Under current federal rules, 2 whole herd tests are required in order to certify a farm-raised deer herd as a tuberculosis-free herd, while 3 whole herd tests are required in order to certify a farm-raised deer herd as a brucellosis-free herd. USDA proposes to harmonize the testing requirements, but has not yet adopted the necessary rule changes. USDA has authorized DATCP to harmonize the testing requirements in Wisconsin by state rule.
This emergency rule reduces the number of whole herd tests required in order to certify a farm-raised deer herd as a brucellosis-free herd, from 3 whole herd tests to 2 whole herd tests, consistent with the testing requirement for tuberculosis-free herd certification.
Comparison with federal regulations
DATCP administers animal disease control programs in cooperation with USDA. USDA has issued federal orders in response to the discovery of VHS in the United States and Canada. The orders limit interstate and international shipments of VHS-susceptible fish from states and provinces that border the Great Lakes, and require negative VHS testing to permit movement. This rule supplements current federal rules by establishing testing requirements for intrastate movement and stocking of wild source fish and fish eggs (including bait species) in Wisconsin.
Comparison with rules in adjacent states
Michigan and Minnesota require VHS testing on salmonids stocked into state waters. On June 7, 2007, Michigan also announced a one-year moratorium on state hatchery production of walleye, northern pike and muskellunge using eggs collected from wild sources in Michigan during 2007. Illinois and Iowa have no VHS testing requirements for intrastate movement or stocking of fish.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Disease Testing of Fish
Effect on private fish farm operators
DATCP estimates that this rule will affect 30-40 private fish farms, not counting DNR “cooperator" fish farms registered by DNR (see above). Many of the affected fish farms are “small businesses," and many of them will be substantially affected by this rule. VHS testing requirements may force some fish farm operators to curtail all or part of their operations. However, some fish farms already conduct VHS tests in order to meet federal requirements for interstate movement of fish.
Fish farm operators may incur added testing requirements under this rule if they keep VHS-susceptible fish or fish eggs that were either (1) collected from any wild source within the preceding 12 months, or (2) kept on a fish farm that received fish or fish eggs (of any species) collected from any wild source within the preceding 12 months. Operators must test those VHS-susceptible fish or fish eggs before they distribute them for bait, for stocking to Wisconsin public waters, or for delivery to other fish farms (other than those registered by the same operator).
A veterinarian or other qualified fish health inspector must certify that the fish or fish eggs are VHS-free, based on tests using approved methods (the American Fisheries Society test or the World Organization for Animal Health test) that DATCP has identified on the health certificate form.
VHS tests must be conducted on a statistically representative sample of fish drawn from the tested species or farm. The average cost to test and certify a single lot of fish is approximately $500 (actual costs vary depending on test method, number of fish in the lot, number of fish species in the lot, etc.). A single fish farm might need to test from 1-30 lots per year, depending on the source and species of the fish, the number of separate fish lots kept on the fish farm, and purposes for which the fish are kept and distributed.
DATCP estimates that approximately 30-40 private fish farm operators will need to conduct VHS tests, and that they will conduct those tests on a combined total of approximately 40 lots of fish per year. Assuming an average cost of $500 per test per lot, the combined total cost to all affected private fish farm operators will be approximately $20,000 per year. However, some of those affected fish farmers are already performing VHS tests in order to meet federal requirements for shipping fish in interstate commerce, so the net impact of this rule may be less than $20,000. Fish farm costs may increase if USDA finds that additional fish species are susceptible to VHS (the amount of the increase will depend on which fish species are found to be susceptible).
Effect on bait dealers
Wisconsin bait dealers are licensed by DNR. This rule will affect licensed bait dealers in the following ways:
•
If bait dealers buy VHS-susceptible bait species that originate from wild sources, their purchase costs may reflect the seller's added cost of VHS testing under this rule.
•
If bait dealers collect VHS-susceptible bait species from wild sources, they will need to conduct VHS tests before reselling or distributing the bait. They will also need to withhold the bait from distribution for at least 4 weeks pending the completion of VHS tests. That will add costs, and may not be practically feasible for affected bait dealers.
