Rule-Making Notices (Hearing Notices)

(DNR # WM-12-11(E))

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to sections 29.014, 29.041 and 227.11 (2) (a), and 227.24 (4) Stats., interpreting sections 29.014, 29.041 and 29.192, Stats., the Department of Natural Resources will hold public hearings on revisions to Chapter NR 10, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to the 2011 migratory game bird seasons and waterfowl hunting zones. This emergency order takes effect upon publication in the official state newspaper on September 3, 2011.

Hearing Information

The hearing will be held on:

Date:   Monday, October 3, 2011

Time:   1:00 P.M.

Location:   Natural Resources State Office Building       (GEF 2)
  101 South Webster Street
  Room 608
  Madison, WI 53703

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 [phone] with specific information on your request at least 10 days before the date of the scheduled hearing.

Submittal of Written Comments

Comments may be submitted until October 4, 2011. 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.

Copies of Proposed Rule

The emergency rule 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 [e-mail].

Analysis Prepared by Department of Natural Resources

Statutory interpreted

Sections 29.014, 29.041 and 29.192, Stats.

Statutory authority

Sections 29.014, 29.041 and 227.11 (2) (a), and 227.24 (4) Stats.

Plain language analysis

Section 1 of this rule order establishes the season length and bag limits for the 2011 Wisconsin migratory game bird seasons. For ducks, the state is divided into three zones, each with 60-day seasons. The season begins at 9:00 a.m. September 24 and continues for 60 consecutive days in the north, closing on November 22. In the South the season begins at 9:00 a.m. on October 1 and continues through October 9, followed by a 5-day split, and then reopens on October 15 and continues through December 4. In the new Mississippi River zone the season begins at 9:00 am on September 24 and continues through October 2, followed by a 12 day split, reopening on October 15 for a 60 day season. The split in the Mississippi River zone is seven days longer than in previous years.

The daily bag limit is 6 ducks including no more than: 4 mallards, of which only 1 may be a hen, 1 black duck, 1 canvasback, 3 wood ducks, 2 scaup, 2 pintails and 2 redheads.

For Canada geese, the state is apportioned into 2 goose hunting zones, Horicon and Exterior. Other special goose management subzones within the Exterior Zone include Brown County and the Mississippi River. Season lengths are: Horicon Zone - 92 days (2 hunting periods, first period beginning September 16 and the second on October 31); Exterior Zone in the northern duck zone - 85 days (Sept. 16 – Dec. 9); Exterior Zone in the southern duck zone – 85 days (Sept. 16 – Oct. 9 and Oct. 15 – Dec. 14) and Mississippi River subzone - 85 days (Sept. 24 – Oct. 2 and Oct. 15 – Dec. 29). 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 that the youth waterfowl hunting season will be held on September 17 and 18.

Section 3 establishes a new duck hunting zone that consists of the Wisconsin portions of the Mississippi River west of the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks.

Summary of, and comparison with, existing or proposed 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. Additionally, while USFWS believes that the NAWMP's population goals would tend to exert a conservative influence on overall duck harvest-management. Other factors, such as habitat, are to be 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 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 have remained 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.

In 2011 the USFWS has given our state the option of reconfiguring duck hunting zones through their concurrent revisions of 50 CFR 20. Section 3 of this board order creates a third duck hunting zone along the Mississippi River.

The 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 FWS 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 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.

In addition to the annual waterfowl hunting regulation process described below, 2011 is the open window to change state duck hunting zones as allowed by the USFWS every 5 years. Since 1991, the USFWS has regulated how states can arrange duck hunting zones and season splits. A season split is a temporary closure of the hunting season in order to extend the hunting later in the duck season. Beginning in 2011, Wisconsin can have three waterfowl hunting with the option for 1 split in each zone or 4 zones with no options for splits. Each zone can have a unique size or shape but must be contiguous and the boundaries clear.

In the past, the USFWS only allowed 3 configurations of duck zones and splits; 1) One statewide zone with the annual option to have 2 season splits, 2) Two zones with the annual option for 1 season split in each zone, 3) Three zones without the option for a split. While we have worked with the USFWS restrictions on duck hunting zones it has been our consistent position that the configuration of duck zones is an issue of hunter opportunity and satisfaction which does not have significant impact on duck populations, therefore, states should be allowed to manage zones without federal regulation.

