Scope Statements
Administration
This statement of scope was approved by the governor on March 15, 2013.
Rule No.
Relating to
Facility use.
Rule Type
Emergency and permanent.
Finding/Nature of Emergency (Emergency Rule Only)
The legislature has vested management authority over various state buildings and grounds, including those of the Wisconsin State Capitol, in the Department of Administration since 1979.
See Wis. Stats. s.
16.84 (1). Since 1979 the Department has permitted the use of these buildings and grounds for the free discussion of public questions and other purposes, so long as such uses did not interfere with the prime uses of these facilities, or otherwise infringe on interests of the state.
See Wis. Stats. s.
16.845; Wis. Admin. Code s.
Adm 2.04.
Beginning February 2011 groups of persons began to occupy the Wisconsin State Capitol building without permits. This included appropriating rooms and hallways in the Capitol building for purposes such as camping and storage of bulk supplies. To restore order to the building and to return the building to a point where the work of the Wisconsin State Legislature and the Supreme Court of Wisconsin could perform their constitutionally authorized functions without undue disruption, the Department expended funds in excess of $7,400,000 for law enforcement personnel. The continuous occupation of the State Capitol was formally terminated in March of 2011.
Groups of persons continue to occupy rooms in the Wisconsin State Capitol building without permits, including the Capitol rotunda. These groups constitute an exception to the norm.
The Wisconsin State Capitol Police (WSCP) issue more than 400 permits annually for the use of various state facilities. Permits are issued for a variety of purposes, whether political, non-political, charitable or commercial. Permits are issued regardless of political party, affiliation or content.
Occupation of the Capitol rotunda and other areas has caused disruptions to properly permitted events and normal governmental activities, including, but not limited to, a Red Cross blood drive, a high school science exhibit, school group tours, general public tours, and legislative committee meetings and sessions. The State does not refuse permits for the lawful and safe use of State facilities by any group or groups. Neither can the State allow any group to occupy the Capitol in disregard of the rights of permit holders, public employees or visitors. It is imperative that the Department continue to gain greater compliance from user groups in order to protect public safety and welfare.
Detailed Description of the Objective of the Proposed Rule
The objective of the proposed rule is to obtain greater compliance from user groups regarding facility use. This objective will be achieved by codifying historical Department practices and more clearly detailing certain provisions of the administrative code as informed by judicial interpretations.
This proposed rule-making may do the following:
A. Codify the WSCP's historical practice of issuing permits to any person requesting such permits, rather than restrict permit requests to only a limited class of governmental officials, non-profit organizations, and the like.
B. Codify limits on the discretion of the WSCP currently found in the Department publication entitled, “Wisconsin State Facilities Access Policy" (WSFAP).
C. Codify the ability of the Department to publish reasonable, content-neutral limitations on uses appropriate for individual facilities, as the primary uses of buildings and facilities may differ.
D. Adopt the historical interpretation of the WSCP, that persons may be cited for violations of Wis. Admin. Code s.
Adm 2.14 (2) for conduct occurring in rooms reserved for use by the Legislature.
E. Define terms such as “event" and “exhibit" and “room," or others as deemed appropriate to increase the clarity of the code.
F. Codify the ability of the Department to waive the requirement that events or exhibits may only occur when a permit has been applied for 72 hours in advance, under a narrow set of circumstances.
G. Further clarify the distinction between an exhibit and signs and the like which are incidental to events, as discussed by Dane County Circuit Court Judge Remmington.
H. Further clarify that a person who creates a hazardous condition and refuses to cease doing so may be cited for such conduct under Wis. Admin. Code s.
Adm 2.14 (2) (zd).
I. Further clarify that even common materials can pose a hazard when used or deployed in a hazardous manner.
J. Further clarify that materials deployed in a hazardous manner may be disposed of by WSCP.
K. Further clarify the appropriate interpretation of Wis. Admin. Code s.
Adm 2.14 (2) (v) by sub-dividing the text, as it was interpreted by Dane County Circuit Court Judge Genovese.
Description of the Existing Policies Relevant to the Rule, New Policies Proposed to be Included in the Rule, and an Analysis of Policy Alternatives
Policies relevant to the rule are existing policies as found in Wis. Stats. s.
16.84, s.
16.845, Wis. Admin. Code Ch.
Adm 2, and the historical interpretations of the law as found in WSFAP. Alternatives to codifying historical practice and further clarifying the existing administrative code include: a) terminating the use of the Wisconsin State Capitol as a designated public forum; b) restricting the manners of use of the designated public forum; or c) disposing of the permitting system in favor of a “voluntary permit system."
Terminating the use of the Wisconsin State Capitol building as a designated public forum is an alternative. The United States Capitol building and a substantial number of other state capitol buildings are not public forums. Employing this alternative is not desirable since the vast majority of users have demonstrated that they are capable of holding events or displaying exhibits without undue interference with the functions of the Legislature or the Department. Similarly, restricting the manner of use (e.g. prohibiting rallies and the like) in the Wisconsin State Capitol building is an alternative that is not recommended for the same reasons.
