MEETING DATE: August 28, 2019

PREPARED BY: Erik Steenblock, Environmental Programs Manager

DEPT. DIRECTOR: Carl Quiram

DEPARTMENT: Public Works CITY MANAGER: Karen P. Brust

SUBJECT:

Environmental Commission Recommendation to City Council to Adopt a Resolution Supporting Assembly Bill (AB) 1788.

RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:

Adopt City Council Resolution 2019-76, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Encinitas Supporting AB 1788, the California Ecosystems Protection Act of 2019.” (Attachment 1)

STRATEGIC PLAN:

This project aligns with the Strategic Plan Vision for:

• Environment - Be good stewards of open spaces, beaches, parks, and the naturalenvironment.

FISCAL CONSIDERATIONS:

There is no direct fiscal impact associated with the recommended action.

BACKGROUND:

Through an Environmental Commissioner Initiated Agenda Item, researched and presented by Commissioner Joy Lyndes on June 13, 2019, the City of Encinitas Environmental Commission approved a recommendation to the City Council to adopt a resolution in support of AB 1788.

Commissioner Lyndes’ report (Attachment 2) summarizes the bill, and provides context and supportive statewide and local data points in support of the Environmental Commission recommendation, including the following:

• Rodenticides (rat poisons) designed to kill rodents are poisoning California’s nativewildlife; these persistent poisons are first consumed by rats, who in turn are consumedby other wildlife, resulting in secondary poisoning and contamination of the food chain.

• A public speaker, Trish Jackman from the San Diego Wildlife Center, spoke at the Encinitas Environmental Commission meeting on May 9, 2019 and provided real world local stories of the impacts of rodenticide use in the Encinitas community.

• A 2018 analysis of 11 studies revealed that more than 85% of California mountain lions, bobcats, and Pacific fishers have been exposed to rodenticides.

• In the decade from 1999 and 2009, the American Association of Poison Control Centers received reports of an average of 17,000 humans exposed to rodenticides annually. The vast majority, roughly 15,000, of these exposures involved children younger than six.

• AAPCC (American Association of Poison Control Centers) reported more than 50,000 dog poisonings from rodenticides in 2014.

ANALYSIS: AB 1788 was introduced by State Assembly Member Richard Bloom on February 22, 2019. In summary, the bill prohibits the use of second generation anticoagulant rodenticides (SGARs) throughout the State, and also prohibits the use of first generation anticoagulant (FGARs) rodenticides on state-owned property. As summarized by the State Assembly Committee on Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials, specifically, the bill:

1. Makes legislative findings about the utility of wild predators in maintaining ecosystem health and about the deleterious impact of rodenticides on predatory species.

2. Declares that the provisions in the bill shall be known as the California

Ecosystems Protection Act of 2019.

3. Prohibits the use, except as specified, of any pesticide that contains one or more of the following anticoagulants: brodifacoum, bromadiolone, difenacoum, and difethialone (SGARs).

4. Exempts from the prohibition on the use of SGARs a situation in which the local

health authority determines that an emergency pest infestation poses an immediate threat to public health.

5. Requires the county agricultural commissioner, in the event that the local health

authority determines that there is a public health emergency, to grant permission for licensed pest control operators, upon application, to use an SGAR. Requires that permission be granted for the limited time frame of the public health emergency.

6. Authorizes the county agricultural commissioner to impose additional conditions

for public health emergency applications of a SGAR.

7. Exempts from the prohibition on the use of SGARs any governmental agency employee certified as a vector control technician who uses pesticides for public health activities, and a mosquito or vector control district that uses pesticides to protect the public health.

8. Exempts from the prohibition on the use of SGARs agricultural activities, including

activities conducted in a warehouse used to store foods for human or animal consumption; an agricultural food production site, including, but not limited to, a slaughterhouse and cannery; and, a factory, brewery, or winery.

9. Prohibits the use, except as specified, of any pesticide that contains one or more

of the following anticoagulants on any state-owned property in California: chlorophacinone; diphacinoneor warfarin (FGARs).

10. Directs state agencies to encourage federal agencies to comply with the

prohibition on FGARs on state-owned property in California.

