Modifying Chapter
NR 10 related to the bobcat hunting and trapping season.
Description of the Objective of the Rule
This rule would establish the 2012 bobcat hunting and trapping season framework.
Description of Existing Policies Relevant to the Rule and of New Policies Proposed to be Included in the Rule and an Analysis of Policy Alternatives; the History, Background and Justification for the Proposed Rule
Through this rulemaking, the department will propose continuing the current trial bobcat season framework that was split into two separate time periods in 2010 and 2011. The alternatives to be considered are reverting back to a single, straight season framework, or extending the trial period in order to allow additional evaluation.
In 2010 and 2011, the bobcat season was split into two separate permit periods: the Saturday nearest Oct. 17 - Dec. 25 and Dec. 26 to Jan 31. There appears to have been public support for the new season framework and the opinion of department staff is that it provides the tools for sound use, management and protection of the bobcat resource. If emergency rules are not promulgated, the season automatically reverts back to a single permit period beginning on the Saturday nearest October 17 and continuing through December 31 in 2012. Some people will view a reversion to the single season framework as a reduction of opportunity that is not socially acceptable. Frequent change of season dates and regulations for hunting and trapping can be confusing and disruptive to the public, can result in citations being issued, and is not necessary for protection of the bobcat population in this situation. Therefore, this emergency rule is needed to preserve the public welfare.
During this rule making process the impacts of the split season framework and public opinion will be evaluated, including through consideration of voting on an advisory question at the April, 2012 spring hearings in each county. If there is support, this rule proposal will be followed by permanent rules.
Statutory Authority for the Rule (Including the Statutory Citation and Language)
Estimate of the Amount of Time that State Employees will Spend to Develop the Rule and of Other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
144 hours.
Description of all Entities that may be Impacted by the Rule
Groups likely to be impacted or interested in this rulemaking are bobcat hunters and trappers, including members of groups such as the Wisconsin Trappers Association, Bear Hunters Association, Wildlife Federation, and the Conservation Congress.
Summary and Preliminary Comparison of any Existing or Proposed Federal Regulation that is Intended to Address the Activities to be Regulated by the Rule
Federal regulations allow states to manage the wildlife resources located within their boundaries provided they do not conflict with regulations established in the Federal Register. None of these rule changes violate or conflict with the provisions established in the Federal Code of Regulations.
Anticipated Economic Impact of the Rule
No economic impacts are anticipated. The hunting season framework proposed in this rule is identical to the season framework that was in place during the previous season.
Contact Person
Scott Loomans, 101 S Webster St., Madison, WI 53707, (608)267-2452,
scott.loomans@wisonsin.gov or John Olson, 2501 Golf Course Road, Ashland, WI 54806, (715) 685-2934,
johnf.olson@wisconsin.gov
Natural Resources
Fish, Game, etc., Chs.
NR 1—
This statement of scope was approved by the governor on February 15, 2012.
Rule No.
WM-02-12(E) (Revises Chapter
NR 10)
Relating to
Establishing the 2012 Migratory Bird Season Framework.
Description of the Objective of the Rule
This emergency rule order will establish the 2012 migratory bird hunting seasons.
Description of Existing Policies Relevant to the Rule and of New Policies Proposed to be Included in the Rule and an Analysis of Policy Alternatives; the History, Background and Justification for the Proposed Rule
This is an annual rule that will be consistent with a federal framework and is not a change from past policies. Migratory game bird hunting is regulated by the United States Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS), in
50 CFR part 20, who will offer a final season framework to Wisconsin on approximately August 1, 2012. The State of Wisconsin's season proposal will be based on the federal framework and local conditions. Wisconsin will also not be more restrictive than the federal bag limit framework except that we will propose one less hen mallard in the bag limit if the federal framework allows two or more, consistent with existing Wisconsin rules. This rule may relax the prohibition on hunting waterfowl in open water for holders of permits for hunters with disabilities and lift a sunset of special migratory bird hunting regulations at the Mead and Zeloski Marsh Wildlife Management Areas.
Statutory Authority for the Rule (Including the Statutory Citation and Language)
Estimate of the Amount of Time that State Employees will Spend to Develop the Rule and of Other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
Approximately 400 hours will be needed by the department prior to and following the hearings.
Description of all Entities that may be Impacted by the Rule
These rules will impact migratory game bird hunters and those who enjoy viewing waterfowl in Wisconsin.
Summary and Preliminary Comparison of any Existing or Proposed Federal Regulation that is Intended to Address the Activities to be Regulated by the Rule
Under international treaty and Federal law, migratory game bird seasons are closed unless opened annually through the USFWS regulations process. As part of the federal rule process, the service 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). Hunting opportunity increases as duck populations approach the goals in the NAWMP. Factors such as habitat are also considered.
Locally produced giant Canada geese are now a considerable portion of the harvest in states that also harvest Mississippi Valley Population geese that nest in Canada. The MFC has been testing the use of a standard season framework for 5 years, ending in 2011. Season lengths and bag limits for each MVP harvest state have remained unchanged. In 2012, the MFC will conduct an evaluation of harvest impacts of these stable regulations and establish a framework for future seasons. Following the 2012 review, changes to the Canada goose zones or hunting regulations may be proposed in Wisconsin.
Anticipated Economic Impact of the Rule
No economic impacts are anticipated. The hunting season frameworks proposed in this rule will be comparable to those in place during the previous season.