Allowing the free use of the Capitol building without need for a permit is not practicable. There is no known legal or factual precedent for this type of arrangement in any other state capitol buildings. More importantly, the potential for conflict between user groups is too high to make such an approach a realistic or practical alternative, as demonstrated by the issues cited in the finding of emergency.
Detailed Explanation of Statutory Authority for the Rule, Including the Statutory Citation and Language
The Department is the managing authority of numerous state properties, and is required to, “Have charge of, operate and maintain
… the state capitol building
… and such other state properties as are designated by law." Wis. Stats. s.
16.84 (1). “The department shall promulgate under ch.
227, and shall enforce or have enforced, rules of conduct for property leased or managed by the department." Wis. Stats. s.
16.846 (1). Additionally, “the managing authority of any facility owned by the state
… may permit its use for free discussion of public questions, or for civic, social or recreational activities." Wis. Stats. sec. 16.845 (1). Further, “Whoever does or attempts an act for which a permit is required under this section without first obtaining a permit may be fined
… or imprisoned
… or both."
Estimate of Amount of Time that State Employees Will Spend Developing the Rule and Other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
Excluding time spent reviewing existing rules, historical information, and other sources in the preparation of this scope statement, we estimate that completion of the Final Draft of this emergency rule will require an additional 24 hours of staff time.
List with Description of all Entities that may be Affected by the Proposed Rule
This proposed emergency rule will clarify and protect the rights of all of the hundreds of user groups who obtain permits to use State facilities each year, as well as the Legislature, Supreme Court, the Attorney General's Office, and the numerous citizens and school groups who visit or work in our State Capitol and other State facilities.
Summary and Preliminary Comparison with any Existing or Proposed Federal Regulation that Is Intended to Address the Activities to be Regulated by the Proposed Rule
Existing federal regulations allow no permitted activities inside the U.S. Capitol building. Existing federal regulations require permits of activities on the grounds of the U.S. Capitol whenever 25 or more persons are involved. Existing federal regulations concerning other facilities vary widely by the nature and location of the facility.
Anticipated Economic Impact of Implementing the Rule. Also, Please Note if the Rule Is Likely to Have an Economic Impact on Small Businesses
None.
Contact Person
Mike Huebsch.
Natural Resources
Fish, Game, etc., Chs.
NR 1—
This statement of scope was approved by the governor on March 13, 2013.
Rule No.
Relating to
Deer management, hunting, and implementation of the 2012 White-tailed Deer Trustee's Report.
Rule Type
Permanent.
Finding/Nature of Emergency (Emergency Rule Only)
These will be permanent rules.
A proposal contained in the 2013–15 state budget would direct the department to develop emergency rules allowing final implementation of provisions from the White-tailed Deer Trustee's Report as soon as the 2014 deer season. If that proposal is enacted, the department will prepare a scope statement for emergency rules that will be similar to this scope statement.
Detailed Description of the Objective of the Proposed Rule
There has been dissatisfaction with various issues related to white-tailed deer management and hunting in Wisconsin. Gubernatorial candidate Scott Walker made a promise to appoint a “Deer Trustee" to review programs. In October of 2011 Dr. James C. Kroll, officially known as Wisconsin's white-tailed deer trustee, entered into a contract with the State of Wisconsin to conduct an independent, objective and scientifically-based review of Wisconsin's deer management practices. The White-tailed Deer Trustee's report was released to the public in July, 2012.
The objective of these proposed rules is to work with sportsmen and sportswomen and other stakeholders in order to implement ideas and solutions from the Deer Trustee's report to forge a new age for deer management.
Description of the Existing Policies Relevant to the Rule, New Policies Proposed to be Included in the Rule, and an Analysis of Policy Alternatives
Implementation of the Deer Trustee's report will result in establishing significant new policies for deer management and hunting management compared to current rules. The primary policy alternatives being analyzed and considered are ones recommended in the report. Throughout this rulemaking process, the department and its partners may evaluate other policy alternatives as they are identified.
The full report is located on the Wisconsin Department of Administration's website at:
http://www.doa.state.wi.us/ section.asp?linkid=239&locid=0
Ch. NR 1 related to Natural Resources Board Policies
Ch.
NR 1 establishes a general framework for the department's wildlife and forestry management activities. The department is reviewing the report with this framework in mind and will recommend modifications that are consistent with the report. These rules are likely to shift away from deer population goals expressed in specific numbers of animals in favor of more general population goals. The basis for establishing deer population goals may also be modified by these rules. The department may revise what it considers to be tolerable levels of crop damage. The chapter currently addresses wildlife habitat management policy and those provisions may be strengthened or made more specific based on significant wildlife habitat related recommendations in the report. Development of a Young Forest Initiative Task Force may be addressed in this chapter as well as a Deer Management Assistance Program. Deer research priorities may also be a topic that is addressed in this policy-setting chapter. This chapter will be amended to maintain cross-reference citations with Ch.
