Assembly Bill 1038 –
the deadly grip of predators on deer
Every deer enthusiast that spends time up the hill chasing bucks, or those who simply just care about deer, knows that California’s deer populations are in serious peril. Certainly, segregating migratory corridors and severing habitat connectivity with roadways and subdivisions has contributed to the decline. Perhaps we can give some credit to our unmanaged old growth forests that may offer deer cover, but little nourishment. Or we can pin the fault on massive fires that have swept through millions of acres of our wildlands. When it comes to trying to place blame on what is driving the continuing decline in the health of California’s deer there are a variety of factors to which we could point. But one primary driver really stands out – mortality by predation. While our deer herds continue to crumble, the populations of apex predators in California are healthy and growing. Said differently, lions and bears – OH MY!
“Oh my,” is right. Let’s start with mountain lions – an apex predator whose meal of choice is deer. In 1972, Assembly Bill (AB) 660 was passed and signed into law, placing a moratorium on the hunting of mountain lions. AB 660 was not introduced out of concern for the health of mountain lion populations, but rather because the “popular” estimate of 600 mountain lions in the state had been in use since 1919. In fact, AB 660 had two major project goals: first, the establishment of an updated population estimate for mountain lions in California; and second, the production of a science-based mountain lion management plan.
Eighteen years later, although mountain lion populations were still considered very healthy by most biologists, the species was designated as a “specially protected mammal” via the narrow passage of Proposition 117 – a.k.a. “The Mountain Lion Initiative” – on the June 1990 statewide ballot. “Ballot Box Biology,” as we say. Proposition 117 not only prohibited the hunting of mountain lions in California in perpetuity, by extension it effectively banned the non-lethal pursuit of mountain lions with hounds.
The loss of hunting as a mountain lion management tool, combined with the inability of houndsmen to place non-lethal pressure on them for the past 35 years, has not only resulted in a major increase in mountain lion populations, but also changes in their behavior. With their numbers growing and their fear of man diminished, sightings of this traditionally highly elusive creature are now commonly occurring in many areas – including in suburban neighborhoods and school yards. Growing public safety concerns were fully justified when, in March of last year, a 21-year-old man was tragically attacked and killed by a mountain lion in the middle of the day in El Dorado County.
Expanding mountain lion populations in California are not only heightening public safety concerns, they are putting increasing pressure on their natural prey – deer. Testimony to our declining deer herds, lions are beginning to look for meals elsewhere – resulting in predation of livestock and pets now skyrocketing far beyond historic levels.
Out of concern for public safety and the upsurge in the loss of livestock, State Senator Alvarado-Gil (R/4-Jackson) has introduced Senate Bill (SB) 818 – legislation which would establish a 5-year pilot program in El Dorado County to collect data on the efficacy of authorizing private houndsmen to proactively haze mountain lions deemed to be a threat to restore their fear of humans and dogs. This pilot program, if implemented, would likely not curb lion predation on deer. But the need for a bill like SB 818 is yet another indicator that this apex predator is screaming for management.
The impact of mountain lion predation on California’s deer is frightening, but it pales in comparison to the damage being done by another apex predator – the black bear.
In January 2021 Senator Scott Weiner (D/11-San Francisco) introduced SB 252 – legislation which proposed a prohibition on bear hunting in California. But, in response to pressure from the California Deer Association (CDA) and a variety of other conservation groups, the author quickly withdrew the bill. Just a few months later, the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) attempted to ban bear hunting by filing a petition with the California Fish and Game Commission. Fortunately, again in response to opposition from CDA and other wildlife organizations, the Commission denied the petition in 2022. But the Commission did direct the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) to revise their Bear Management Plan which had not been updated since 1998 – something that CDA had long been calling for.
For nearly two decades, CDFW has estimated that California’s statewide black bear population was between 30,000 to 40,000. In March 2025, CDFW is expected to release an updated Bear Management Plan which documents that bear populations are roughly twice that previous estimate. Double the trouble. Growing mountain lion populations may be putting greater stress on deer but escalating black bear populations are intensifying the problem.
Although omnivores, black bears are opportunistic feeders – especially when it comes to feeding on deer fawns. In 2012, CDA helped fund a CDFW study that evaluated the efficacy of using hair-snares to conduct genetic sampling of a black bear population residing on the Department’s Slinkard Valley Wildlife Area in Mono County. The “Final Project Report” of that study, submitted in March 2014, states “Monteith (2011) indicated that black bear predation on mule deer fawns could be limiting a segment of the Round Valley deer herd that occupies summer range located west of the Sierra crest. This author reported that more than 70% of fawn mortalities that occurred west of the Sierra Crest were related to predation by black bears. Moreover, fawns were six times more likely to die from bear predation than any other cause of mortality.”
Further, the final report noted that “The black bear population in California has grown both in distribution and abundance over the last 25 years. Population estimates generated from statewide harvest data indicate that bear numbers in California now exceed 30,000 animals (CDFG 2010). As a result, bears have expanded their range into portions of the state where they were formerly not known to occur, while other areas with historically low numbers have experienced dramatic population increases.” Continuing, the report stated that “…Bears are generalists that rely on a variety of food sources to supplement their diet; however, they are also facultative predators because they specialize in predation of young ungulates during the first few weeks of life (Welker 1986, Pojar and Bowden 2004, Montieth 2011). Therefore, based on data presented by Monteith (2011), it is speculated that as the bear population continues to expand throughout the eastern Sierra, the level of bear predation on mule deer fawns will also increase.”
