California Senate Bill SB1135

California 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/17/26
• Refer: 2/26/26
• Refer: 3/23/26
• Refer: 4/8/26
• Report Pass: 4/14/26
• Refer: 4/14/26
• Report Pass: 5/14/26
• Engrossed: 5/22/26
• Refer: 6/1/26
• Refer: 6/3/26

Caption

An act to add Chapter 14 (commencing with Section 2960) to Division 3 of the Fish and Game Code, relating to wildlife.

Impact

If passed, SB 1135 would affect existing state laws pertaining to wildlife management by reestablishing the framework needed for effective resolution of conflicts between humans and wildlife. The Wildlife Coexistence Program would include initiatives such as maintaining a wildlife incident reporting tool and offering resources to mitigate human-wildlife conflicts. Specifically, it seeks to address the unique challenges caused by wolves and livestock interactions, including provisions for compensation to farmers for losses due to wolf attacks.

Summary

Senate Bill 1135, known as the California Wildlife Coexistence Act, aims to establish a comprehensive approach to managing wildlife in a manner that promotes coexistence between humans and wildlife. The bill tasks the Department of Fish and Wildlife with creating the Wildlife Coexistence Program and the Wolf-Livestock Coexistence and Compensation Program, which would focus on addressing the challenges associated with human-wildlife interactions. It emphasizes maintaining ecological balance and reducing conflicts while aligning with state environmental policies.

Sentiment

Support for the bill is generally seen among environmental advocates who believe it represents a progressive step towards sustainable wildlife management. However, there is contention around aspects of the bill, particularly regarding how resources will be allocated and whether certain stakeholders will receive fair representation within the advisory committees. The focus on nonlethal conflict resolution methods is viewed positively by conservationists but might face resistance from some agricultural groups concerned about their livelihoods.

Contention

Key points of contention revolve around the implications for agricultural communities, who may fear increased wildlife interactions impacting livestock. The requirement for individuals to adopt nonlethal conflict reduction measures to qualify for compensation could also provoke debate about the feasibility and effectiveness of such standards. The proposed establishment of the Wildlife Coexistence Technical Advisory Committee is noted as a critical aspect, raising questions about its composition and the extent of influence it may hold over wildlife management practices.