Any inquiries for the small business regulatory coordinator for the Department of Commerce can be directed to Sam Rockweiler, as listed above.
Initial Regulatory flexibility analysis
Types of small businesses that will be affected by the rules.
Owners and operators of food processing plants and food warehouses who choose to pursue the tax credits in sections
71.07 (3rm),
71.28 (3rm), and
71.47 (3rm) of the Statutes, for modernizing or expanding those facilities.
Reporting, bookkeeping and other procedures required for compliance with the rules.
An application form prescribed by the Department must be completed and submitted to the Department.
Types of professional skills necessary for compliance with the rules.
No new professional skills are necessary for compliance with the rules.
Rules have a significant economic impact on small businesses.
No.
Environmental Analysis
The Department has considered the environmental impact of the proposed rules. In accordance with chapter Comm 1, the proposed rules are a Type III action. A Type III action normally does not have the potential to cause significant environmental effects and normally does not involve unresolved conflicts in the use of available resources. The Department has reviewed these rules and finds no reason to believe that any unusual conditions exist. At this time, the Department has issued this notice to serve as a finding of no significant impact.
Fiscal Estimate
Assumptions used in arriving at fiscal estimate
Although the rules will newly result in review of documentation relating to certifying applicants as eligible to then claim allocated tax credits for investments in food processing plants and food warehouses, the number of these reviews and allocations is expected to be too small to result in significant changes in the Department's costs for administering its business development programs. Therefore, the proposed rules are not expected to have any significant fiscal effect on the Department.
The proposed rules are not expected to impose any significant costs on the private sector, because the rules address only voluntary submittal of documentation relating to tax credits for investments in food processing plants and food warehouses.
State fiscal effect
No state fiscal effect.
Local government fiscal effect
No local government costs.
Long-range fiscal implications
None known.
Agency Contact Person
Steven Sabatke
Wisconsin Department of Commerce
Bureau of Business Finance and Compliance
P.O. Box 7970, Madison, WI 53707-7970
Telephone: (608) 267-0762
Notice of Hearing
Natural Resources
Fish, Game, Forestry, Recreation, Chs.
NR 1—
DNR # WM-22-10(E)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss.
29.014,
29.041,
29.197,
227.11 (2) (a), and
227.24 (4) Stats., the Department of Natural Resources will hold a public hearing on emergency rules to revise Chapter
NR 10, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to the 2010 migratory game bird seasons and waterfowl hunting zones. This emergency order took effect on September 1, 2010.
Hearing Information
Date and Time:
|
Location:
|
Tuesday
October 26, 2010
2:00 p.m.
|
State Natural Resources Office
Building, Room 608
101 South Webster Street
Madison, WI
|
Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, reasonable accommodations, including the provision of informational material in an alternative format, will be provided for qualified individuals with disabilities upon request. Please call Scott Loomans at (608) 267-2452 with specific information on your request at least 10 days before the date of the scheduled hearing.
Copies of Rule and Submittal of Written Comments
The proposed rules and fiscal estimate may be reviewed and comments electronically submitted at the following Internet site:
http://adminrules.wisconsin.gov. Written comments on the proposed rule may be submitted via U.S. mail to Mr. Kent Van Horn, Bureau of Wildlife Management, P.O. Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707 or by email to
kent.vanhorn@wisconsin.gov. Comments may be submitted until
October 26, 2010. Written comments whether submitted electronically or by U.S. mail will have the same weight and effect as oral statements presented at the public hearings. A personal copy of the proposed rule and fiscal estimate may be obtained from Mr. Van Horn.