This rule applies only to bait species that are known to be susceptible to VHS. Of the major bait species in Wisconsin (fathead minnow, white sucker, golden shiner and emerald shiner), only one species (emerald shiner) is currently known to be susceptible to VHS. Emerald shiners are obtained exclusively by wild harvesting, while other major bait species can be hatched and raised on farms. At this time, DATCP estimates that emerald shiners represent less than 10% of the overall bait market in Wisconsin (the market for wild-harvested emerald shiners has already diminished as a result of federal VHS testing requirements for emerald shiners moved in interstate commerce).
DATCP estimates that approximately 25 Wisconsin bait dealers are currently harvesting emerald shiners from the wild. DATCP estimates that each of those bait dealers would need to test an average of 6 lots of wild-harvested emerald shiners each year, before distributing the emerald shiners for sale. Assuming an average cost of $500 per test lot, the average annual cost for an individual bait dealer would be about $3,000 per year, and the combined total cost to all 25 of those bait dealers would be about $75,000 per year. That figure does not include added costs to hold the emerald shiners for 4 weeks while testing is completed. It is extremely difficult to hold emerald shiners for extended periods, so it may not even be possible for most bait dealers to hold them for the required 4 weeks.
The difficulty of holding emerald shiners for 4 weeks, combined with the added cost of testing emerald shiners, may drive many bait dealers out of the business of harvesting wild emerald shiners for sale as bait. However, those bait dealers may still be able to harvest and sell other types of bait that are not affected by this rule.
Bait dealers that are not currently harvesting emerald shiners will not be substantially affected by this rule unless USDA finds that additional bait species are susceptible to VHS. If USDA finds that other major bait species are susceptible to VHS, this rule could have a more dramatic impact on bait dealers. The impact will depend on the species that are affected.
Accommodation for small business
This rule will have a limited effect on most private fish farms and bait dealers. But in some cases (especially in the case of bait dealers that harvest emerald shiners from wild sources for sale as bait), this rule may impose substantial added costs. If USDA finds that additional fish or bait fish species are susceptible to VHS, this rule may have a more dramatic impact on fish farm operators or bait dealers, or both. Many of the affected entities are small businesses.
This emergency rule is needed to protect the health of wild and farm-raised fish populations in this state. Effective disease control is important for the entire aquaculture industry in this state. Although this rule may increase costs for some fish farm operators and bait dealers, the costs are currently outweighed by the need to prevent and control the spread of disease. DATCP has not exempted small businesses, or adopted more lenient VHS testing requirements for small business, because the risk of disease spread is unrelated to business size.
Disease-Free Certification of Farm-Raised Deer
This rule will have no negative effects on farm-raised deer keepers, and will reduce testing costs for some farm-raised deer keepers. Actual cost savings will depend on herd size and current test schedules. By facilitating simultaneous testing for brucellosis and tuberculosis, this rule will also avoid some stress on tested deer.
Fiscal Estimate
Summary
Disease Testing of Fish
Fiscal effect on DNR
This emergency rule will have a fiscal impact on DNR fish hatchery and stocking operations. Under this rule, all VHS-susceptible fish and fish eggs (including VHS-susceptible bait species) must be tested for VHS before being stocked to Wisconsin public waters if they were either (1) collected from a wild source within the preceding 12 months or (2) kept on a fish farm that received fish or fish eggs of any species collected from a wild source within the preceding 12 months. This emergency rule provides a limited exemption for fish or fish eggs that are reintroduced to the same waters from which they are collected (see below).
Under current rules, a veterinarian or other qualified fish health inspector must issue a fish health certificate for fish or fish eggs stocked into Wisconsin public waters. The inspector must issue the health certificate on a form prescribed by DATCP. Under this emergency rule, if the fish are of a VHS-susceptible species, and were either (1) collected from a wild source within the preceding 12 months or (2) kept on a fish farm that received fish of any species collected from a wild source within the preceding 12 months, the fish health certificate must certify that the fish are VHS-free. The certification must be based on VHS tests conducted according to approved methods (the American Fisheries Society test or the World Organization for Animal Health test) that DATCP identifies on the health certificate form.