NR 10.
Ch. NR 8 related to License and Permit Procedures
Ch.
NR 8 establishes standards and procedures for the automated license issuance system. These rules may recommend changes if they are necessary to improve efficiency or flexibility in the issuance of licenses, as needs arise during development of new automated licensing systems, and to maintain cross-reference citations.
Ch. NR 10 related to Game and Hunting
This chapter establishes most of the deer population management policy and practices and hunting regulations that are in place today. Ch.
NR 10 establishes the Sex-Age-Kill model for estimating deer populations, deer population goals, and deer management units. These rules will replace the current population goals with a simplified goal statement to, “increase, stabilize, or decrease population density." These rules will establish a set of metrics to monitor progress towards the goal. These rules will reduce the number of deer management units and may combine farmland regions. The department will consider using county boundaries in place of the current unit boundaries.
These rules will simplify the regulatory process by setting antlerless harvest goals, regulations, and antlerless permit quotas on a three-to-five year cycle instead of annually under current rule. Historical demand for antlerless permits has not been a factor considered in quota setting in the past but would be a consideration under these rules. Through these rules, the department may eliminate free antlerless deer tags, currently referred to as herd control tags. These rules may establish a fee for antlerless tags which allow harvest of deer in its CWD management zones. Currently, some units have an unlimited number of antlerless deer permits available per hunter but, under this proposal, that may no longer be the case. Finally, these rules may establish antlerless deer permits and allow the establishment of quotas for public lands that are different from the permits and quotas that are established for privately owned lands in a management unit.
Simplifying the regulatory process and implementing a new population management goal system may require a variety of related hunting regulations changes. Changes may include the names for permits and the allowable use of various deer permits. Back tags worn by hunters, deer carcass tags, and tagging requirements may be modified or eliminated where possible in order to simplify regulations or as opportunities arise during development of new automated licensing systems. Deer registration and transportation requirements may be relaxed and, in their stead, more customer-friendly harvest reporting procedures established. Black bear are another species for which in-person registration of harvested animals is required. These rules may modify bear harvest recording requirements if that is practical because deer and bear registration occur at the same locations and through the same process under current rules.
The department may recommend deer hunting season date modifications as a result of this rulemaking. While the report generally recommends that, “keeping seasons and bag limits consistent for longer periods of time would allow better assessment of management progress", it is challenging to discuss management system changes of this scale without considering season dates. For instance, it may be possible to simplify hunting regulations by eliminating a one-day closure of the archery season on the day before the traditional nine-day firearm season opens. The timing of other seasons for youth, disabled hunters, or other special seasons may also be evaluated. A move to more “passive" management of CWD, as recommended in the report, may also involve changes to deer hunting season dates.
This rulemaking will establish a Deer Management Assistance Program that will allow landowners and hunters to work together with the department to manage deer on a site-specific basis. The program will actively involve members of the public in the collection, analysis, and reporting of deer harvest information and improve management of the deer herd. The department may establish enrollment fees for participation in the program and that money will be credited back to implementation. This is a central recommendation of the report and recommends that the department establish: a) applicability to private and public lands, b) initial areas eligible to participate, c) administration of DMAP, d) funding, e) personnel and training, f) minimum property size to participate, g) fees, h) participation requirements, i) data collection requirements, j) registration of deer harvested on DMAP properties, k) data analysis and reporting, and l) assessment of DMAP effectiveness.
The department does not intend to modify regulations on the method of deer harvest at this time. However if an ACT of the legislature modifies a legal method of harvest while this rule package is being promulgated, and related rule changes are needed, this rule package would implement an ACT of the legislature. Notably, the department is aware that changes to the allowable uses of crossbows are being considered.
The trustee's report generally recommends a more passive approach than current department policy to the management of Chronic Wasting Disease. CWD-related rulemaking will be correspondingly limited in this proposal. However, regulation changes related to disease testing protocol, harvest permits and other hunting regulations may be identified and included if they are consistent with the report. The department establishes separate population goals for deer units that are in a CWD zone. Those goals and methods of population estimation will be modified or eliminated by these rules.
These rules may make other modifications to deer hunting regulations if they can be characterized as simplifications. These may include changes to the allowable hunting hours or allowable guns, ammunition, and other devices.
Chs. NR 11 and 15 related to Closed Areas and Game Refuges
Modifications to Chs.
NR 11 and
15 will likely be needed to update cross references with Ch.
NR 10 which will be modified significantly. The report did not recommend changes to these chapters of administrative code. Additional modifications to these chapters may be made if that assists with regulations simplification or improvement of hunting opportunities.
Ch. NR 12 related to Wildlife Damage and Nuisance Control
Modifications to Ch.
NR 12 will likely be needed to update cross references with Ch.
