RBOC and BoatUS are advocating for boaters as golden mussel legislation moves forward without essential boating provisions

RBOC and our national advocacy partner BoatU.S. are advocating for the inclusion of essential boating provisions in legislation addressing golden mussels and is opposing the bill unless they are included to provide balance, accountability, focus and access.

We embrace the objectives of AB 1772 [Papan] to enhance the current efforts to prevent the infestation and spread of nonnative, invasive golden mussels into additional waterways and water delivery infrastructure. This is a challenging issue and we appreciate Assembly Member Papan’s engagement and leadership.

Our organizations have been engaged in a collaborative process as AB 1772 has moved through the Assembly as an acknowledged work in progress. For a previous update: click here

Today we received confirmation of the amendments the author will be making to the bill for consideration in the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Water.

These amendments do not address several key issues that are critical to the recreational boating community and present concerns as well. The issues and concerns are of such significance that we have adopted a position in opposition to the measure unless it is amended to resolve them. We would support the bill if it were to be so amended.

It is important to recognize that the Department of Fish and Wildlife [DFW] is already engaged and is leading the effort to develop a uniform standard and procedures for decontaminating conveyances, even without the enactment of AB 1772. The legislation adds a comprehensive inspection and decontamination program and imposes an additional invasive mussel infestation prevention fee of $20 per nonmotorized vessel every 2 years.

Significantly, the measure as amended will not provide the balance, accountability, focus and access RBOC and BoatU.S. have consistently advocated. AB 1772 will not:

• Prevent the continued introduction of invasive species by commercial vessel ballast water and to impose responsibility and financial accountability on the responsible entities.

• Identify and implement alternative and equitable funding sources for prevention, control, and mitigation activities to respond to aquatic invasive species beyond fees imposed on the recreational boating community. This could be in the form of assessments on commercial activities, including on international cargo shipping operations that may impact the introduction of aquatic invasive species to California waters. Instead, the measure imposes a new fee on non-motorized boaters.

• Ensure reciprocity so that boaters can leave a body of water that is not infested to travel to another body of water and launch their boats. This should be authorized, for instance, when a boat is leaving a body of water that is not infested, or when a boat has been decontaminated upon departure.

• Provide for the anticipated future, post-infestation, when many water bodies are infested. The golden mussel that was first discovered in the U.S. in the Sacramento - San Joaquin Delta in 2024 has now been found as far south as the San Diego area. This could structured as reciprocity between the affected water bodies.

• Provide for a potential termination of the program, if the invasive species threat is removed, e.g., if testing shows no further state infestations for 12 months.

The proposed amendments raise new concerns as well:

• A vessel operator should have the ability to refuse to submit to decontamination or quarantine, and depart the location without entering the protected waterway, without the conveyance being quarantined or impounded, and without the conveyance being decontaminated involuntarily.

• Non-governmental inspection and decontamination stations should not have the authority to issue a quarantine certificate.

• The legislature should not be authorized to appropriate funds with arbitrary percentage limits, and without minimum funding to DBW or DFW. This could result in the Legislature appropriating the entirety of the funds for grants to entities and failing to support the department’s and division’s actual direct costs of administration.

• As a condition of receiving grant funding an entity receiving funding should be required to implement an invasive mussel prevention and inspection program.

There are also technical issues that need to be addressed in the amendments:

• The designated period of time in an order to dry should not be unlimited in duration and should be limited to the amount of time necessary to dry the conveyance.

• The department should not have unlimited authority to impose “any requirements” in situations where there is a drying order.

• There should be a prohibition against the removal or destruction of a tamper-proof device by anyone other than law enforcement or a qualified inspector.

• There is no definition of the “minimum retention period for inspection and decontamination certificates.” This could be interpreted to mean the owner/operator’s retention of the certificate, or of the tamper-proof device, or retention of the conveyance or the certificate by the station.

