During the past month, two record-setting California condors were dispatched to the Los Angeles Zoo, one from the coastal mountains near Big Sur, the other from the oak-studded wildlands near the Ventura-Kern county line.

Their record distinctions were that they had recorded the highest and second-highest levels of lead poisoning ever measured among members of their fragile species.

Condor 245 had lead concentrations in its blood 56 times higher than the level that would trigger emergency intervention in a human. Condor 242 registered at 61 times that threshold.

The latter is expected to survive. Condor 245 died a week ago.

Results of a necropsy are pending, but biologists suspect what happened to 245 is the same thing one of them witnessed befall 242: Scavenging for food, it ingested lead bullet fragments imbedded in the carcass of a wild animal.

The events have discouraged Jess Grantham, coordinator of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Ventura-based California Condor program.

Grantham has spent much of his career trying to bring back the species from the brink of extinction, and he's beginning to wonder how much longer the birds can survive under the intensive, unnatural baby-sitting of man.

"We caught 15 birds and tested them for lead in the past week," he said last Tuesday. "We used to do that once a year; now we're doing it all the time."

Biologists have resumed leaving animal carcasses at designated sites to ensure the safety of the condors' food supply.

"That's about as unnatural as you can get," Grantham said. "At some point, you have to either say this is not working, or you have to do something about it."

Copper bullets considered

The march toward "doing something" — namely, outlawing the use of lead ammunition in areas where wild condors forage — has been a stop-and-go affair since at least 2003, when the California Fish and Game Commission first began considering a possible ban.

If a ban were implemented, hunters could still shoot deer in the affected areas, but they would have to use copper bullets, a type of ammunition, hunters argue, that is somewhat more expensive and far less available than traditional lead bullets.

The commission's deliberate pace led to the filing of a lawsuit by the Natural Resources Defense Council in 2006, alleging the agency's inaction violated the requirements of the federal Endangered Species Act.

Legislation to implement a ban, introduced by Assemblyman Pedro Nava, D-Santa Barbara, foundered in the Legislature in 2005 and 2006, shot down by opposition from hunting groups, the National Rifle Association and the firearms industry.

In 2007, however, the weight of evidence has become so great that action appears imminent unless jurisdictional distrust, exploited by interest groups on both sides, gets in the way.

The question now is if something is going to be done, who's going to do it? Regulators on the Fish and Game Commission, or lawmakers in the Capitol?

Special hearing today

Two watershed events are approaching that will determine whether the state of California will do what condor experts say is essential for the ancient birds' survival in the wild.

By Sept. 14, lawmakers must determine the fate of legislation to achieve that goal, and the Fish and Game Commission is moving toward making a decision by the end of the year.

Today in Sacramento, the commission will conduct a rare special hearing dedicated exclusively to the issue.

Those in the hunting community — although many are not yet convinced that a ban is justified — prefer the commission make the decision.

"I have to put my faith in them," said Glenn Tessers, chairman of the Southern California chapter of the California Deer Association. "The Department of Fish and Game is going to go down the tubes if hunting goes away. Why would they do anything to make hunting go away? It just doesn't make sense."

Environmentalists, frustrated by the commission's inaction to date, are pushing for a law to implement the ban.

"Condors have been dying for decades. The commission hasn't done anything," said Kelly Sorenson, executive director of the Ventana Wildlife Society, the nonprofit group that manages the wild condor population in Northern California.

The Department of Fish and Game — the state agency that executes rules adopted by the commission — weighed in with a May 30 letter to Nava. "AB 821 undermines the regulatory authority of the commission," wrote department official Greg Hurner.

Nava responds that his bill, AB 821, would not be necessary if the commission had done its job. He said earlier this year that he introduced the bill as a direct result of what he called the commission's "abuse of discretion in ignoring the science."

Nava's effort to implement a statutory ban has advanced much further than in previous years. It has been passed by the Assembly and approved by one Senate committee, and is now being considered by the Senate Appropriations Committee.

He says he will move forward with the bill, even if the commission sends strong signals today that it intends to take the same action through regulation.

"It's taken a lot of work to get the legislation to this point," Nava said. "It would be foolish not to see it through. ... My goal has always been to do what we have to do, given the state of the science, to protect the condor."

Timing could be critical

Commissioners will hear testimony but can take no action today because an environmental report on the proposed lead ammunition ban is being redrafted.

Environmentalists are cooperating with and lobbying the commission to enact a ban, but they are also pushing for the legislation. Privately some question whether the commission's staff in the Department of Fish and Game is committed to taking action.

They complain the environmental report was inexplicably taken off the department's Web site, an action that interrupted the required public comment period and necessitated starting the process anew. Because of that delay, the earliest the commission could now act is December.

"We're going to redraft the environmental document," said Adrianna Shea, the commission's deputy executive director. "The commission just wants to make sure it's doing its diligence."

The timing could be critical. If the Legislature does not pass the bill, or if it were to be vetoed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, no law could be enacted before the beginning of the fall 2008 hunting season. That would leave the rules for next year entirely in the hands of the commission.

Evidence disputed

Biologists say that each hunting season in which lead bullets are used increases the peril to condors in the wild. Studies in Arizona and in California have shown the incidence of lead poisoning in condors spikes during and just after deer hunting season ends.

"Deer hunting is linked to elevated levels of lead. We published that study, and they all concur our evidence is strong," said Sorenson of the Ventana Wilderness Society.

An alliance of gun and hunting groups continues to dispute the evidence, however.

In a strongly worded letter to the commission last month, the alliance said it opposes "the draconian and unwarranted step of banning traditional hunting ammunition based on inconclusive science." The letter said the proposal "reflects a hidden agenda by some to ban all hunting in California."

The letter was signed by, among others, representatives of the National Rifle Association, the California Rifle and Pistol Association and the National Association of Firearms Retailers.

Not all in the hunting community, however, are so dismissive of the evidence.

"It's not 100 percent conclusive, but the best available science is pretty strong," said Bill Gaines, president of the California Outdoor Heritage Alliance.

Gaines opposes Nava's bill and said he believes the commission is the proper agency to deal with the issue.

If a ban is to be implemented, for instance, he said the commission could require that its effect be studied and the issue be reconsidered in a few years.

He also suggests studying the effects of a lead-ammunition ban implemented this year by Tejon Ranch, the state's largest private hunting reserve.

If a broader ban is to be adopted, Gaines said, its implementation should be delayed.

"Cost and availability are real concerns," he said. "Give the manufacturers some lead time so they can try to ramp up and meet the demand."

The commission, he notes, has professional staff, is required to follow all the public regulatory rules and must conduct open meetings. It is, he says, the proper place for the issue to be decided.

"If the science dictates the ban be put in place, do it right," he said.