11. Exempts agricultural activities from the prohibition on the use of FGARs. The full text of AB 1788 as introduced on February 22, 2019 and last amended in the Senate on June 24, 2019, is included in Attachment 3. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: The action being considered by the City Council is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is not a “project” under Section 15378(b)(5) of CEQA Guidelines. The action involves an organizational or administrative activity of government that will not result in the direct or indirect physical change in the environment. ATTACHMENTS: 1. City Council Resolution 2019-76, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Encinitas

Supporting AB 1788, the California Ecosystems Protection Act of 2019” 2. Environmental Commission Report - Recommendation to City Council to Approve a Resolution

Supporting AB 1788 (Dated June 13, 2019) 3. Full Text – AB 1788

RESOLUTION NO. 2019-76

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA SUPPORTING AB 1788, THE CALIFORNIA ECOSYSTEMS PROTECTION ACT OF

2019

WHEREAS, rodenticides (rat poisons) designed to kill rodents are poisoning California’s native wildlife; and these persistent poisons are first consumed by rats, who in turn are consumed by other wildlife, resulting in secondary poisoning and contamination of the food chain;

WHEREAS, a 2018 analysis of 11 studies revealed that more than 85% of California mountain lions, bobcats, and Pacific fishers have been exposed to rodenticides;

WHEREAS, between 1999 and 2009, the American Association of Poison Control Centers (AAPCC) received reports of an average of 17,000 humans are exposed to rodenticides annually. The vast majority, roughly 15,000, of these exposures involved children younger than six;

WHEREAS, The AAPCC reported more than 50,000 dog poisonings from rodenticides in 2014; and

WHEREAS, exclusion and sanitation are the best approaches to managing rodents. Sealing buildings, eliminating food and water sources, and trimming foliage and tree limbs from the sides and roofs of houses are important steps to reduce the presence of rodents.

NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Encinitas hereby does resolve as follows:

1. That the City of Encinitas urges the California State Legislature to pass AB 1788, establishing the California Ecosystems Protection Act of 2019.

2. That with limited exceptions, this bill would ban the use of second generation anticoagulant rodenticides (SGARs) throughout the state and first generation anticoagulant rodenticides (FGARs) on any state-owned property.

3. That a Certified copy of this Resolution is sent to State Assembly Members and State Senators.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this _______ day of _____________, 2019 by the following vote to wit: AYES: NAYS: ABSTAIN: ABSENT:

___________________________________ Catherine S. Blakespear, Mayor City of Encinitas ATTESTATION AND CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of Ordinance 2019-06 which has been published pursuant to law. _________________________________ Kathy Hollywood, City Clerk

MEETING DATE: June 13, 2019 TO: Environmental Commission FROM: Commissioner Joy Lyndes SUBJECT: Recommendation to City Council to Approve a Resolution Supporting AB

1788, the California Ecosystems Protection Act of 2019

RECOMMENDATION: Request the City Council to pass a Resolution supporting the California Ecosystem Protection Act of 2019, AB 1788, an act to amend Section 12978.7 of, and to add Section 12978.8 to, the Food and Agricultural Code, relating to pesticides. CITY STRATEGIC PLAN FOCUS AREA/GOAL: Environmental. BACKGROUND: This bill would ban the use of second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides (SGARs) throughout the state and first-generation anticoagulant rodenticides (FGARs) on any state-owned property.1

Rodenticides (rat poisons) designed to kill rodents are poisoning California’s native wildlife; and these persistent poisons are first consumed by rats, who in turn are consumed by other wildlife, resulting in secondary poisoning and contamination of the food chain. Other cities including Moorpark, Calabasas, and Malibu have stopped using anticoagulant rodenticides in their city-owned parks and facilities and in 2014, the Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks phased out the use of SGARs after concluding their use “compromised” the city’s objective of maintaining “healthy and safe parks.” Twenty-nine California cities have passed resolutions discouraging stores from selling rodenticides; In addition, exclusion and sanitation are the best approaches to managing rodents. Sealing buildings, eliminating food and water sources, and trimming foliage and tree limbs from the sides and roofs of houses are important steps to reduce the presence of rodents. A public comment speaker at the Encinitas Environmental Commission meeting on May 9, 2019 by a representative from the Rancho Coastal Humane Society overviewed the seriousness of the issue of rodenticide poisoning in our community. 1 http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB1788