• Department recognition of other state certificates should not require inspection, decontamination and quarantine, and “achieving the same standards” is not the correct determination. It would be appropriate for the department to recognize other government-issued confirmation of compliance with standards and procedures that the department determines are at a minimum as effective as those established here.

• There is no definition of a “notice of noncompliance.”

• There is no definition of the WID Data Sharing System in one section, while it is defined in two others.

• There is no assurance that boaters will be able to launch at a water body when the database confirms that a conveyance has not been in an infected water body. 

• There is authorization for the expenditure of non-motorized sticker fees for costs and grants without specific parameters or controls, for example, to “contractors issuing stickers.”

For the reasons set forth above, RBOC and BoatU.S, believe that AB 1772 as it will be amended will not achieve its stated purpose but will stand up expensive programs and staffing and place new obstacles in front of the recreational boating public. We therefore have an opposition position on the bill unless it is amended to resolve these concerns.

RBOC Advocating for Balance, Accountability & Focus with Legislation Addressing Golden Mussels

RBOC shares the objectives of AB 1772 to enhance the current efforts to prevent the infestation and spread of nonnative, invasive golden mussels into additional waterways and water delivery infrastructure. This is a challenging issue and we appreciate the leadership of Assembly Member Diane Papan [D-San Mateo] as the Member develops provisions that will be incorporated into this legislation as it moves forward.

The Assembly Water, Parks and Wildlife Committee analysis that has now been published for the April 23 hearing on AB 1772 sets forth a series of amendments for consideration of the committee.

RBOC has several perspectives on the amendments that are consistent with and in furtherance of our communications with legislators, the committee, the administration and other stakeholders over the course of the past several months including as AB 149 [Chapter 831, Statutes of 2025] was developed and considered in the Legislature.

First, there are several important over-arching issues that remain partially addressed, unaddressed, or limited to the legislative intent provisions that will have no impact. These include:

• A balanced approach that does not place the entire financial burden on recreational boaters and recognizes that our community is not responsible for the introduction of golden mussels and other invasive species.

• Requirements to prevent the continued introduction of invasive species by commercial vessel ballast water and to impose financial liability on the responsible entities.

• A recognition that the infestation of golden mussels is rapidly expanding at a pace that exceeds the consideration, enactment and implementation of legislation. As of today, infestations have been identified as far south as the Rialto and Santa Ana Valley pipelines, Silverwood Lake, and Sweetwater Reservoir [in San Diego!].

• A focused approach on what would be most effective for prevention efforts (versus more costly control efforts after the fact) that do not create a bureaucratic infrastructure, financial burden, and other requirements on the recreational boaters who will continue following widespread golden mussel infestation protocols. Decontamination that is effective on golden mussels may not be effective against future invasives.

• Clear authority for the private sector to act rapidly to establish and provide decontamination services for the recreational boating community.

In addition to these broad issues and concerns, we offer the following comments and suggestions that are specific to the amendments:

• The provisions would apply to “conveyances,” which appears to be intended to pertain to objects that can convey aquatic invasive species. Perhaps ice chests, life vests, and more. It would be important to provide a definition including in-water work related to permitted construction activities.

• The provisions would impose a label requirement on conveyances. Because many nonmotorized conveyances are not required to have state registration, they would be difficult if not impossible to identify.

• The provisions authorize “authorized personnel” of the department to provide decontamination, but this needs to be clarified whether it would include the private sector.

• The provisions do not identify the funding for decontamination.

• The provisions refer to “launches” as a nexus for decontamination even though potential conveyances can enter waters without launching.

• The provisions would require the state to develop decontamination standards but there is no reference to a process that would include stakeholder input.

• The provisions focus on new fees on boaters without identifying other stakeholders and beneficiaries such as agriculture, ports and utility districts.

• The Golden Mussel Response Framework notes the need to address other potential pathways of spread but also states that the spread of Golden mussel will happen anyway through state and federal water conveyance systems because there are no mechanisms to prevent it.

• The provisions do not provide an assurance of reciprocity so that verified decontaminated boats can be placed into non-infested bodies of water.

