On a recent episode of the Hunterizer Podcast, we sat down with Bill Gaines — the principal of Gaines and Associates Government Relations and the chair of the California Hunting and Conservation Coalition — for one of the most sweeping conversations about hunting policy we have ever recorded. Bill has spent more than three decades navigating the California state legislature on behalf of hunters, anglers, and wildlife managers. What emerged was a detailed, candid picture of how hunting in California is defended, what threatens it most, and what every hunter in the state must do if future generations are going to experience it.
If you really care about the future of hunting, if you care about your kids or grandkids having the same opportunity, now is the time to get involved. I don’t care if you hate politics.
— Bill Gaines
The full Hunterizer Podcast episode with Bill Gaines is available on youtube:
A hunter who hated politics — but did it anyway
Bill grew up in Lodi, in California’s Central Valley, hunting from the time he was old enough to hold a BB gun. He graduated from UC Davis with a Bachelor’s degree in Agricultural and Managerial Economics, earned his Master’s from Golden Gate University, worked five years at Lockheed Missiles and Space in the Bay Area, then seven years at Aerojet in Rancho Cordova — hunting country, finally close to the refuges and foothills he loved. When the post-Cold War defense industry started shedding jobs, his wife found an ad in the newspaper for a Director of Government Affairs at the California Waterfowl Association. He was already a member. She told him to apply. He was terrified. He had never worked with the state legislature and said he hated politics. The afternoon before his interview, he went to the library and crammed on the California Legislature for two hours. He got the job.
That was 1992. He spent 15 years as CWA’s staff lobbyist, then led the California Outdoor Heritage Alliance for seven years before launching Gaines & Associates Government Relations in 2013. Today he represents Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, California Deer Association, the California Chapter of the Wild Sheep Foundation, California Houndsmen for Conservation, three Safari Club International chapters, the California Hawking Club, and dozens of others. He does it, he says, so he can do what he actually wants to do — hunt.
California’s shrinking hunting community
California has roughly 40 million residents. The state sells somewhere between 200,000 and 250,000 hunting licenses per year — less than half of one percent of the population. That number has been falling for years. Eighty percent of the elected in the state legislature come from urban districts. Their constituents either have no position on hunting or are actively opposed to it. The only time most urban Californians encounter hunting in the news is when something goes wrong — a poaching story, a controversy, a bad actor. The broader story — hunters as the primary funders of wildlife conservation, as stewards of habitat, as advocates for access — rarely makes the Los Angeles Times. That imbalance shapes every vote at the Capitol, and it is the core challenge Bill and his coalition fight against during every legislative session.
The legislative battle: playing defense in Sacramento
Every year, the California legislature produces a wave of gun control bills and animal welfare bills that directly threaten hunting. Some go after entire species — a bill to ban bear hunting was killed just a few years ago. Others target methods of take: the use of hounds to pursue bears was stripped from Fish and Game Commission authority by Senate Bill 1221 in 2012, placed into statute, and has not been recovered since. Then there are the broadly written gun bills — drafted by legislators who do not understand what “semi-automatic” means in practice — that would sweep up a duck hunter’s Beretta A400 or a standard deer rifle alongside the illegal weapons they are ostensibly aimed at.
Assembly Bill 28, signed into law a couple of years ago, added an 11 percent excise tax on all firearm and ammunition purchases — collected from law-abiding hunters, sport shooters, and collectors — and earmarked that revenue for gun violence prevention programs. The people buying legally from from sporting good stores are not the ones committing the violence. But they are paying the tax. Nine other states are now watching California and considering similar legislation. What happens at the California Capitol, Bill made clear, does not stay there.
An apex predator crisis hiding in plain sight
The clearest evidence of what happens when emotion drives wildlife policy is the state of California’s apex predators. Mountain lions have been effectively unmanageable since Proposition 117 passed in 1990 — and haven’t been legally hunted since 1972. Black bears, previously estimated at around 30,000 animals, were just recounted in the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (CDFW) 2025 Bear Conservation and Management Plan at over 60,000 — double the prior estimate and the highest black bear population of any contiguous U.S. state. Wolves, listed under both federal and California Endangered Species Acts, are expanding rapidly, hitting ranching operations hard and competing with elk for territory. And, to make matters even worse, Bill and the Coalition are now fighting legislation which would require CDFW to develop a roadmap for the potential reintroduction of grizzly bears into California.
The data on deer is stark. A study conducted by the California Deer Association in partnership with CDFW collared 100 deer fawns and tracked their survival through their first 30 days. Eighty of them were killed by bears. Once fawns are older and faster, bears lose the ability to run them down — so bears shift strategy. They engage in what biologists call kleptoparasitism: chasing mountain lions off of their adult deer kills and taking the carcass. The displaced lion then has to kill again, which is often a deer — or somebody’s livestock. An adult mountain lion kills roughly one deer per week. Stack that against an unmanaged bear population of 60,000 and a wolf pack that has developed a taste for cattle, and the picture becomes clear. California’s predator-prey balance, in Bill’s words, is “way out of whack.”