NR 10 which will be modified significantly. The report did not recommend significant structural changes to the damage program. Additional modifications to this chapter may be made if that assists with regulations simplification or improvement of hunting opportunities.
Ch. NR 13 related to Chippewa Treaty Rights Participants
Chapter
NR 13 is intended to regulate off-reservation treaty rights of treaty rights participants recognized by Lac Courte Oreilles Band v. Voigt,
700 F. 2d 341 (7th Cir. 1983). Modifications to Ch.
NR 13 will likely be needed to update numerous cross references with Ch.
NR 10 which will be modified significantly. The report did not recommend changes to this chapter of administrative code.
Ch. NR 19 related to Miscellaneous Fur, Fish, Game and Outdoor Recreation
Modifications to Ch.
NR 12 will likely be needed to update cross references with Ch.
NR 10 which will be modified significantly. This section also contains regulations for feeding of wild animals and white-tailed deer related provisions which are not directly related to the report. Additional modifications to the chapter may be made if that assists with regulations simplification or improvement of hunting opportunities.
Ch. NR 45 related to the Use of Department Properties
Modifications to Ch.
NR 45 will likely be needed to update cross references with Ch.
NR 10 which will be modified significantly. The report did not recommend specific changes to this chapter of administrative code. However, many regulations in this chapter apply to deer hunters who are using department managed lands. Additional modifications to this chapter may be made if that assists with regulations simplification or improvement of hunting opportunities.
Detailed Explanation of Statutory Authority for the Rule (Including the Statutory Citation and Language)
Department authority to conduct a variety of habitat and wildlife management activities is established in ss.
23.09 (2) (b),
(d), and
(h),
(k) and
(km), and
(p), Stats. These sections authorize rulemaking related to deer and deer habitat management and: plans and priorities for conservation, game refuges, cooperative forest protection, research, resources inventory, and disease control. These sections authorize many of existing provisions of Ch.
NR 1 (Natural Resources Board Policy), Ch.
NR 11 (closed areas), Ch.
NR 15 (game refuges), and Ch.
NR 45 (use of department properties).
The primary authority to establish hunting regulations for deer and other species is established in s.
29.014, Stats. This section directs the department to establish and maintain open and closed seasons, bag limits, size limits, rest days, and other conditions for the taking of game that conserves the game supply and provides citizens with good hunting opportunities. This section authorizes many of the existing provisions of Ch.
NR 8 (license and permit procedures), Ch.
NR 10 (game and hunting) and Ch.
NR 19 (Miscellaneous Fur, Fish, Game and Outdoor Recreation).
The wildlife damage and nuisance program and rulemaking authority are established in s.
29.889 (2) (b), Stats., which directs the department to establish rules for program eligibility and funding, methods of abating damage, forms and procedures, prorating claims, and record keeping, audits and inspections. This is the authorizing legislation for much of Ch.
NR 12 related to wildlife damage.
Rules related to Chippewa treaty rights (Ch.
NR 13) are promulgated under general authority to establish hunting regulations in s.
29.014, Stats. and these rules are the department's interpretation of how laws must be interpreted or limited in order to comply with the general limitations on state regulatory authority expressed in Lac Courte Oreilles v. State of Wisconsin,
668 F. Supp. 1233 (W.D. Wis. 1987) and the specific limitations expressed in the regulatory phase of the Voigt litigation. (See e.g., Lac Courte Oreilles v. State of Wisconsin,
707 F. Supp. 1034 (W.D. Wis. 1989).
Estimate of Amount of Time that State Employees Will Spend Developing the Rule and of Other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
The department estimates that rule and program development will require the equivalent of 5 full time staff people, or 10,400 hours. This estimate includes developing new deer management programs in addition to time spent specifically on rule promulgation.
List with Description of all Entities that may be Affected by the Proposed Rule
White-tailed deer affect nearly every Wisconsin resident in some way. Many of these effects are significant from a recreational, economic, and/or social perspective. A wide variety of groups and individuals will be interested in this proposed rule. Some groups include: Wisconsin Conservation Congress, Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission, Wis Farm Bureau Federation, WI Deer Hunters Assn., The Nature Conservancy, Whitetails Unlimited, WI Bowhunters Assn., WI County Forest Association, WI Woodland Owners Assn., Quality Deer Management Association, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, and the Sierra Club.
Groups registered to lobby the Wisconsin legislature within the last year, many registered specifically on these rules, include: WI Bear Hunter's Assoc., White-tails of WI, Safari Club International – WI Chapters, WI~Force, WI Wildlife Federation, National Rifle Assoc. of America, and the Assoc. of WI Snowmobile Clubs.
Summary and Preliminary Comparison with any Existing or Proposed Federal Regulation that is Intended to Address the Activities to be Regulated by the Proposed 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 Implementing the Rule (Note if the Rule is Likely to Have a Significant Economic Impact on Small Businesses)
The department estimates that the economic impact of these rules will be moderate and, pursuant to
2011 Executive Order 50, will facilitate a 30 day period for comment on a draft economic impact analysis. The comment period will be held in late summer, 2013.