VHS tests must be conducted on a statistically representative test sample of fish drawn from the tested species or farm. The average cost to test and certify a single lot of fish is approximately $500 (actual costs vary depending on test method, number of fish in the lot, number of different species in the lot, etc.). A single fish farm might need to test from 1-30 lots per year, depending on the source and species of the fish, the number of separate fish lots kept on the fish farm, and the purposes for which the fish are kept and distributed.
DNR annually registers approximately 100 fish farms with DATCP. Thirteen of those fish farms are state-owned fish hatcheries. The remainder are registered by DNR but owned by private DNR “cooperators" (as registrant, DNR assumes legal responsibility for compliance with fish health rules). DATCP estimates that DNR will need to conduct VHS tests on a combined total of approximately 120 lots of fish per year (including fish at state hatcheries and “cooperator" fish farms registered by DNR).
Assuming an average test cost of $500 per lot, the total cost to DNR would be approximately $60,000 per year. However, DNR has already implemented a number of internal controls and VHS testing protocols, so the added cost of this rule will be less than $60,000. DNR costs may increase if USDA finds that additional fish species are susceptible to VHS (the amount of the increase will depend on which fish species are found to be susceptible).
Under this emergency rule, fish and fish eggs are exempt from VHS and other fish health testing requirements if they are reintroduced into the same body of water from which they were collected, for the purpose of increasing or rehabilitating a desirable sport fish population. (DATCP and DNR must approve the reintroduction, and a veterinarian or fish health inspector must still issue a fish health certificate based on a visual inspection.) This exemption will make it easier for DNR, local governments and others to continue programs (including so-called “walleye wagon" programs) to supplement the natural reproduction of important sport fish species.
Fiscal effect on DATCP
DATCP will incur added costs to administer and enforce the fish health testing requirements under this emergency rule (and any subsequent “permanent" rule). DATCP will need at least 2.0 FTE additional staff to review and process a large volume of fish health certificates in a timely manner; to train fish health inspectors to collect samples for VHS testing; to provide compliance information and respond to industry inquiries; to conduct inspections and monitor compliance; to conduct investigations of possible law violations; and to initiate enforcement actions if necessary.
The 2.0 FTE staff will have a combined total cost of at least $120,000 per year, including salary, fringe benefits and support costs. DATCP will attempt to absorb these costs in the short term by shifting staff from other important disease control responsibilities, but DATCP will not be able to do so indefinitely without putting other livestock sectors at unacceptable risk. DATCP will seek federal grant funds to cover some of the costs, but federal funding is not guaranteed.
Fiscal effect on University of Wisconsin
This emergency rule may have a slight fiscal impact on University of Wisconsin research facilities and some local governments, to the extent that they may operate fish farms or procure fish from farms affected by this rule. However, the effect will likely be minimal unless those entities are engaged in distributing VHS-susceptible fish or fish eggs from wild sources.
Fiscal effect on local governments
This emergency rule exempts local governments from VHS and other fish health testing requirements when they reintroduce sport fish or fish eggs into the same body of water from which they were collected, for the purpose of increasing or rehabilitating the fish population. (DATCP and DNR must approve the reintroduction, and a veterinarian or fish health inspector must issue a fish health certificate based on a visual inspection.) This exemption will make it easier for local governments to continue current programs (including so-called “walleye wagon" programs) to supplement the natural reproduction of important sport fish species.
Disease-Free Certification of Farm-Raised Deer
This emergency rule extends brucellosis-free herd certification from 2 years to 3 years (a herd owner may request a shorter term), and reduces the required number of certification tests from 3 whole herd tests to 2 whole herd tests, consistent with tuberculosis-free herd certification. That will allow herd owners to conduct simultaneous tests for both diseases. Simultaneous testing will reduce testing costs and limit stress on tested deer. The change will have no fiscal impact on DATCP, on other agencies of state government, or on local government.