• The provisions ignore the continuing deficit in the Harbors and Watercraft Revolving Fund, as well as the cumulative impact to recreational boaters from the new vessel registration fees, the recently authorized increased invasive sticker fees, and the proposed non-motorized vessel fees.

• The provisions fail to address whether recreational boaters and other conveyances will be able to enter and utilize bodies of water after they have been infested. The framework suggests 5 days of mandatory decontamination and should include decontamination of equipment related to in-water work (i.e., not related to vessels or other watercraft).

• The provisions do not address and incorporate any additional efforts with other states, federal agencies and owners of private facilities who can also prevent infestation or spread from access points that are not state-managed, but these water conveyances are linked.

• The provisions do not include a periodic, ongoing review of the program and potential termination (sunset), as well as fee reduction or elimination.

As discussed above there are several issues outstanding that are essential to an effective, balanced effort to prevent and control golden mussels and enable recreational boaters to enjoy the vast and unique waterways of this state. 

RBOC has offered our continued engagement to accomplish this shared objective as AB 1772 moves forward through the Assembly Water, Parks and Wildlife Committee.

RBOC Advocating for Revisions to Piecemeal Approach to Golden Mussel Legislation

As the Legislature rushes to pass budget trailer legislation to the Governor by September 12, RBOC has identified several key boating concerns with the golden mussel measures AB 149 and SB 149 that prevent it from supporting the measures as currently worded. The nonprofit boater advocacy organization is advocating for changes to resolve those concerns.

The organization appreciates the efforts of Assembly Member Heather Hadwick in bringing issues forward in today’s hearing of the Assembly Budget Committee and urging their resolution for the many recreational enthusiasts in her Northern California district that includes Lake Tahoe and many other lakes.

RBOC shares the objectives of the just-amended AB 149 and SB 149 to enhance the current efforts to prevent the infestation and spread of nonnative, invasive golden mussels into additional waterways and water delivery infrastructure.

These two budget trailer bills and their specific provisions were just made public this week through amendments,

Piecemeal - They comprise a piecemeal approach on an important issue that deserves a comprehensive, multi-disciplinary dedication of resources with the engagement of the various agencies, departments, divisions, stakeholders and beneficiaries.

Boater Fee Focus - While the measures identify and dedicate tens of millions of additional state funds for these efforts, they impose additional fees on only one stakeholder: the owners of recreational vessels.

New fees place yet another obstacle in front of boaters who are already deterred by constantly-changing prohibitions and restrictions being imposed on a case-by-case basis for individual bodies of water. There are locations where boaters are paying $120 or more to decontaminate their boats, avoid 30-day quarantines, and launch them at a lake.

Interstate Impact - As currently drafted, SB 149 requires nonresident vessels to obtain and display a California Invasive Mussel Infestation Prevention Fee sticker to operate on nonmarine waters within the state. This inadvertently creates a regulatory gap on Lake Tahoe and Topaz Lake. Both lakes straddle the California–Nevada border, and thousands of vessels cross jurisdictions during a single boating season. This oversight risks undermining decades of collaborative work between California and Nevada agencies, the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency [TRPA], and local partners.

Decontamination - Attention must be given to approaches to minimize the disruptions to on-the-water recreation without compromising the prevention and eradication efforts. These should include enhanced decontamination facilities, as well as an extension of inspections to the variety of non-motorized craft that are placed into the water at locations other than launch ramps and present a risk of spreading infestation, such as kayaks, canoes, rafts and other vessels.

Commercial Ships - The measures also fail to identify and address the most prevalent source of the introduction of invasive species in our waterways, which is commercial ship ballast water. A high priority must be placed on new measures to effectively prevent future occurrences and place responsibility and accountability on these sources of infestation.

These issues are essential to an effective, balanced effort to prevent, control and eradicate golden mussels, and RBOC offers our continued engagement to accomplish this shared objective.

RBOC & BoatUS Concerned that Golden Mussel Fee Legislation May be Rushed Through

RBOC and BoatUS are suggesting to a coalition of interests pursuing expedited budget trailer bill legislation that the issue should not be rushed during the final month of legislative activity this year, and should instead be addressed within the stakeholder process the Division of Boating and Waterways will be initiating in the near future.

The proposed amendments to the Fish and Game Code and the Harbors and Navigation Code would expand the existing quagga and zebra program to include invasive freshwater mussels including golden mussels. This presents several issues:

• Legislation should address prevention efforts in a comprehensive manner and involve the various agencies, departments, divisions, stakeholders and beneficiaries rather than a piecemeal approach focused prematurely on recreational vessels.

• Expansion of the current program should address and include the financial participation of the most prevalent source of the introduction of invasive species in our waterways, which is commercial ship ballast water.

• Expansion of the current program should identify and place a high priority on timely, efficient, and effective measures to prevent the spread of golden mussels.

• A stronger emphasis should be placed on recreational vessel decontamination to minimize the disruption of on-the-water recreation.

• Inspections should extend to the variety of non-motorized craft that are placed into the water at locations other than launch ramps, such as kayaks, canoes, rafts and other vessels, together with their financial participation.

• Expansion of the current program should be preceded by an analysis of the data and findings developed through its implementation over the past 10 years with grants exceeding $26 million, incorporating improvements where appropriate.

• Expansion of the current program should be preceded by an analysis of how the current inspections for quagga and zebra mussels also effectively identify the presence of golden mussels without an additional dedication of resources.

• Fees paid by boaters should be deposited in the Harbors and Watercraft Revolving Fund and administered by the Division of Boating and Waterways in State Parks with an assurance that the funding will be utilized for and dedicated to boating-related services.

  These issues will be considered by the Division of Boating and Waterways as it develops recommendations to the Legislature to resolve the ongoing structural deficiency in the Harbors and Watercraft Revolving Fund, as per the recently-adopted state budget for Fiscal Year 2025-2026.

  This soon-to-be-initiated DBW stakeholder process is our preferred mechanism for the consideration and development of plans to expand the current prevention program to include invasive freshwater mussels including golden mussels. RBOC and BoatU.S. are encouraging this as an alternative to the current proposal.

State Budget Update - Boater Fees, Delta Conveyance Project

The state’s fiscal year began on July 1 with the Governor and legislative leadership having agreed upon the main budget trailer bill and related budget trailer bills.

Boating Fees & Taxes

Registration fee increase have not yet been raised to resolve the $20 million annual deficit in the Harbors and Watercraft Revolving Fund and the programs and services if supports.

The enacted budget directs the Division of Boating and Waterways to consult with stakeholders to develop and submit a proposal to the Legislature to keep the fund in structural balance on an ongoing basis.

RBOC continues to advocate for updates and efficiencies to state programs financed by boat registration fees to ensure they provide positive benefits to boaters and share costs with other stakeholders where appropriate – prior to an increase in boat registration fees.

The adopted budget incorporates a number of revisions including the financial participation of other beneficiaries in invasive species efforts, and the elimination of funding for the beach erosion program that does not benefit boaters.  Even with these and other actions, the HWRF deficiency has not yet been resolved.

Placing the burden of a $20 million annual deficit solely on vessel registration fees and ignoring the $107 million in annual fuel taxes that are attributable to boats would increase those registration fees by at least 300%.

There are proposals that would increase boat registration fees even more. Legislation has been drafted and is being circulated to amend state law to expand the current quagga and zebra mussel sticker boaters purchase through DMV to include the golden mussel and other invasive species.

Delta Conveyance Project

The Governor’s proposed budget trailer bills to expedite this project have not yet been introduced and were not included in the 20 budget trailer bills that have been enacted thus far.

RBOC continues to oppose the 2 proposed trailer bills, agreeing with the suggestion of the independent and nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office, as well as individual legislators and other stakeholders who are urging the Legislature to defer these trailer bills so that they are not taken up within the budget development process.