These rules will significantly modify rules that establish the department's habitat and deer harvest management strategies. Examples of the types of changes that could be made include; increased emphasis of habitat management on private land, use of different methods of measuring and estimating deer populations, and new ways to define and achieve desired deer populations or population trends. These rules will result in moderate revisions to regulations that apply to individual deer hunters. Examples of the types of changes that could be made include; eliminating or creating new deer management units, simplified harvest registration procedures, different deer hunting regulations on private versus public lands, and different uses and changes in the availability of antlerless deer harvest permits.
Deer population, harvest, and habitat management affect many entities in this state. A broad description of affected industries includes agriculture, forestry, tourism, and retail. Governments may be impacted by these rules because many do have programs to manage nuisance deer locally. Many non-profit groups are focused on natural resource conservation, wildlife resources, or deer in particular, and may be affected by these rules.
The department anticipates there may be moderate effects on the financial health of industries, governments, and groups. The department anticipates there will be moderate effects of these regulations for individual hunters and landowners. The longer comment period will allow 30 days for affected industries, governments, and groups to prepare comments that will be useful for preparation of the final economic impact analysis.
Affected entities are likely to base their evaluations of economic impact on their opinions of whether-or-not the rules will result in deer population increases, stabilization, or decreases. For instance, agriculture and forest-products interests may benefit from low deer populations and resulting low levels of crop and tree damage. The tourism and retail industries may benefit from high deer populations that result in greater enthusiasm and participation in deer hunting. This rule package will be designed to balance competing interests with a different approach than current rules.
It may be important to note that the department is statutorily prohibited from managing deer populations with regulations that require a hunter to first harvest an antlerless deer before harvesting a buck. The department also lacks rulemaking authority for certain deer hunting season frameworks. These changes to the department's regulatory authority result from recently enacted statutes and they will not be considered as part of an economic analysis prepared for these rules. While deer may have significant positive or negative impacts to different entities, removal of these harvest regulations likely moderates the economic impact of this rule package.
The department anticipates that there will be no or very few implementation and compliance costs for the affected entities. These rules will not establish reporting or compliance requirements or other regulations for small business. A possible outcome of these rules is the elimination of deer registration stations at local businesses throughout the state. The department will summarize the value of registration fees paid by the department to businesses, and related impacts of this voluntary program, in the economic impact analysis.
This is not a complete estimate of economic impacts but, rather, a summary which indicates that these rules could have moderate economic effects and that a longer period to gather information from affected entities is warranted. The final economic analysis for these rules may include descriptions of specific impacts of deer and deer hunting in this state based on surveys and research done by the department, other state and federal agencies, and affected industries. However, even though significant research exists, the impact of wild deer on the environment and to people under various conditions cannot be anticipated with exact precision. The final analysis will also include significant narrative descriptions of anticipated economic impacts.
Contact Person
Natural Resources
Fish, Game, etc., Chs.
NR 1—
This statement of scope was approved by the governor on March 6, 2013.
Rule No.
Relating to
The 2013 Bureau of Wildlife Management housekeeping rule amending.
Rule Type
Permanent.
Finding/Nature of Emergency (Emergency Rule Only)
These will be permanent rules only.
Detailed Description of the Objective of the Proposed Rule
These rule changes are proposed to update administrative code language to correct inconsistencies, update outdated language, and provide clarification when appropriate. This rule package will amend regulations for hunting, deer carcass transportation, captive wildlife, possession of concealed handguns on DNR lands, and falconry found in Chs.
NR 10,
11,
12,
15,
16,
18, and
45.
Specifically, these rules would;
1.
Update administrative code language related to deer hunting seasons that are no longer in effect with the passage of 2011 ACT 50. This rule proposal makes changes of a housekeeping nature by striking rule language that is no longer in effect as a result of the ACT.
2.
Remove protective status for collared doves and monk parrots. Such protections could prevent management and control activities for these exotic species. [ss.
NR 10.04 and
12.05]
3.
Simplify the process for licensed waste haulers and deer pick-up contractors to remove deer carcasses from the CWD zone to transport them directly to a landfill. Current rules allow DNR to grant an exception to the rule for licensed waste haulers, but incorporating this language directly into administrative code would make the process easier. [s.
NR 10.105]
4.
Expand hunting opportunities for disabled waterfowl hunters by easing restrictions on concealment requirements. Boats that can carry a person in a wheelchair may not be able to meet the concealment requirements for waterfowl hunting. [s.
NR 10.12 (3)]
5.
Simplify the application process for conducting a Gun Deer Hunt for Hunters with Disabilities. Current application paperwork and procedures can cause undue hardship for hunt sponsors and a substantial amount of staff time is spent processing paperwork. [s.
NR 10.40]
6.
Update language pertaining to possession of concealed handguns on DNR lands to conform to state law. [chs.
NR 15 and
45].
7.