State fiscal effect
Increase in costs that are not possible to absorb within the agency's budget.
Local government fiscal effect
Increase in costs; permissive.
Types of local governmental units affected
Towns, villages, cities, counties, school districts.
Fund sources affected
GPR, PRO
Affected Ch.
20 appropriations
Notice of Hearing
Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection
The State of Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP) announces that it will hold a public hearing on a proposed amendment to Chapter
ATCP 123, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to customer access to subscription video services.
Hearing Information
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
At 1:00 p.m.
Dept. of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection
2811 Agriculture Drive, Board Room (CR-106)
Madison, Wisconsin, 53718-6777
Hearing impaired persons may request an interpreter for these hearings. Please make reservations for a hearing interpreter by Monday, August 18, 2008, by writing to Michelle Reinen, Division of Trade and Consumer Protection, P.O. Box 8911, Madison, WI 53708-8911, telephone (608) 224-5160. Alternatively, you may contact the DATCP TDD at (608) 224-5058. Handicap access is available at the hearings.
Submission of Written Comments
DATCP will hold a public hearing at the time and place shown above. DATCP invites the public to attend the hearing and comment on the proposed rule. Following the public hearing, the hearing record will remain open until Friday, September 12, 2008 for additional written comments. Comments may be sent to the Division of Trade and Consumer Protection at the address below, by email to
michelle.reinen@wi.gov or online at
https://apps4.dhfs.state. wi.us/admrules/public/Home
To provide comments or concerns relating to small business, please contact DATCP's small business regulatory coordinator Keeley Moll at the address above, by emailing to
Keeley.Moll@datcp.state.wi.us or by telephone at (608) 224-5039.
Copies of Proposed Rule
You may obtain a free copy of this rule by contacting the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection, Division of Trade and Consumer Protection, 2811 Agriculture Drive, P.O. Box 8911, Madison, WI 53708. You can also obtain a copy by calling (608) 224-5160 or emailing
michelle.reinen@wi.gov. Copies will also be available at the hearings. To view the proposed rule online, go to:
Analysis Prepared by the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection
2007 Wisconsin Act 42 regulates providers of subscription video services. Among other things, the act regulates customer access to video services, and prohibits discrimination in the provision of video services based on race or income. This rule interprets and clarifies those regulations.
Statutes interpreted
Statutory authority
Explanation of statutory authority
2007 Wisconsin Act 42 eliminates municipal franchising of cable television services and creates a new state system for franchising and regulating “video service providers" (including but not limited to cable television service providers). The act regulates subscription video services provided, under a state franchise, via cable or local telephone lines. Among other things, the act does all of the following (see s.
66.0420 (8), Stats.):
•
Prohibits a state-franchised video service provider from denying access to a “group" of potential customers based on race or income. A provider has a defense against a claim of discrimination based on income if, within 3 years after the provider first offered video services, at least 30% of the households with access to the provider's video service are “low-income households." The Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (“DATCP") may extend the applicable time period, at the request of a video service provider.
•
Requires a state-franchised “large telecommunications video service provider" to do all of the following, unless DATCP grants a waiver or extension:
• Provide video service access to at least 35 percent of the households in each of the provider's basic local exchange service areas within the state franchise area no later than 3 years after the provider first offers video service.
• Provide video service access to at least 50 percent of the households within each basic local exchange service area not more than 5 years after the provider first offers video service in that area, or not more than 2 years after at least 30 percent of the households with access have subscribed for at least 6 consecutive months, whichever occurs later.
•
Requires a state-franchised “large telecommunications service provider" to file an annual report with DATCP regarding the provider's progress in complying with minimum access requirements.
•
Allows a video service provider to satisfy access requirements with an alternative technology (other than satellite service) that offers the same basic service, function and content features offered by the provider's normal video service network.
•
Provides that a telecommunications video service provider is not required to provide video service outside its basic local exchange service area.
•
Provides that an incumbent cable service provider is not required to provide video service outside the area in which it provided cable television service when it first received a state franchise.