Analysis Prepared by Department of Natural Resources
Statutes interpreted
Statutory authority
Plain language analysis
Section 1 of this rule order establishes the season length and bag limits for the 2010 Wisconsin migratory game bird seasons. For ducks, the state is divided into two zones each with 60-day seasons. The season begins at 9:00 a.m. September 25 and continues for 60 consecutive days in the north, closing on November 23. In the South the season begins at 9:00 a.m. on October 2 and continues through October 10, followed by a 5-day split, and then reopens on October 16 and continues through December 5. The daily bag limit is 6 ducks including no more than: 4 mallards, of which only 1 may be a hen, 3 wood ducks, 2 scaup, 2 redheads, 2 pintails, 1 black duck and 1 canvasback,.
For Canada geese, the state is apportioned into 3 goose hunting zones: Horicon, Collins and Exterior. Other special goose management subzones within the Exterior Zone include Brown County and the Mississippi River. Season lengths are: Collins Zone - 65 days (three hunting periods, September 16 – October 3, October 4 – 24, October 25 – November 19); Horicon Zone - 92 days (2 hunting periods, first period beginning September 16 and the second on November 1); Exterior Zone in the northern duck zone - 85 days (Sept. 18 – Dec. 11); Exterior Zone in the southern duck zone – 85 days (Sept. 18 – Oct. 10 and Oct. 16 – Dec. 16) and Mississippi River subzone - 85 days (Oct. 2 – Oct. 10 and Oct. 16 – Dec. 30). The statewide daily bag limit for Canada geese in all zones is 2 birds per day during the open seasons within the zones.
Section 2 establishes the youth waterfowl hunting season dates.
Comparison with federal regulations
Under international treaty and Federal law, migratory game bird seasons are closed unless opened annually via the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) regulations process. As part of the Federal rule process, the USFWS proposes a duck harvest-management objective that balances hunting opportunities with the desire to achieve waterfowl population goals identified in the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP). Under this harvest-management objective, the relative importance of hunting opportunity increases as duck populations approach the goals in the NAWMP. Thus, hunting opportunity would be maximized when the population is at or above goals. Other factors, such as habitat, are considered.
In the past, the regular Canada goose season was based on the allowable Mississippi Valley Population (MVP) harvest which was determined based on the spring breeding population estimate obtained from an aerial survey of the MVP breeding range as prescribed by the Mississippi Flyway MVP management plan. However, because locally produced giant Canada geese now constitute a considerable portion of the harvest in all states that also harvest Mississippi Valley Population birds, the Mississippi Flyway Council (MFC) is testing the use of a standard season framework for 5 years. Beginning in the fall of 2007 and continuing through 2011, season lengths and bag limits for each MVP harvest state will remain unchanged. Each state retains the flexibility to schedule the timing of their Canada goose season. In addition, if the MVP spring population numbers dropped to a predetermined low level during the 5-year period, the stable season framework would be adjusted.
All proposed modifications included in this rule order are consistent with these parameters and guidelines which are annually established by the USFWS in
50 CFR 20.
Comparison with rules in adjacent states
Since migratory bird species are managed under international treaty, each region of the country is organized in a specific geographic flyway which represents an individual migratory population of migratory game birds. Wisconsin along with Minnesota, Michigan, Illinois and Iowa are members of the Mississippi Flyway. Each year the states included in the flyways meet to discuss regulations and guidelines offered to the flyways by the USFWS. The USFWS regulations and guidelines apply to all states within the Flyway and therefore the regulations in the adjoining states closely resemble the rules established in this rule order, and only differ slightly based on hunter desires, habitat and population management goals. However, these variations fall within guidelines and sideboards established by the USFWS.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies:
For the regular duck season, a data based process called Adaptive Harvest Management is used annually by the USFWS and the Flyways to determine which of 3 framework alternatives best matches the current year's data on populations and habitat (data from the spring pond and duck survey). The option of a closed season is also possible if survey conditions indicated that this is necessary for the management of duck populations. The determination of which alternative is selected is based in part on the spring wetland conditions on the breeding grounds and the Mid-Continent Mallard population. These data come from the May Pond and Breeding Waterfowl Population Surveys conducted by the USFWS and Canadian Wildlife Service on traditional survey areas as well as surveys from select states, including Wisconsin.