Bears: real changes coming in 2026
For the first time in years, there is genuine good news on the bear front. The Fish and Game Commission is expected to adopt two changes for the 2026 season at its April hearing: a second bear tag, and the reopening of Modoc and Lassen counties in California’s northeastern corner — an area closed when bears were rare there and that now has bears precisely because populations have expanded beyond their historic range. Bill testified in support of both changes at the Commission’s February 2026 discussion hearing on the topic and reports that opposition, while vocal, was — surprisingly — relatively limited.
What, he believes, CDFW would genuinely like — but cannot recommend to the commission, because the legislature removed that authority from them in 2012 — is the restoration of hound hunting. AB 1038, which would have done exactly that, failed by a single vote in committee last year. The argument for hounds is both practical and ethical: a bear treed by dogs can be examined, assessed, and released if it turns out to be a sow with cubs or simply not the right animal. As Bill put it, it is the only form of catch-and-release hunting that exists. A spring season and baiting remain off the table for now — pushing too hard on those methods of take risks triggering a ballot initiative, and that is exactly how California lost mountain lion hunting in the first place.
The slow collapse of California’s deer herd
Deer once numbered over a million in California. The population is now below 500,000 and the trend is still downward. Predator pressure explains much of it — both directly, through kills, and indirectly, through the displacement of deer from their traditional migratory corridors. But forest management is another major driver. Mature climax forests provide almost no food at ground level. After a fire, new browse comes up and deer follow. The absence of active forest management — prescribed burns, thinning, habitat maintenance — has removed the food base deer depend on.
Then there is roadkill. UC Davis researchers estimate that up to 100,000 deer are struck by vehicles each year in California — a figure that dwarfs the roughly 20,000 taken by hunters annually. Urban sprawl and expanding highway networks fragment migratory corridors, cutting off routes deer have used for generations. This is where Senate Bill 395 comes in. Bill’s clients, the California Deer Association, sponsored the bill — deliberately named after U.S. Route 395, which runs along California’s eastern Sierra corridor and is ground zero for deer-vehicle collisions — to establish a smartphone-based reporting system where any motorist could log a roadkill’s GPS location. That data would tell Caltrans and wildlife managers exactly where wildlife crossings should go. The bill also would have allowed permitted salvage of roadkill meat. It passed the legislature. It never got the funding to be implemented. Bill has run it twice and will try again.
Roadkill meat salvage: turning waste into opportunity
In California, an estimated 20,000–100,000 deer are killed annually by vehicles, with much of that meat going to waste. Bill Gaines, representing the California Deer Association, wrote much of Senate Bill 395 to allow licensed hunters to salvage meat from freshly killed deer, elk, pronghorn, or wild pigs for personal consumption. The bill also proposed a simple, Waze-like cell-phone app for motorists to report roadkill locations in real time. This would generate critical data for Caltrans, the CHP, and CDFW to pinpoint high-risk zones and prioritize the placement of wildlife crossings — reducing both animal deaths and highway accidents.
Although SB 395 passed the legislature and was signed into law by Governor Newsom in 2019 (effective 2020), implementation has been blocked by funding issues. The bill required the legislature to make a specific budget appropriation to launch the app and permitting system. But subsequent efforts to secure the necessary funding were unsuccessful. As a result, we don’t have the app and salvaging roadkill meat remains illegal, leaving valuable protein to rot and depriving wildlife managers of vital collision data. Gaines & Associates plans to reintroduce the measure under new leadership, viewing it as a practical win for conservation, food security, and highway safety.
Elk, the SHARE program, and a rare success story
Not all of California’s wildlife news is grim. The state is home to all three western elk subspecies — Rocky Mountain, Roosevelt, and tule — and tule elk exist nowhere else on earth. Elk populations in northwestern California are growing strongly, to the point where animals are expanding onto private ranchland and competing with cattle for grazing.
The SHARE program — Shared Habitat Alliance for Recreational Enhancement, a bill Bill’s office wrote roughly 15 years ago — creates a pathway for private landowners to enroll their property in a permitted hunting system that provides liability protections and connects them with hunters. Unlike general tags, where access fees on private land can easily be thousands of dollars, SHARE tags come with the landowner’s cooperation already built in. This year, for the first time, CDFW announced spring elk hunts through the SHARE program with five bull tags available in the northwest. Hundreds of elk tags have been added in recent years. Bill urges every California hunter to look at the SHARE program before the season opens and put their name in — the drawing fee is about $15.