Relax fence standards for captive canines. Fence standards for canines could be more similar to captive bear fences rather than captive feline fences because canines are unlikely to climb fences. [ch.
NR 16]
8.
Update the falconry bag limit to include one hen pheasant. Under current rules, any hen pheasant killed by a falcon must be left to lie, even though the falcon does not differentiate between hen and rooster pheasants. [ch.
NR 18]
9.
Replace the word “Conibear" with the generic term “body gripping trap" to protect the Conibear
® trademark. [s.
NR 11.10]
11.
Simplify the regulations pertaining to entry into closed areas and waterfowl refuges to provide consistencies among properties. [chs.
NR 11 and
15]
12. The department may include other, minor, non-controversial rule proposals passed at the annual Spring Fish & Wildlife Hearings as advisory questions by the Conservation Congress.
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
All of the policies in this rule are generally consistent with past board policies of regulating fish and game harvest for conservation purposes.
Eurasian collared doves are currently a protected species in Wisconsin, and monk parrots are prohibited, but have become established in Chicago, and could naturally colonize in Wisconsin. These exotic species have a large reproductive output and an ability to adapt to a variety of habitats. Under current rules, Eurasian collared doves cannot be harvested, and permission from the DNR is necessary before destroying monk parrots or their nests. By classifying Eurasian collared doves as unprotected, and monk parrots as birds causing depredation, and thereby allowing their harvest by the public, the necessity of future management action for these two species could be reduced.
Under current rules, deer waste from the CWD management zone may only be disposed at a landfill within the CWD management zone unless permission to move the waste to a landfill outside of the CWD management zone is granted by the department. This change would allow private sector waste haulers to negotiate disposal contracts with landfills outside of the CWD management zone, which could allow private sector business more cost effective methods for disposing of deer waste.
Waterfowl hunters must be `concealed' in emergent vegetation as defined in NR 10.001(20) unless hunting one of the few lakes that allow open water hunting. Accessible boats may not be able to meet the concealment requirements because they may require deeper water to operate and it is therefore difficult to find emergent vegetation capable of meeting the definition of concealment. People with disabilities may also be physically unable to get into a smaller-sized boat that is capable of meeting the concealment requirement. This rule will make waterfowl hunting opportunities for people with disabilities more equitable.
The current application process for sponsoring a Gun Deer Hunt for People With Disabilities on private land is cumbersome. Streamlining the process will help to reduce costs associated with the application procedure for private sponsors as well as reduce the department's costs of administering the hunt.
State law (
2011 Acts 35 and
51) pertaining to the possession of concealed handguns and firearms transportation changed in 2011 and this proposal will update administrative code to reflect these changes.
Fence standards for captive wolf, wolf-dog hybrids, and coyote are currently the same as for cougar, bobcat, and lynx (i.e., 10 feet tall with an additional 4 feet at the top slanted in at a 30-45° angle). Canines are unlikely to climb fences, so this rule seeks to reduce fence standards for captive canines to reflect their likely behavior. The new fence standards that would be in place under this rule would be the same as current rules for captive bear (i.e., 8 feet tall with an additional 3 feet at the top slanted inward at a 30-45° angle).
Under current rules, a falconer whose raptor kills a hen pheasant must leave the dead pheasant where it lies. This rule change will allow falconers to harvest and legally possess a hen pheasant taken by falconry methods outside the regular pheasant hunting season and hen/rooster stocked public hunting grounds. This will reduce the waste of a game bird, and will also make Wisconsin's rules for falconry more similar to rules in surrounding state.
The holder of the Conibear® trademark contacted the WI Department of Justice requesting that the DNR remove the term “Conibear" from administrative code, and replace it with a more generic term, such as “body-gripping trap" to protect their trademark name. Additionally, this rule may slightly expand the allowable sizes of colony traps used for muskrats so that they can be more easily constructed with the materials that are commonly available at hardware stores.
In 2011, a new law changed the requirements associated with a Class B bear license; one of the changes was that youth under 16 no longer need a Class B bear license to perform the activities authorized by a Class B bear license. This rule will help to simplify the administrative code associated with Class B bear licenses, and bring the administrative code in line with state law.
A number of closed areas and refuges are established to protect migratory birds during the hunting season. These refuges provide safe resting areas for migrating waterfowl and a result is that birds may remain in an area for a longer period of time during the hunting season and provide hunting opportunities around the refuges. However, many of regulations for refuges are out-of-date. Modifications to refuge-related rules could include clarifying that entry to refuges is not allowed during a split in the duck hunting season. For the first time in 2012, to accommodate people who prefer to hunt late in the fall season, the duck season will be closed for five days in November in the north duck zone. The season will re-open after those five days and continue five days later into November than would otherwise be allowed under the federal framework. Some refuges could be open to the public during the five days when the waterfowl season is closed, potentially resulting in disturbances to waterfowl that will have a negative effect on hunting when the season reopens.