Wisconsin's regular Canada goose season harvest consists of approximately 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 any 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 that meeting, staff were provided status information and the proposed framework alternative from the USFWS. Department staff worked with the other states in our Flyway to discuss and develop proposals and recommendations that were voted upon 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 USFWS announced its final waterfowl season framework recommendation on July 29. Department staff then 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 30. 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 during the first week of August around the state to solicit additional input on the proposed annual waterfowl rule.

Analysis and supporting documentation 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 are 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.

Small business regulatory coordinator

The Department's Small Business Regulatory Coordinator may be contacted at [e-mail] or by calling [phone].

Fiscal Estimate

State fiscal effect

None.

Local government fiscal effect

None.

Private sector fiscal effect

None.

Small businesses in the tourism industry may benefit when liberal migratory bird hunting season frameworks can be offered.

Summary

Because this proposal does not differ significantly from the season frameworks available in previous years, there are no new expenditures, record keeping requirements, or processes created.

Agency Contact Person

Mr. Kent Van Horn, Bureau of Wildlife Management, P.O. Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707 or by email to [e-mail].

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Without Public Hearing

Transportation

rulemaking_notices CR 11-043 CR 11-043

The Wisconsin Department of Transportation proposes an order to amend sections Trans 100.02 (11m), (12m) and (13m), relating to mandatory minimum liability limits for insurance policies under safety responsibility, damage judgment and mandatory insurance laws.

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to the authority of sections 85.16 (1), 227.11, and 343.02, Stats., and according to the procedure set forth in section 227.16 (2) (b), Stats., the Wisconsin Department of Transportation proposes to adopt the following rule amending Chapter Trans 100 without public hearing. The proposed rulemaking will bring Chapter Trans 100 into conformity with a statute that has been changed or enacted, namely the provisions of Chapter 344, Stats., as amended by 2011 Wis. Act 14.

Submittal of Written Comments

The public record of this proposed rulemaking will be held open for 30 days from the date of this notice for the submission of comments. Any comments should be submitted to, and requests for copies of the proposed rule may be made to Jane Dederich, Accident Records Unit Supervisor, Division of Motor Vehicles, Room 804 P. O. Box 7983, Madison, WI 53707-7983. You may also contact Ms. Dederich by phone at [phone] or via e-mail: [e-mail].

Copies of Proposed Rule

To view the proposed amendments, view the current rule, and submit written comments via e-mail/internet, you may visit the following website http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov
/library/research/law/rulenotices.htm.

Analysis Prepared by the Department of Transportation

Statutes interpreted

Sections 344.01 (2) (d), 344.15 (1), 344.33 (2) (a) to (c), Stats.

Statutory authority

Sections 85.16 (1), 227.11, and 343.02, Stats.

Explanation of statutory authority

The Department is charged with administering the safety responsibility, damage judgment, and mandatory insurance laws contained in ch. 344, Stats. This rule making implements ch. 344, Stats., as amended by 2011 Wis. Act 14.

Related rules or statutes

Chapter 344, Stats.

Plain language analysis

Current Wis. Admin. Code ch. Trans 100 reflects the mandatory minimum liability limit amounts established under 2009 Wis. Act 28 and the indexing system for adjustments to those limits. 2011 Wis. Act 14 lowered the mandatory minimum liability limit amounts and repealed the indexing system. This rule making will amend the mandatory minimum insurance limits in current Trans 100 to conform to those set by 2011 Wis. Act 14, and repeal the current rule's references to the indexing system.

The Property Casualty Insurers Association of America has produced a memo discussing the impact on the insurance industry of the liability limits set in 2009 Wis. Act 28. [“2009 Wisconsin Act 28: Analyzing the Repeal of Automobile Insurance-Related Provisions," Property Casualty Insurers Association of America, January 18, 2011.] According to that industry group, the $15,000, $50,000, $100,000 minimum insurance limits set in Act 28 affected about 10% of the state's insured population and increased premiums for that group by 10% to 12.5%.

The industry report suggests the higher limits were not needed because 96 out of 100 claims result in total economic claims of $25,000 or less, the average cost of property damage claims from motor vehicle accidents in Wisconsin is $2,600 and that the average cost of motor vehicle bodily injury claims in Wisconsin is $17,700. The paper claimed that repealing this provision would result in decreased premiums for those insured drivers affected by the Act 28 increases in liability limits.