Contact Person
Scott Loomans, 101 S Webster St., Madison, WI 53707, (608)267-2452,
scott.loomans@wisonsin.gov or Kent Van Horn, Migratory Birds Specialist, 101 South Webster Street, PO Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707-7921, (608) 266-8841,
Kent.Vanhorn@wisconsin.gov.
Natural Resources
Environmental Protection — General, Chs.
NR 100—
This statement of scope was approved by the governor on February 15, 2012.
Rule No.
Revises Chapter
NR 115, Wis. Adm. Code WT-06-12
Relating to
Wisconsin's Shoreland Management Program.
Description of the Objective of the Rule
Modify the rule relating to the impervious surface limits, nonconforming structure provisions, vegetation standards and administrative procedures to reduce the administrative burden on counties.
Description of Existing Policies Relevant to the Rule and of New Policies Proposed to be Included in the Rule and an Analysis of Policy Alternatives; the History, Background and Justification for the Proposed Rule
Wisconsin's minimum shoreland zoning standards were originally codified as Ch.
NR 115, Wis. Adm. Code, in the 1960's, and had been revised very little until 2009. Rule revisions in 2009 addressed the changes in land use and development patterns from small, older family cottages to year-round homes and multi-unit complexes with sizes proportionate to the high value of the shoreline property. Since the 1960's, most counties have elected to create shoreland zoning ordinances that go beyond the minimum standards, but were looking for up-to-date statewide minimums to make these protective measures more consistent. Scientific research has show that easily-implementable up-to-date minimum standards are a critical tool for protecting Wisconsin lakes and streams.
Since the legislature approved the modifications to Ch.
NR 115 in 2009, counties have identified certain provisions in the revised rule that are unclear, difficult to implement or administratively burdensome. The current proposal is to clarify and modify certain sections of the code to address these concerns, so that counties can implement the state minimum shoreland standards efficiently and effectively.
Current policy under Ch.
NR 115.05 (1) (e) specifies that the impervious surface standards be applied to land within 300 feet of the ordinary high water mark and limits the amount of impervious surfaces on a property to a maximum of 30%. The new policies will simplify the application of impervious surfaces to only riparian lots or those lots that lie entirely within 300 feet of the ordinary high water mark. Further, the policy will provide additional options for properties that currently exceed 30% impervious surfaces on their lot or wish to exceed 30% in the future.
Second, the nonconforming structure standards under NR 115.05 (1) (g) limit the ability for structures to be laterally expanded within 75 feet of the ordinary high water mark, require the removal of nonconforming accessory structures when relocating or reconstructing a principal structure and specify that maintenance and repair of nonconforming structures may be allowed. The new policy would allow for some lateral expansion of structures within 75 feet, but more than 35 feet from the ordinary high water mark. The new policy will also remove the requirement that nonconforming accessory structures be removed when relocating or reconstructing a nonconforming principal structure, and will clarify the department's intent in allowing maintenance and repair of legal nonconforming structures.
Third, the current policy under NR 115.05 (4) requires the submittal of variances, special exceptions or conditional use permits, or appeals for map or text interpretation, and decisions to amend a map or text of an ordinance. While the policy will remain the same, current NR 115 contains two substantially similar requirements but is confusing because the language is conflicting. The new policy will be to remove one these statements to clarify the intent of the department.
Finally, the vegetative management standards under NR 115.05 (1) (c) (d), specifies that counties may allow the removal of exotic or invasive species, damaged or diseased vegetation or vegetation that creates an imminent safety hazard, as long as the property owner agrees to replace or replant vegetation as soon as practicable. The new policy will continue to allow the removal of these species, but will clarify that counties do not have to require a permit for the removal of these species or the replanting of new vegetation.
Statutory Authority for the Rule (Including the Statutory Citation and Language)
Section
59.692 (1m), Stats. requires counties to adopt zoning and subdivision regulations for the protection of shoreland areas to effect the purposes of section 281.31 and to promote public health, safety, and general welfare.
Section
281.31 (6), Stats. requires the department prepare and adopt general recommended standards and criteria for municipalities to protect navigable waters giving “particular attention to safe and healthful conditions for the enjoyment of aquatic recreation
…the capability of the water resources
…building setbacks from the water; preservation of shore growth and cover; shoreland layout for residential and commercial development; suggested regulations and suggestions for the effective administration and enforcement of such regulations."
Estimate of the Amount of Time that State Employees will Spend to Develop the Rule and of Other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
The department estimates that approximately 820 hours of existing staff time will be needed to complete the rule revision process. This time includes meeting with stakeholders, drafting rule language, completing an economic impact analysis, conducting statewide public hearings, collecting public input at those hearings, and providing information for the Natural Resources Board, and legislature. Little to no economic impact is expected from the proposed rule revisions; a Level 3 Economic Impact Analysis will be prepared.
Description of all Entities that may be Affected by the Rule
Groups likely to be impacted by these issues include a) property owners: b) zoning administrators and county officials: c) realtors: d) contractors, and others who provide land alteration services: and e) members of the public who recreate on or near navigable waters.
Summary and Preliminary Comparison with any Existing or Proposed Federal Regulation that is Intended to Address the Activities to be Regulated by the Rule
There are no existing or proposed federal regulations that address the issue of shoreland zoning.
Contact Person
Russ Rasmussen, Deputy Water Division Administrator (608) 267-7651.