Who controls what: the regulatory landscape explained
A question that comes up constantly among hunters is who actually makes wildlife decisions in California. Bill’s breakdown is worth understanding. The state legislature writes laws — entries in the Fish and Game Code that override everything below them. The California Fish and Game Commission sets regulations — seasons, bag limits, methods of take, zone boundaries — through a transparent public process with three hearings and opportunities for testimony at each. CDFW provides science and recommendations to the commission but cannot take a public position on legislation without specific authorization from the governor. That authorization is rarely granted.
The result is that the legislature makes consequential wildlife decisions without hearing from the scientists whose job it is to manage wildlife. The commission, by contrast, operates in a relatively science-driven environment and is where hunters can actually make a difference with testimony. Its five members are appointed by the governor, confirmed by the Senate, and serve six-year terms — long enough to make decisions based on data rather than constituent pressure. Bill’s track record at the commission is considerably better than at the Capitol.
Hunter recruitment: everyone has a role
With fewer than 250,000 licensed hunters in a state of 40 million, the math is unforgiving. But Bill’s argument is that much of the recruitment problem is self-inflicted. Hunters who have been doing this for decades are too often unwilling to share it. He described a moment early in the youth waterfowl weekend program when a veteran duck hunter argued against scheduling the youth hunt before the regular season opener because, as the man put it, it would ruin his opening day. That attitude — more concerned with personal success than with the next generation — is part of why the numbers keep declining.
Bill wrote the legislation that mandated California’s “free hunting days” — two per year, one in spring and one in fall — specifically designed to get people who completed hunter education but never bought a license, out into the field with a mentor. He also worked with the commission to establish the youth turkey hunting weekend several years ago and has pushed for apprentice (youth) programs across deer, elk, and waterfowl. The single biggest bottleneck right now, he says, is a shortage of volunteer Hunter Education instructors. If you are an experienced hunter in California, become a Hunter Education instructor — it may be the highest-leverage thing you can do for the future of hunting in this state.
The Hunting and Conservation Coalition: strength in numbers
In 2015, Bill helped launch the California Hunting and Conservation Coalition, a coordinating body that brings together organizations with Capitol representation — CWA, Ducks Unlimited, CRPA, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation — and those without. The coalition meets four times a year, shares intelligence on what is moving through the legislature and the Fish and Game Commission, and coordinates responses when bad proposals appear. Since its founding, the coalition’s track record on blocking harmful proposals has improved substantially. The model has since been replicated in Oregon, Washington, and Colorado. The concept is simple: coordination and communication within a fragmented hunting community produces results that no single organization can achieve alone.
A book and a call to action
Bill and his wife recently completed a book called Before the Wild is Gone. She grew up in a city, knew nothing about hunting, and over 35 years of marriage came to understand — on her own terms — why hunting matters to wildlife, to habitat, and to the North American conservation model. The book tells that story alongside Bill’s career, the policy battles he has fought, and a direct call to action for hunters who want future generations to have the same opportunities they have had. It will be in print shortly after the podcast episode airs.
Where Hunterizer fits in
Bill recognized immediately the problem Hunterizer was built to address. California’s hunting regulations are spread across multiple large PDF digests — big game, waterfowl, upland — with A zones, B zones, X zones, muzzleloader tags, archery tags, SHARE tags, and bag limits within bag limits. Waterfowl alone involves aggregate daily limits with sub-limits by species — seven ducks total, but only two hen mallards, only two redheads, and a pintail limit that changes year to year. Turkey shooting hours are capped at 5 p.m. during the spring season for reasons most hunters have never heard explained. Even someone who has been hunting California for fifty years finds the regulations daunting. Tools that simplify that complexity, surface the right information at the right location, and lower the barrier to entry for new and returning hunters serve the same mission as everything Bill does at the Capitol: keep hunting legal, accessible, and growing.
What this conversation reminded us
Hunting in California is not fading quietly — it is being contested, season by season, bill by bill, and commission hearing by commission hearing, by a small number of professionals like Bill Gaines who show up every day at a Capitol full of legislators who have never been in the field. That fight can only be won if the hunting community itself gets involved. Every California hunter has a state senator and an assembly member who represents them. Those legislators respond to constituent contact. Bill’s ask is simple: know who your representatives are and get to know them, respond when organizations send alerts, and make your voice heard. Less than half of one percent of Californians hunt. Every single one of them needs to act like it matters.
Bill Gaines’ Links
- Book: Before the Wild is Gone — coming soon (link will be added upon publication)
- Firm: Gaines and Associates Government Relations
- Coalition: California Hunting and Conservation Coalition — contact Bill to get your organization involved
- Email: bgaines@gainesandassociates.com
Hunterizer App
Hunting California? See exactly what’s in season at your GPS location.
The Hunterizer app shows species, bag limits, and zone rules for your exact coordinates — for every county in California.