The paper also concluded that the liability limit indexing system that was included in Act 28 was not necessary because the increased liability limits of Act 28 would insure that average claims would not exceed the liability limits until 2027. The paper stated that Wisconsin's bodily injury claim severity has been rising at roughly the same pace as its health care costs, i.e., about 5 to 6 percent a year. Applying that annual rate of change, to the current average injury claim cost of $17,700, the paper concluded that “it will take many years – possibly not until 2027 (10 years after the given 2017 date) – before the average injury claim cost of $17,700 reaches the new minimum per-person limit of $50,000."

Applying those same figures and methodology to the minimum mandatory limits set in 2011 Wis. Act 14, it appears that the average injury claim in Wisconsin will exceed Act 14's minimum per-person limit of $25,000 sometime between 2016 and 2018. Assuming the median personal injury claim is approximately the same as the mean (average), Wisconsin should expect the personal injury coverage limits set in 2011 Act 14 to be inadequate to cover the damages in about ½ of all personal injury accidents in Wisconsin within 5 to 7 years.

Year by Which Average Personal Injury Claims may be expected to exceed $25,000 Minimum Mandatory Insurance Limit for Single Coverage in Wisconsin
	Calculation at 5% Annual Increase				Calculation at 6% Annual Increase
Year	Expected Average PI Claim	Minimum Expected Increase in Claims	Annual Increase		Expected Average PI Claim	Maximum Expected Increase in Claims	Annual Increase
2010	$ 17,700.00	5%	$ 885.00		$ 17,700.00	6%	$ 1,062.00
2011	$ 18,585.00	5%	$ 929.25		$ 18,762.00	6%	$ 1,125.72
2012	$ 19,514.25	5%	$ 975.71		$ 19,887.72	6%	$ 1,193.26
2013	$ 20,489.96	5%	$ 1,024.50		$ 21,080.98	6%	$ 1,264.86
2014	$ 21,514.46	5%	$ 1,075.72		$ 22,345.84	6%	$ 1,340.75
2015	$ 22,590.18	5%	$ 1,129.51		$ 23,686.59	6%	$ 1,421.20
2016	$ 23,719.69	5%	$ 1,185.98		$ 25,107.79	6%	$ 1,506.47
2017	$ 24,905.68	5%	$ 1,245.28		$ 26,614.26	6%	$ 1,596.86
2018	$ 26,150.96				$ 28,211.11

Summary of, and comparison with, existing or proposed federal regulations

There are no existing or proposed federal regulations on this issue.

Comparison with rules in adjacent states

Michigan:

Owners of passenger vehicles, vans, and light trucks must purchase Michigan no-fault insurance before registering their vehicle. Michigan Law requires the following minimum liability amounts by type: “$20,000.00 because of bodily injury to or death of 1 person in any 1 accident and, subject to said limit for 1 person, $40,000.00 because of bodily injury to or death of 2 or more persons in any 1 accident, and $10,000.00 because of injury to or destruction of property of others in any 1 accident." Mich. Comp. Laws s. 257.520(b)(2) (2011). These limits do not appear to be adjusted by index.

Minnesota:

The Minnesota No-Fault Act, Minn. Stat. s. 65B.48 (2010), requires owners of registered motor vehicles to maintain no-fault insurance. Vehicle owners must be insured to the following minimum liability amounts by type: “not less than $30,000 because of bodily injury to one person in any one accident and, subject to said limit for one person, of not less than $60,000 because of injury to two or more persons in any one accident, and, if the accident has resulted in injury to or destruction of property, of not less than $10,000 because of such injury to or destruction of property of others in any one accident." Minn. Stat. s. 69B.49 subd. 3 (1) (2010). These limits do not appear to be adjusted by index.

Illinois:

All motor vehicles operated in Illinois must be covered by liability insurance. Vehicle owners are required to provide insurance information at the time of registration renewal. Illinois requires drivers to carry bodily injury or death liability limits of $20,000 for single-person and $40,000 for multiple-persons, as well as property damage liability limits of $15,000 and uninsured motorist coverage. 625 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/7-203 (2011). These limits do not appear to be adjusted by index.

Iowa: