to the department.
(b)Notwithstanding Section 4652, any wild pig that is encountered while in the act of inflicting injury to, molesting, pursuing, worrying, or killing livestock or damaging or destroying, or threatening to immediately damage or destroy, land or other property, including, but not limited to, rare, threatened, or endangered native plants, wildlife, or aquatic species, may be taken immediately by the owner of the livestock, land, or property or the owner’s agent or employee, or by an agent or employee of any federal, state, county, or city entity when acting in their official capacity. The person taking the wild pig shall report the taking no later than the next working day to the department and shall make the carcass available to the department. Unless otherwise directed by the department and notwithstanding Section 4657, the person taking a wild pig pursuant to this subdivision, or to whom the carcass of a wild pig taken pursuant to this subdivision is transferred pursuant to subdivision (c), may possess the carcass of the wild pig. The person in possession of the carcass shall make use of the carcass, which may include an arrangement for the transfer of the carcass to another person or entity, such as a nonprofit organization, without compensation. The person who arranges this transfer shall be deemed to be in compliance with Section 4304. It is the intent of the Legislature that nothing in this subdivision shall be interpreted to authorize a person to take wild pigs pursuant to this subdivision in violation of a state statute or regulation or a local zoning or other ordinance that is adopted pursuant to other provisions of law and that restricts the discharge of firearms.
(c)The department shall make a record of each report made pursuant to subdivision (a) or (b) and may have an employee of the department investigate the taking or cause the taking to be investigated. The person taking a wild pig shall provide information as deemed necessary by the department. Upon completion of the investigation, the investigator may, upon a finding that the requirements of this section have been met with respect to the particular bear or wild pig taken under subdivision (a) or (b), issue a written statement to the person confirming that the requirements of this section have been met. The person who took the wild pig may transfer the carcass to another person without compensation.
~~(d)Notwithstanding Section 4763, any part of any bear lawfully possessed pursuant to this section is subject to Section 4758.~~
(e)Nothing in this section prohibits federal, state, or county trappers from killing or trapping bears when the bears are killing or molesting livestock, but no iron-jawed or steel-jawed or any type of metal-jawed trap shall be used to take the bear, and no person, including employees of the state, federal, or county government, shall take bear with iron-jawed or steel-jawed or any type of metal-jawed traps.
~~(f)This section shall not apply to grizzly bear.~~
SEC. 7.Section 4185 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:
4185.
(a)In any district or part of a district within the Counties of San Bernardino and Riverside, bears may be taken at any time with traps within a good and substantial fence, as the fence is described in Section 17121 of the Food and Agricultural Code, surrounding beehives, if no part of the fence is at a distance greater than 50 yards from a beehive, and if a conspicuous sign is posted and maintained at each entrance to the enclosed premises to give warning of the presence of the traps. An iron or steel-jawed or any type of metal-jawed trap shall not be used to take bear under this section.
~~(b)This section shall not apply to grizzly bear.~~
SEC. 8.Section 4764 is added to the Fish and Game Code, immediately following Section 4763, to read:
4764.
~~The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to grizzly bear, with the exception of Section 4758.~~

~~SEC. 9.~~SEC. 3.

Chapter 9.5 (commencing with Section 4775) is added to Part 3 of Division 4 of the Fish and Game Code, to read:

CHAPTER 9.5. Grizzly Bear

4775.

(a) (1) It is the intent of the Legislature to determine whether reintroduction of the grizzly bear (Ursus arctos), the official state animal, is biologically feasible and whether areas of the state exist in which the conditions necessary for long-term coexistence and stewardship can be achieved.

(2) It is further the intent of the Legislature that the department evaluate whether, and under what conditions, the ecological functions once provided by the grizzly bear may be restored through human-mediated landscape restoration, including through reintroduction of the species in areas where reintroduction is determined to be feasible and advisable.

(b) The department shall develop a roadmap that evaluates whether, and under what conditions, reintroduction of the grizzly bear is feasible and advisable, and the extent to which the ecological functions once provided by the grizzly bear may be restored through human-mediated landscape restoration, including through reintroduction of the species. The roadmap shall include, but is not limited to, all of the following:

(1) The following scientific assessments and evaluations, based on the best available science and data:

(A) A scientific assessment of the grizzly bear’s historical distribution in California, its historical ecology and ecological roles across the state’s ecosystems, the principal causes and processes that contributed to its extirpation from the state, and the genetic relationship between California’s historical grizzly bear population and extant grizzly populations that may serve as a potential source population for reintroduction.

(B) An assessment of the native species, ecological communities, ecosystem functions, and ecological processes that may have been affected, directly or indirectly, by the grizzly bear’s extirpation from California, and that may benefit from restoration of the ecological functions once provided by the grizzly bear, including through reintroduction of the species.

(C) An evaluation and comparative assessment of potential reintroduction areas based on ecological criteria, land ownership, habitat connectivity, landscape permeability, conflict risk, existing and needed coexistence infrastructure, community support, and any other factors the department determines relevant to long-term grizzly bear reintroduction.

(D) An evaluation of potential source populations and founder population composition, including genetic diversity, sex and age structure, disease screening, animal welfare considerations, and any other considerations necessary to maintain demographic or genetic viability.

(2) Consultation, review, and framework development, including all of the following:

(A) Consultation with California Native American tribes, with priority given to tribes whose ancestral territories overlap with proposed reintroduction areas, and in coordination with the University of California, local governments, law enforcement agencies, landowners, land managers, regional conservation organizations, outdoor recreation organizations, residents, stakeholders, and other experts in wildlife conservation and grizzly bear reintroduction.