Reaching a similar conclusion, the draft update to CDFW’s Bear Management Plan states that “Within California, Monteith et al. (2014) found neonate mule deer born west of the Sierra Crest, where black bear densities are higher than east of the Sierra crest, were >6 times more likely to die of black bear predation than any other cause. High rates of black bear predation were thought to limit deer abundance in this area by causing a reduction in the proportion of deer that migrate to summer range, as deer trade off obtaining superior nutritional benefits to avoid predation (Monteith et al. 2014). Black bear predation is also a common cause of mortality for black-tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus) fawns in the Mendocino National Forest (Wittmer et al. 2014).”
Suffice it to say that it is very well documented that the increase in predation of young fawns by expanding bear populations is substantially contributing to the decline of our deer. But what about bear predation on adult deer? The draft Plan states that research has demonstrated that “black bears frequently displace mountain lions from their kills, a behavior called kleptoparasitism,” noting that studies have “found black bears at 77% of mountain lion kills, and black bears displaced mountain lions from them 72% of the time. Black bear kleptoparasitism caused mountain lions to increase their kill rates substantially to recoup energetic losses to black bears…and mountain lion kill rates in this system were the highest reported for the species across their range.” The draft Plan concludes those comments with the statement “high rates of predation on deer fawns and kleptoparasitism of mountain lion kills by black bears have likely contributed to a declining deer population in this area.”
Clearly, if we care about healthy deer populations, we must manage predator populations. Although hunting has long been eliminated as a means for keeping mountain lion numbers in check, it remains a critical tool for keeping bear populations in balance. But are we using it? Although the draft Plan cautiously stops just short of saying that California hunters need to harvest more bears, it provides strong arguments pointing in that direction. Looking at hunter harvest in other states for comparison, the draft Plan notes that “…Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Wisconsin have reported increasing black bear populations with harvest rates >20%.” Yet, in California, the draft Plan states that hunters harvest “less than 3% annually of the statewide population.”
Why is our harvest comparatively so low? To begin, California regulations limit the number of bears that can be annually harvested at 1,700 – a cap set many years ago when the state’s bear populations were much lower. Most effectively hunted via the pursuit by dogs, legislation (SB 1221) was passed in 2012 which prohibited the use of dogs for pursuing bears beginning in 2013. Prior to passage of SB 1221, when pursuit by dogs was still a legal ‘method of take’, the 1,700 annual cap was regularly filled.
At that time, even though total bear numbers were much lower, CDFW called for the cap of 1,700 bears to be increased. Not once, but twice, CDFW requested the Fish and Game Commission to increase the 1,700 annual harvest quota. But both times the Commission rejected that request due to the objection of animal-rights interests.
If we were not using hunting as an effective tool for managing bears then, we certainly are not using it now. Since the ban on pursuing bears with dogs went into effect in 2013 the annual harvest has typically been closer to 1,000 and never exceeded more than 1,441 bears. For 2024, CDFW is reporting a statewide harvest of only 967.
Banning the pursuit of bears with dogs was not only bad news for deer, it was also a big blow to public safety. Similar to the case with cats, the inability of houndsmen to place non-lethal pressure on bears for the past twelve years has resulted in changes in bear behavior. With their fear of man and dogs eroded, their numbers growing, and their range expanding into areas they have never been before, human-bear conflict has also skyrocketed.
Bottom line – if we care about the health of California’s deer and the safety of our public, we MUST manage California’s bears. Not willing to sit idly by, CDA has set its sights on bears. To address this very serious concern, CDA is partnering with the California Houndsmen for Conservation to sponsor AB 1038 – legislation intended to restore the tool desperately needed to manage bear populations, their threat to public safety, and their devastating impact on deer.
Authored by Assembly Member Heather Hadwick (R/1-Redding), AB 1038 would restore the ability of houndsmen to pursue bears with dogs. A two-part bill, part one would require the California Fish and Game Commission to establish “Tree and Free” seasons during which a person may use dogs in the non-lethal pursuit of bears. By creating seasons for the non-lethal pursuit of bears with dogs, AB 1038 would help address public safety concerns by helping to restore the wariness of humans and dogs that historically have kept bears away from human occupied areas and out of trouble.
Part two of AB 1038 would take a step towards curbing over-predation of deer by bears by restoring the authority of the Commission to establish a season during which an individuals may use pursuit by dogs as “method of take”.
CDA understands this legislation will face fierce opposition. But if we are to save California’s deer, we must take decisive action to better control the unchecked predator species that prey upon them. With the release of the final updated CDFW Bear Management Plan imminent, the time for bold action is now.
As of early March, AB 1038 has yet to be referred to policy committee for its first hearing.
Editor’s Note: We expect AB 1038 and SB 818 to be first heard in April. Be sure to watch future issues of California Deer for updates on their progress.