Environmental Commission

Agenda Report

ANALYSIS: A 2018 analysis of 11 studies revealed that more than 85% of California mountain lions, bobcats, and Pacific fishers have been exposed to rodenticides. In the decade from 1999 and 2009, the American Association of Poison Control Centers received reports of an average of 17,000 humans exposed to rodenticides annually. The vast majority, roughly 15,000, of these exposures involved children younger than six. The AAPCC (American Association of Poison Control Centers) reported more than 50,000 dog poisonings from rodenticides in 2014. Supporting the State bill to limit the use of specific and the most harmful rodenticides to domestic and wild animals, and humans demonstrates Encinitas’s support for minimizing and hopefully eliminating unintentional secondary poisonings in our community. ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 – Draft Resolution

ATTACHMENT 1

RESOLUTION NO. 2019-XX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENCINITAS

URGING THE US CONGRESS TO ENACT THE CALIFORNIA ECOSYSTEMS PROTECTION ACT OF

2019 – AB 1788

WHEREAS, rodenticides (rat poisons) designed to kill rodents are poisoning California’s native wildlife; and these persistent poisons are first consumed by rats, who in turn are consumed by other wildlife, resulting in secondary poisoning and contamination of the food chain; and

WHEREAS, a 2018 analysis of 11 studies revealed that more than 85% of California mountain lions, bobcats, and Pacific fishers have been exposed to rodenticides; and

WHEREAS, 29 California cities have passed resolutions discouraging stores from selling rodenticides; and

WHEREAS, the cities of Moorpark, Calabasas, and Malibu have stopped using anticoagulant rodenticides in their city-owned parks and facilities; and

WHEREAS, in 2014, the Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks phased out the use of SGARs after concluding their use “compromised” the city’s objective of maintaining “healthy and safe parks.”; and

WHEREAS, between 1999 and 2009, the American Association of Poison Control Centers received reports of an average of 17,000 humans exposed to rodenticides annually. The vast majority, roughly 15,000, of these exposures involved children younger than six; and

WHEREAS, The AAPCC reported more than 50,000 dog poisonings from rodenticides in 2014; and

WHEREAS, exclusion and sanitation are the best approaches to managing rodents. Sealing buildings, eliminating food and water sources, and trimming foliage and tree limbs from the sides and roofs of houses are important steps to reduce the presence of rodents.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Encinitas urges the California Legislature to enact without delay the California Ecosystem Protection Act of 2019, AB 1788, an act to amend Section 12978.7 of, and to add Section 12978.8 to, the Food and Agricultural Code, relating to pesticides.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that with limited exceptions, this bill would ban the use of second generation anticoagulant rodenticides (SGARs) throughout the state and first generation anticoagulant rodenticides (FGARs) on any state-owned property.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this XXXX day of XXXXX, by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NAYS:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

__________________________ ____

Catherine Blakespear, Mayor City of Encinitas ______________________________ Kathy Hollywood, City Clerk

AMENDED IN SENATE JUNE 24, 2019

AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 2, 2019

AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MARCH 19, 2019

california legislature—2019–20 regular session

ASSEMBLY BILL No. 1788

Introduced by Assembly Member Bloom (Coauthor: Assembly Member Friedman)

(Coauthor: Senator Stern)

February 22, 2019

An act to amend Section 12978.7 of, and to add Section 12978.8 to, the Food and Agricultural Code, relating to pesticides.

legislative counsel’s digest

AB 1788, as amended, Bloom. Pesticides: use of anticoagulants. Existing (1)  Existing law regulates the use of pesticides and authorizes the

Director of Pesticide Regulation to adopt regulations to govern the possession, sale, or use of any pesticide, as prescribed. Existing law prohibits the use of any pesticide that contains one or more of specified anticoagulants in wildlife habitat areas, as defined. Existing law exempts from this prohibition the use of these pesticides for agricultural activities, as defined. Existing law requires the director, and each county agricultural commissioner under the direction and supervision of the director, to enforce the provisions regulating the use of pesticides. A violation of these provisions is a misdemeanor.