Detailed Explanation of Statutory Authority for the Rule (Including the Statutory Citation and Language)
The chapter on wild animals and plants, in s.
29.014, Stats., “rule making for this chapter", establishes that the department shall maintain open and closed seasons for fish and game and any limits, rest days, and conditions for taking fish and game. This grant of rule-making authority allows the department to make changes related to taking of unprotected species, movement of deer waste, concealment of waterfowl hunters, the administration of deer hunts, taking of hen pheasants by falconers, legal trap types, and waterfowl hunting hours and season dates.
The establishment of game refuges is authorized in s.
23.09 (2) (b), Stats., relating to the department's ability to designate locations reasonably necessary for the purpose of providing safe retreats in which birds may rest and replenish adjacent hunting grounds.
The establishment of rules for the housing of captive wildlife is authorized in s.
169.39 (3), Stats., which directs the department to promulgate rules pertaining to the specifications for enclosures.
State law (
2011 Acts 35 and
51) relating to the possession of concealed handguns and transporting firearms changed in 2011 and this proposal will update administrative code to reflect these changes.
Under 2011 ACT 50, the department is prohibited from establishing regular firearm deer seasons that occur earlier than the Saturday before the Thanksgiving holiday. This rule proposal makes changes of a housekeeping nature by striking rule language that is no longer in effect as a result of the ACT.
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.
List with Description of all Entities that may be Impacted by the Rule
Hunters, trappers, recreational users of DNR lands, and holders of captive wildlife permits are the principal groups that will be affected by this rulemaking. Any impacts will be very minor and no controversy is anticipated.
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 Implementing the Rule (Note if the Rule is Likely to Have a Significant Economic Impact on Small Businesses)
These rules, and the legislation which grants the department rule making authority, will have no effect on the private sector or small businesses. These rules are applicable to individual sportspersons and impose no compliance or reporting requirements for small business.
This scope statement includes a proposal that would simplify the process by which private sector waste haulers are able to dispose of deer waste from the CWD Management Zone. This proposal is expected to reduce costs for private business because they will be able to find local, cost effective methods for disposal rather than transporting waste to one of the two landfills within the CWD management zone which accept deer waste. The department currently has authority to make exceptions on a case-by-case basis and has granted exemptions, so actual economic benefits will be minor.
The proposal to relax fence standards would replace more restrictive fence standards that are set to go into effect on January 1, 2014. By superseding the more restrictive fence standards, permit holders will not be required to upgrade existing fences to a higher standard. However, the number of people who possess captive canines such as wolf-dog hybrids is fewer than two dozen and no statewide economic impacts are expected. The captive breeding of wolf-dog hybrids is prohibited in Wisconsin so there should be no impact on wolf-dog hybrid breeders.
Other proposed rule changes are not expected to significantly influence the spending activities or hunting and trapping activity of hunters, trappers, dog trainers, or other outdoor enthusiasts. Correspondingly, no related economic impacts are anticipated.
Contact Person
Natural Resources
Fish, Game, etc., Chs.
NR 1—
This statement of scope was approved by the governor on March 6, 2013.
Rule No.
Relating to
Wildlife rehabilitation.
Rule Type
Permanent.
Finding/Nature of Emergency (Emergency Rule Only)
These will be permanent rules only.
Detailed Description of the Objective of the Proposed Rule
This subchapter was adopted in 2004 to establish consistent standards for the rehabilitation of wildlife, ensure that all persons engaged in wildlife rehabilitation are qualified, and to ensure that rehabilitators provide humane care and housing for wildlife being rehabilitated. These Proposed revisions will clarify existing rules and establish new requirements on people licensed to rehabilitate wild animals based on what the department has learned after nearly ten years of experience administering the subchapter.
Description of the Existing policies Relevant to the Rule, New Policies Proposed to be Included in the Rule, and an Analysis of Policy Alternatives
Wildlife rehabilitation is the act of providing temporary care for injured, sick or orphaned wildlife with the goal of releasing them back into the wild. Animals released back into the wild must have the ability to recognize and find appropriate foods, socialize with members of their own species and exhibit normal behaviors such as fear of humans and predator avoidance.
This proposal will investigate clarifying the roles of care providers who assist with the rehabilitation of wildlife under the authority of the basic and/or advanced licensee's license. The goal is to increase the amount of supervision of assistants who are not licensed and a resulting increase in the quality of animal care. This may be accomplished by creating definitions for the terms, “volunteer", “subpermittee", “intern", or “care-provider". The proposal will establish a clear prohibition of rehabilitation by volunteers working under a license holder's authority with specific exemptions.
The addition of care providers (which includes interns) will allow both basic and advanced licensees to have individuals assist with basic wildlife rehabilitation activities. By allowing care providers, licensees can have qualified individuals assist with rehabilitation care in case of emergencies, busy times of the year, or when the licensee is not available. Complete authority and responsibility will remain with the licensee and all care providers can only assist with rehabilitation activities at the licensee's facility.