Wisconsin's regular Canada goose season harvest consists of close to a 50:50 ratio between resident giant and MVP population Canada geese. As a result, the parameters of Wisconsin's regular goose seasons are guided by the Mississippi Flyway management plans for the MVP and giant Canada goose populations and approved by the Mississippi Flyway Council and the USFWS. The health of these populations was measured with spring breeding population surveys, survival data and harvest rates obtained from banding and production studies. The surveys and studies are conducted annually and are supported by the State of Wisconsin as part of the MFC. The result of this work is reviewed annually by the MFC committee and the USFWS to measure the impact of the stable season framework trial period.
The primary elements of Wisconsin's waterfowl regulatory process include conducting spring waterfowl surveys, participation in MFC meetings, commenting on federal proposals, and soliciting input from the public. The state process begins with Flyway meetings in February and March each year where staff provide input to the development of federal framework alternatives and requests related to the early seasons. In spring and summer, breeding waterfowl surveys and banding are conducted in support of the regulatory process.
In early July, staff conducted a public meeting to solicit input from interest groups, including representatives of the Conservation Congress Migratory Committee. At this meeting staff provided the attendees with breeding status information and asked for items that they wish the department to pursue at the MFC meeting in mid July. Department staff then attended the MFC Technical and Council meetings. At these meetings, staff was provided status information and the proposed framework alternative from the USFWS. Department staff then worked with the other states in our Flyway to develop proposals and recommendations that were voted on by the MFC. Proposals that passed at the MFC meeting were forwarded to the USFWS for consideration by the Service Regulations Committee (SRC) at their meeting. The SRC recommended its final waterfowl season framework on July 30 and it was announced on August 2. Department staff summarized waterfowl status and regulation information for Wisconsin citizens and presented this information to the Migratory Committee of the Conservation Congress and at a public meeting (Post-Flyway Meeting) of interest groups and individuals on July 31. Staff gathered public input at these meetings regarding citizen suggestions for the development of Wisconsin's waterfowl regulations given the federal framework. Public hearings were held on the permanent version of this rule order from August 2 through 5 around the state to solicit additional input.
Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business
These rules, and the legislation which grants the department rule making authority, do not have a significant fiscal effect on the private sector or small businesses. Additionally, no significant costs are associated with compliance to these rules.
Small Business Impact
These rules are applicable to individual sportspersons and impose no compliance or reporting requirements for small businesses, nor is any design or operational standards contained in the rule.
Pursuant to s.
227.114, Stats., it is not anticipated that the proposed rule will have an economic impact on small businesses.
Environmental Analysis
The Department has made a determination that this action does not involve significant adverse environmental effects and does not need an environmental analysis under ch.
NR 150, Wis. Adm. Code.
Fiscal Estimate
Assumptions used in arriving at fiscal estimate
This proposed migratory bird season rule is similar to the season in previous years and will not result in any significant changes in spending or revenue. There are no new government costs anticipated due to the provisions of this rule.
State fiscal effect
No state fiscal effect.
Increase costs — May be possible to absorb within agency's budget.
Local government fiscal effect
No local government costs.
Long-range fiscal implications
None.
Agency Contact Person
Kent Van Horn, Staff Specialist
PO Box 7921
101 S. Webster Street, WM/6
Madison, WI 53707-7921
Phone: ( 608) 266-8841
Natural Resources
Fish, Game, Forestry, Recreation, Chs.
NR 1—
DNR # ER-35-10, ER-37-10(E)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss.
23.09 (2),
29.604,
227.11 (2) and
227.24, Stats., the Department of Natural Resources will hold public hearings on the emergency and permanent rule proposals to list four cave bat species as threatened in s.
NR 27.03 (3), Wis. Adm. Code. The hearings will be held concurrently with hearings to list the fungus,
Geomyces destructans, as a prohibited invasive species in s.
NR 40.04 (2), Wis. Adm. Code.
