WeVote
Log In

Bill

WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 259

Summary — HB 259: "Dumping dead wildlife; person shall have hunting license revoked for one year."

Status: Died in committee
Introduced: August 19, 2025
Subject area: Wildlife, Fisheries & Parks

Main purpose

HB 259 would have made unauthorized disposal (dumping) of dead wildlife a sanctionable violation by tying a hunting-license penalty to the act. The core intent was to discourage improper disposal of wildlife carcasses by imposing administrative consequences on people who dump dead wild animals.

Key provisions (as described)

  • Required revocation of the person’s hunting license for one year upon conviction or administrative finding that the person dumped dead wildlife.
  • The statute appears aimed at using license revocation as the primary sanction rather than (or in addition to) criminal fines or incarceration.

Note: The bill text provided to the summary request was limited. No specific language about definitions (e.g., what constitutes “dumping” or “dead wildlife”), required scienter (intent), enforcement procedures, or any related criminal penalties, civil fines, or restitution was included in the materials available. The bill’s scope (statewide vs. county-limited), exceptions (e.g., roadkill reporting, licensed disposal, disease control by agencies), and appeals/process for license reinstatement were not available.

Who would be affected

  • Hunters and other license-holders: the penalty targets individuals who hold hunting licenses, so licensed hunters are the population most directly affected.
  • Landowners/land managers and the general public: if the prohibition were broad, anyone disposing of a wild animal could be subject to the sanction if they hold a hunting license.
  • Wildlife enforcement agencies and licensing authorities: agencies managing hunting licenses (game wardens, fish & wildlife departments) would be responsible for enforcement and processing revocations.
  • Waste and public-health officials: improper carcass disposal can pose public-health or environmental risks; agencies may be engaged in clarifying permitted disposal methods, but the bill’s materials do not specify coordination.

Potential impacts

  • Administrative: licensing agencies would need procedures to suspend/revoke and later reinstate licenses; enforcement and recordkeeping workload could increase.
  • Behavioral: by attaching a steep penalty (one-year license loss), the bill sought to deter illegal or unsafe carcass disposal.
  • Fiscal: no fiscal note was provided for this specific wildlife bill; impacts are likely small but could include administrative costs for agency processing and enforcement.

Legislative timeline / procedural notes

  • Introduced: August 19, 2025.
  • Referred to committee (Wildlife, Fisheries & Parks).
  • Final status: Died in Committee (no enactment).

Outstanding questions / recommended follow‑up

Because the available record is sparse, readers should consult the bill text or committee files for:
- Exact statutory language and definitions (what conduct is prohibited; mens rea; exemptions).
- Enforcement mechanism and burden of proof (criminal conviction vs. administrative finding).
- Any additional penalties (fines, restitution) or civil remedies.
- Agency rulemaking or administrative procedures for revocation and reinstatement.

If you want, I can draft a concise checklist of amendments or model language that would clarify enforcement, exemptions (e.g., authorized roadkill salvage or public-health removals), and due‑process safeguards for license revocation.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.