This bill would create the California Ecosystems Protection Act of 2019 and expand this prohibition against the use of a pesticide containing specified anticoagulants in wildlife habitat areas to the entire

96

state. The bill would expand the exemption for agricultural activities to include activities conducted in certain locations and would also exempt from its provisions the use of pesticides by any governmental agency employee who uses pesticides for public health activities and aactivities, a mosquito or vector control district that uses pesticides to protect the public health. health, and the use of any pesticide or rodenticide used for the eradication of nonnative invasive species inhabiting or found to be present on offshore islands in a manner that is consistent with all otherwise applicable federal and state laws and regulations.

(2)  Existing law provides that the above-described provisions do not preempt or supersede any federal statute or the authority of any federal agency.

This bill would additionally provide that these provisions do not preempt or supersede special local need or emergency exemptions for the use of pesticides under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.

The (3)  The bill would also prohibit the use of any pesticide that contains

one or more specifically identified anticoagulants on state-owned property.

By (4)  By imposing additional duties on county agricultural

commissioners, and expanding the definition of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.

State-mandated local program: yes.

96

— 2 — AB 1788

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

line 1 SECTION 1. (a)  The Legislature finds and declares all of the line 2 following: line 3 (1)  Wildlife, including birds of prey, mountain lions, bobcats, line 4 fishers, foxes, coyotes, and endangered species such as the northern line 5 spotted owl, pacific fisher, and San Joaquin kit fox, are an line 6 irreplaceable part of California’s natural ecosystems. As predators line 7 of small mammals, they play an important role in regulating and line 8 controlling the population of rodents throughout the state to line 9 improve public health and welfare.

line 10 (2)  Millions of people annually visit California for the purposes line 11 of viewing and photographing wildlife, and these visits contribute line 12 millions of dollars to California’s economy. line 13 (3)  Urban areas are increasingly being used by predatory line 14 mammals and birds of prey and the public enjoys seeing them and line 15 values these animals and the ecosystem services they provide. line 16 (4)  The ecosystem services provided by native wildlife predators line 17 are a public trust, just like clean air and water. We, as California line 18 residents, are obligated to conserve these wildlife populations for line 19 future generations of Californians. line 20 (5)  Scientific research and state studies have found rodenticides line 21 in over 75 percent of animals tested. These rodenticides lead to line 22 direct mortality and chronic long-term health impacts for natural line 23 predators, nontarget organisms, and endangered species and further line 24 steps are needed to reduce rodenticide exposure in nontarget line 25 animals. line 26 (6)  While all anticoagulant rodenticides have a harmful impact line 27 on nontarget animals, second generation anticoagulant rodenticides line 28 (SGARs) are particularly dangerous to nontarget wildlife as SGARs line 29 are higher potency than prior generations and a single dose has a line 30 half-life of more than 100 days in a rodent’s liver. Due to high line 31 toxicity and concern for impact on nontarget wildlife, the line 32 Department of Pesticide Regulation banned consumer sales and line 33 use of SGARs in 2014, restricting their purchase and use to line 34 certified pesticide applicators. line 35 (7)  Despite the 2014 regulations issued by the Department of line 36 Pesticide Regulation, scientific research and state studies have line 37 found no significant reduction in the number of nontarget wildlife line 38 with detectable levels of SGARs in their system. From 2014