(B) Independent peer review of the assessments and evaluations required by paragraph (1), drawing on the most qualified individuals and organizations, including tribal representatives, individuals from appropriate institutions within the state, individuals from within the University of California, representatives of governmental, scientific, and wildlife management organizations, and individuals from institutions with expertise in grizzly bear conservation, reintroduction, or management, and other qualified experts.

(C) Development of a framework for incorporating the cultural, spiritual, and ecological values of California Native American tribes, including recognition of the grizzly bear’s significance to tribal traditions, land relationships, tribal stewardship, and consideration of opportunities for tribal participation as partners, cooperating entities, or costewards in planning, monitoring, coexistence, and implementation.

(3) Management, implementation, cost, and regulatory measures, including all of the following:

(A) Development of management procedures, including animal handling, translocation logistics, postrelease monitoring, conflict prevention and response protocols, public education, attractant management, community engagement, and standards for human-grizzly coexistence.

(B) An estimate of implementation costs and agency capacity needs, including relocation, monitoring, staffing, equipment, community engagement, coexistence infrastructure, tribal stewardship, education, attractant mitigation, and conflict mitigation, with an analysis of potential cultural, ecological, and socioeconomic benefits, potential economic impacts to agricultural and ranching operations in and near potential reintroduction areas, potential effects on forest products and outdoor recreation industries, potential economic opportunities, including wildlife tourism, and rural and tribal community development, with the intent to determine sufficiency of funding and agency capacity for long-term stewardship.

(C) Proposed statutes, if any, and regulations governing the taking and management of grizzly bears consistent with state and federal wildlife laws and regulations, including any relevant regulations promulgated pursuant to Section 10 of the federal Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1539), and conservation objectives.

(c) (1) By June 30, 2030, the department shall submit the roadmap document developed pursuant to subdivision (b) to the relevant budget and policy committees of the Legislature, the Legislative Analyst’s Office, and the commission.

(2) The roadmap document developed pursuant to subdivision (b) shall be made publicly available on the department’s internet website.

(3) The roadmap submitted pursuant to this subdivision shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code.

(4) To the extent permitted under Article VII of the California Constitution, the department may contract with outside specialists in developing and completing the roadmap pursuant to subdivision (b).

(d) Any reintroduction of the grizzly bear in the state shall not be undertaken or authorized until all of the following occur, as carried out by the department or others:

(1) Completion of the roadmap required by subdivision (b).

(2) Determinations, based on the best available science, that establishment of a self-sustaining grizzly population in the state is advisable and biologically viable.

(3) Identification of the particular areas in which reintroduction may occur, based on the assessments and evaluations required by subdivision (b), including consideration of ecological suitability, land ownership, habitat connectivity, landscape permeability, conflict risk, coexistence infrastructure, and community support.

(4) Consultation with California Native American tribes, with priority given to tribes whose reservations or ancestral territories overlap with proposed reintroduction areas, and engagement with communities, including local residents, landowners, and other stakeholders in or near proposed reintroduction areas, through public meetings and other outreach efforts intended to inform the public about the proposed reintroduction and its potential effects, if any, on ongoing human activities.

(5) Adoption of a framework incorporating the cultural, spiritual, and ecological values of California Native American tribes into grizzly bear reintroduction planning, management, coexistence, and long-term stewardship, including recognition of the grizzly bear’s significance to tribal traditions, land relationships, tribal stewardship, and consideration of opportunities for tribal participation as partners, cooperating entities, or costewards in planning, monitoring, coexisting, and implementation.

(6) Adoption of long-term stewardship standards and procedures for proposed reintroduction areas, including postrelease monitoring, conflict prevention and response protocols, public education, attractant management, community engagement, standards for human-grizzly coexistence, livestock loss prevention and response measures, compensation and technical assistance measures for agricultural and ranching operations, and coordination with local governments, local agencies, and law enforcement agencies for implementation, emergency response, and ongoing management.

(7) Adoption of procedures that minimize risk of conflict to human life and property.

(8) Adoption of procedures that promote the welfare of grizzly bears involved in restoration efforts.

(9) Adoption of regulations that set forth the circumstances under which the taking of grizzly bears may be authorized consistent with the conservation of the species.

(e) (1) It is the intent of the Legislature that the department and the commission be provided with sustainable funding sufficient to fully implement this section and the resulting obligations. The grizzly bear is an umbrella species whose conservation supports a broad range of ecological and wildlife management objectives. Development and implementation of the roadmap, assessments, consultations, and coexistence and stewardship frameworks, as required by this section, including assessment of the grizzly bear’s historical ecology and ecological roles in California and evaluation of the extent to which the ecological functions once provided by the grizzly bear may be restored through human-mediated landscape restoration, may also benefit habitat restoration, species recovery, and human-wildlife coexistence initiatives within and surrounding reintroduction areas evaluated pursuant to this section, regardless of whether reintroduction is ultimately undertaken.

(2) Notwithstanding any other law, the department may accept and, subject to an appropriation for this purpose, expend funds from any public or private sources to administer this chapter.

(f) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to limit the authority of the commission or department pursuant to the California Endangered Species Act (Chapter 1.5 (commencing with Section 2050) of Division 3).

(g) (1) Except as specified in paragraph (2), implementation of this chapter is contingent upon an appropriation in the annual Budget Act or other statute for purposes of this chapter.

(2) The department may accept funds pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (e) regardless of whether an appropriation is made pursuant to paragraph (1).

Text of SB 1305 as amended, from the official record. Connect Plus keeps every version and highlights what changed.Compare versions