The significant precedent-setting policies raised by the trailer bills, together with their potential implications for the recreational boating community and others, are more appropriately developed, deliberated and voted upon within the public, transparent policy committee process that applies to thousands of legislative measures introduced each year.

Additional Budget Actions

Ongoing discussions involving the leadership of the Senate and Assembly, and the Governor, are continuing and could result in additional legislation [termed "budget trailer bills"] revising the budget provisions that have been enacted.

What We're Working On Now - invasive mussels, marine flares, Delta Conveyance, Boater Funds and More

A brief snapshot on what RBOC is working on now:

• Engaging with the various state and regional agencies as they take action to prevent the infestation of water bodies by the golden mussel, often imposing restrictions and prohibitions on all on-the-water activities.

• Advocating for changes in legislation establishing an extended producer responsibility program for pyrotechnic marine flares to acknowledge that there is only one manufacturer and so that the take-back requirements are structured to ensure that the costs of implementation do not place an unreasonable burden on boaters.

• Opposing the Delta Conveyance Project that, as revised to one tunnel, would still significantly impede navigation and harm Delta recreation.

• Advocating within the state budget process to obtain updates and efficiencies to state programs financed by boat registration fees to ensure they provide positive benefits to boaters and share costs with other stakeholders where appropriate – prior to an increase in boat registration fees.

•  Supporting local Dana Point boaters by requesting that the Court provide clear and understandable rules as they apply to boaters who feel they are being treated in a manner inconsistent with the applicable laws and the Tidelands doctrine that protect their rights to use public facilities on our coasts and waterways.

•  Supporting legislation to review the effectiveness of low-leach-rate paint and elevated copper concentrations in saltwater harbors, bays, and marinas that are primarily a result of the use of copper-based antifouling paint, and to determine the best methods to address elevated copper concentrations in saltwater harbors, bays, and marinas that are primarily a result of the use of this paint in the state.

•  Requesting that the Outdoor Recreation for All [30x30] program identify the values of and prioritize on-the-water opportunities within its initiatives. Clear confirmation should also be provided that the significant areas of water that have been protected over the years, including the marine life protected areas [MLPAs] count towards the 30% preservation goal.

•  Raising concerns that the state’s authorization of E15 fuel will raise prices on E10 gasoline, will restrict the availability of that fuel, and will inevitably ruin many boat engines.

What We're Working On - A Brief Update on Key Boating Issues

Here’s a quick update on some of the key issues RBOC’s is working on:

• Engaging with the various state and regional agencies as they take action to prevent the infestation of water bodies by the golden mussel, often imposing restrictions and prohibitions on all on-the-water activities.

• Advocating for legislation establishing an extended producer responsibility program for pyrotechnic marine flares to acknowledge that there is only one manufacturer and so that the take-back requirements are structured to ensure that the costs of implementation do not place an unreasonable burden on boaters.

• Opposing the Delta Conveyance Project that, as revised to one tunnel, would still significantly impede navigation and harm Delta recreation.

• Advocating for updates and efficiencies to state programs financed by boat registration fees to ensure they provide positive benefits to boaters and share costs with other stakeholders where appropriate – prior to an increase in boat registration fees.

• Supporting legislation to review the effectiveness of low-leach-rate paint and elevated copper concentrations in saltwater harbors, bays, and marinas that are primarily a result of the use of copper-based antifouling paint, and to determine the best methods to address elevated copper concentrations in saltwater harbors, bays, and marinas that are primarily a result of the use of this paint in the state.

• Requesting that the Outdoor Recreation for All [30x30] program identify the values of, and prioritize on-the-water opportunities within its initiatives. Clear confirmation should also be provided that the significant areas of water that have been protected over the years, including the marine life protected areas [MLPAs] count towards the 30% preservation goal.

• Raising concerns that the state’s authorization of E15 fuel will raise prices on E10 gasoline, will restrict the availability of that fuel, and will inevitably ruin many boat engines.

California's Golden Mussel Response Framework Recommendations Impact Boating

Framework includes numerous recommendations specific to recreational boating.

