Breakspear is 38 years old and lives in California.Number Senatorial district. Encinitas resident.
Surviving millions of vehicles on Southern California’s spaghetti-like tangle of highways is just one of the dangers mountain lions and other wildlife face in our ever-expanding state. Combine this threat with other risks, like more frequent and intense wildfires, pollution, and habitat loss and fragmentation, and you can truly see why thousands of California voters in 1990 supported Proposition 117 to permanently invest in habitat protection. This initiative created the Habitat Conservation Fund, empowering the state Wildlife Conservation Commission, through a $30 million annual state budget, to invest in the restoration and acquisition of more than 500,000 acres of California’s most precious landscapes in every corner of the state. Unfortunately, that fund and the progress we’ve made are in jeopardy.
Given the significant budget challenges facing the state this year, the fund was initially targeted for cuts and was scheduled to end six years early. The proposal was first proposed by the Legislature just a few years ago. Extension I joined this program because I saw positive results. Cutting this program would go against voters’ wishes and threaten to jeopardize decades of investment progress. The state is suffering from severe budget deficits and needs to cut state spending, but there are legal and policy reasons to reject this short-sighted proposal.
As a member of the Senate Budget Subcommittee with jurisdiction over natural resources issues, I have spoken out in opposition to cutting the only reliable, ongoing and consistent source of funding for open space acquisition. Over 50 diverse organizations, from hunters and anglers to land trusts and wildlife conservation advocates, have joined me in lobbying hard in Sacramento to ensure that Habitat Conservation Funds remain intact in the state’s final budget deal.
First, there is the legal issue. Section 8 of Proposition 117 prohibits any already appropriated Habitat Protection Fund monies from being returned to the General Fund. It also provides that any action taken by the Legislature must be consistent with and further the initiative’s objectives. Prematurely repealing annual appropriations clearly would not further voter-supported habitat protection objectives.
The Habitat Conservation Fund has weathered many economic downturns over the past few decades, and it will weather this one too. Another notable feature of the fund is that it raises millions of dollars from private philanthropic organizations and serves as a local fund to secure millions more in federal funding.
The program has funded hundreds of projects, from the world’s largest wildlife crossing currently under construction on Highway 101 in Agoura Hills, to new trailheads to Redwood National and State Parks, to important ancestral land return projects in San Bernardino County. Open space protection and wetlands restoration projects are occurring throughout Sacramento and the Central Valley. In my district, the Habitat Conservation Fund is helping to repair and reconnect severed habitat connections along Lusardi Creek. Across San Diego and Orange Counties, more than $75 million in Habitat Conservation Fund funding approved by the Wildlife Conservation Commission has protected or restored more than 27,000 acres.
Voters in 1990 could not have predicted how important this funding is to us today. Habitat protection is one strategy in nature-based solutions that absorbs carbon from the atmosphere and reduces greenhouse gas emissions while protecting California’s renowned plants and animals.
Thousands of Californians have already called and emailed the Governor and my fellow legislators, urging them to protect the Habitat Conservation Fund, and I urge you to join them.