96

AB 1788 — 3 —

line 1 through 2018, the Department of Fish and Wildlife found SGARs line 2 in more than 90 percent of tested mountain lions, 88 percent of line 3 tested bobcats, 85 percent of protected Pacific fishers tested, and line 4 70 percent of northern spotted owls tested. Such data indicates line 5 that a consumer sales and use ban of SGARs has been insufficient line 6 to reduce rodenticide exposure in nontarget animals and further line 7 steps must be taken. line 8 (8)  Rodenticides can be counterproductive to rodent control by line 9 poisoning, harming, and killing natural predators that help regulate

line 10 rodent populations throughout California. line 11 (9)  The use of pesticides and rodenticides to reduce or eliminate line 12 nonnative invasive species inhabiting or found to be present on line 13 offshore islands is critically important for the environmental and line 14 ecosystem health of these islands, and for allowing federally and line 15 state-listed endangered and threatened species, including species line 16 presumed extinct or on the verge of extinction, to recover and line 17 propagate back to population levels that existed before the line 18 presence of these nonnative invasive species and for avoiding line 19 federal or state listing of native and endemic species due to their line 20 displacement by nonnative invasive species. line 21 (b)  It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this act to ensure line 22 that aquatic, terrestrial, and avian wildlife species remain a fully line 23 functional component of the ecosystems they inhabit and move line 24 through in California. line 25 (c)  This act shall be known, and may be cited, as the California line 26 Ecosystems Protection Act of 2019. line 27 SEC. 2. Section 12978.7 of the Food and Agricultural Code is line 28 amended to read: line 29 12978.7. (a)  Except as provided in subdivision (c), (d), or (e), line 30 the use of any pesticide that contains one or more of the following line 31 anticoagulants is prohibited in this state: line 32 (1)  Brodifacoum. line 33 (2)  Bromadiolone. line 34 (3)  Difenacoum. line 35 (4)  Difethialone. line 36 (b)  State agencies are directed to encourage federal agencies to line 37 comply with subdivision (a). line 38 (c)  This section does not apply to either any of the following:

96

— 4 — AB 1788

line 1 (1)  The use of pesticides used by any governmental agency line 2 employee who complies with Section 106925 of the Health and line 3 Safety Code, who uses pesticides for public health activities. line 4 (2)  A mosquito or vector control district formed under Chapter line 5 1 (commencing with Section 2000) of Division 3 or Chapter 8 line 6 (commencing with Section 2800) of Division 3 of the Health and line 7 Safety Code, that uses pesticides to protect the public health. line 8 (3)  The use of any pesticide or rodenticide used for the line 9 eradication of nonnative invasive species inhabiting or found to

line 10 be present on offshore islands in a manner that is consistent with line 11 all otherwise applicable federal and state laws and regulations. line 12 (d)  (1)  This section does not apply to the use of pesticides for line 13 agricultural activities, as defined in Section 564. line 14 (2)  For purposes of paragraph (1), “agricultural activities” line 15 include activities conducted in any of the following locations: line 16 (A)  A warehouse used to store foods for human or animal line 17 consumption. line 18 (B)  An agricultural food production site, including, but not line 19 limited to, a slaughterhouse and or cannery. line 20 (C)  A factory, brewery, or winery. line 21 (e)  This section does not preempt or supersede any federal line 22 statute or the authority of any federal agency. agency, including line 23 special local need or emergency exemptions for the use of line 24 pesticides under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and line 25 Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 135 et seq.). line 26 SEC. 3. Section 12978.8 is added to the Food and Agricultural line 27 Code, to read: line 28 12978.8. (a)  Except as provided in subdivision (d), the use of line 29 any pesticide that contains one or more of the following line 30 anticoagulants is prohibited on any state-owned property in line 31 California: line 32 (1)  Chlorophacinone. line 33 (2)  Diphacinone. line 34 (3)  Warfarin. line 35 (b)  State agencies are directed to encourage federal agencies to line 36 comply with subdivision (a). line 37 (c)  This section does not apply to the use of pesticides for line 38 agricultural activities, as defined in Section 564. line 39 (d)  This section does not preempt or supersede any federal line 40 statute or the authority of any federal agency.

96

AB 1788 — 5 —

line 1 SEC. 4. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to line 2 Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution for certain line 3 costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district line 4 because, in that regard, this act creates a new crime or infraction, line 5 eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime line 6 or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the line 7 Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the line 8 meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California line 9 Constitution.

line 10 However, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that line 11 this act contains other costs mandated by the state, reimbursement line 12 to local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made line 13 pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division line 14 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code.

O

96

— 6 — AB 1788