RBOC and the recreational boating industry are reaching out together to the Department of Fish and Wildlife as the lead agency to initiate a dialogue on boating-specific recommendations set forth in the Golden Mussel Response Framework that has just been released.

The framework was developed to “provide recommendations to state and local policy makers, managers, and the public on how to respond to the recent detections of golden mussel through a common framework across agencies and jurisdictions. In many instances the recommendations are intended to provide options, with some applying more to a statewide response, while others may be more appropriate on a local scale. Some of the recommendations are already being implemented, while others may need additional effort, legal authority, and resources to fully implement. “

The framework considers partner engagement and coordination as a critical component in the prevention effort.

Specific to recreational boating, the recommendations include:

• Maintaining a list of waterbodies to inform boaters about their watercraft inspection program (Watercraft Inspections in California and Vessel Restrictions)

• Establishing prevention programs at all accessible, private and public, uninfested waters (not just reservoirs open to the public for recreation).

• Promote adoption of the Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination Database by all agencies that control or otherwise manage watercraft access • Set statewide standards on watercraft inspection programs.

• Set statewide standards for watercraft banding programs.

• Work with water managers to build reciprocal inspection/decontamination programs.

• Promote mandatory watercraft inspection and decontamination (if watercraft is not Clean, Drain, Dry).

• Promote mandatory inspection of equipment prior to being put in water (if equipment is not Clean, Drain, Dry).

• Implement education and outreach strategies (Objective 2. Education and Outreach Plan).

• Update existing dreissenid Prevention Plan Guidance Document to include golden mussel.

• Utilize K9 scent detection in inspection programs.

• Encourage fishing contest tournament organizers to institute measures to prevent participants from spreading invasive mussels.

• Implement education and outreach strategies (Objective 2. Education and Outreach Plan).

• Enhance inspection hours of operation at CDFA Border Protection Stations and consider inspection of outgoing moored vessels. 

• Evaluate options for in-water hull cleaning of recreational watercraft.

• Evaluate anti-biofouling coatings for recreational watercraft, submerged intakes, pumps, fish screens, etc.

• The California State Legislature could amend the law to include golden mussel or, alternatively, more clearly define the word mussel for purposes of fund expenditure. Additionally, consideration should be given to allow these funds to be used in waterbodies already infested to help prevent the spread.

• Upon authorization and amendments to HNC Sections 675-676, State Parks could revise the regulations to add golden mussel to be included with the Mussel Fee.

• Upon authorization and amendments to HNC Sections 675-676, State Parks could revise the regulations to add golden mussel infestation prevention work to be included in QZ Grant Program awards.

• Upon authorization and amendments to FGC 2301 and 2302, CDFW could amend this section to include golden mussel allowing water operators and reservoir managers to continue to operate under the approval of a control plan and prevention plan. Strong consideration should be given to ensuring that control and prevention plans include feasible mitigation measures.

• Upon authorization and amendments to FGC 2301, CDFW could amend this section to require watercraft and equipment leaving mussel-infested waters to be decontaminated.

• Under existing FGC Section 2301, establish a regulation requiring mandatory removal of conveyance drain plugs when not in water.

• The CSLC could amend ballast water management regulations to strengthen existing performance standards by adding an exchange requirement to more effectively kill fresh or brackish water organisms (e.g., the CSLC could add a mid-ocean ballast exchange requirement).    Action - The CSLC is targeting Spring of 2025 to amend these regulations via emergency rulemaking, to be followed by permanent rulemaking.

• Statewide General National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit for Residual Pesticide Discharges to Waters of the United States from Aquatic Animal Invasive Species Control.

• SWRCB should work with water operators and managers to expedite, to the extent possible, the issuance of Aquatic Animal Invasive Species Control Permits to help control and contain golden mussels.

• Utilization of the Mussel Fee Sticker (aka quagga/zebra mussel sticker) revenue.

• Create an out-of-state boater fee for vessels not registered in California.