The addition of subpermittees allow advanced licensees the ability to have qualified individuals assisting with rehabilitation activities either on-site or off-site of the licensee's facility. As part of the proposed rule change, subpermittees will be subject to the same restrictions as basic licensees. These restrictions involve the types of animals that can be rehabilitated (those that are dangerous or difficult to handle), as well as euthanasia requirements.
These rules will establish requirements for basic and advanced licensees to add new species to their license authority.
These rules will require wildlife rehabilitation license applicants to indicate prior experience in wildlife rehabilitation and/or animal care, certify that they have read and understand a code of ethics for wildlife rehabilitators, and provide documentation of compliance with local ordinances.
These rules will establish continuing education requirements which must be met before renewing basic or advanced licenses, and will add that taking and passing an exam is required to apply for an advanced license.
This proposal will incorporate by reference the Minimum Standards for Wildlife Rehabilitation (or equivalent enclosures) for the size and construction of enclosures used to contain wild animals established by the National Wildlife Rehabilitation Association and the International Wildlife Rehabilitation Council. Additionally, applicants for wildlife rehabilitation licenses will need to provide a complete caging/enclosure report with pictures of their enclosures when their rehabilitation license applications are submitted.
This proposal will establish who can perform euthanasia on wild animals. Euthanasia may be performed by the advanced licensee, a basic licensee under the direct supervision of the sponsoring advanced licensee or their consulting veterinarian. The proposal also states that a licensed veterinarian who is not consulting a licensee can perform euthanasia.
This proposal will establish that, for purposes of responding to an oil spill or other disaster, a person licensed to rehabilitate wildlife in another state may temporarily assist with rehabilitation in this state.
This proposal will establish requirements for wildlife rehabilitation license applicants from other states and provinces who are requesting either a basic or advanced wildlife rehabilitation license.
The proposal prohibits by rule the rehabilitation of skunks because of threats to public and animal health of rabies in that species. Under the proposal, the rehabilitation of deer is also prohibited by rule in areas where CWD has been identified.
Current statutes and rule require rehabilitators to keep records of animals received, the condition of the animals and the disposition of each animal. For certain species, quarterly reporting to the department is required. Through this proposal, the department may modify reporting requirements.
Wildlife rehabilitation experience is required of an advanced license holder who wishes to sponsor basic license holders. This proposal requires that the advanced license holder be able to document or otherwise prove to the department that they have experience rehabilitating the species being considered and be approved by the department and the existing wildlife rehabilitation advisory committee. Potential sponsors will be reviewed by the Wildlife Rehabilitation Advisory Committee.
The proposal may expand the role of the existing Wildlife Rehabilitation Advisory Committee. The committee would continue to be focused on issues related to the wildlife rehabilitation but might also advise the department on other issues related to privately held captive wild animals.
This proposal will update cross-references and correct other errors that may be discovered during rule drafting.
This proposal may make other non-controversial updates that are identified during the rule drafting and review process.
Detailed Explanation of Statutory Authority for the Rule (Including the Statutory Citation and Language)
The department's authority to authorize and regulate the rehabilitation of wild animals is established in s.
169.24, Stats. The department is directed by s.
169.24 (2), Stats., to, “promulgate rules to establish the qualifications required to obtain a rehabilitation license, the types of activities authorized by a rehabilitation license and the standards, limitations, and requirements for rehabilitation licenses."
Estimate of Amount of Time that State Employees Will Spend Developing the Rule and of Other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
200 hours will be necessary to develop these rules.
List with Description of all Entities that may be Affected by the Proposed Rule
Holders of licenses to rehabilitate injured wild animals and their subpermittees, care providers, and volunteers are the primary people who will be impacted by these rules. Wildlife rehabilitation is typically performed by non-profit organizations or individuals and volunteers who are not reimbursed by government funding or by fees paid for services.
Summary and Preliminary Comparison with any Existing or Proposed Federal Regulation that Is Intended to Address the Activities to be Regulated by the Proposed 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. Under international treaty and Federal law, the possession of migratory birds is also regulated by the United States Fish & Wildlife Service. Additionally, federal regulations do apply to bald eagles and federally listed endangered or threatened species. None of these rule changes violate or conflict with the provisions established in the Federal Code of Regulations.
Anticipated Economic impact of Implementing the Rule (Note if the Rule is Likely to Have a Significant Economic Impact on Small Businesses)
Wildlife rehabilitation is typically performed by non-profit organizations or individuals who are not reimbursed by government funding or by fees paid for services. These rules, and the legislation which grants the department rule making authority, will have no economic effect on small businesses. These rules are applicable to wildlife rehabilitators and impose no compliance or reporting requirements for small business, nor are any design or operational standards contained in the rule.
Contact Person
Natural Resources
Fish, Game, etc., Chs.
NR 1—
This statement of scope was approved by the governor on March 6, 2013.
Rule No.
Relating to
Migratory bird hunting regulations.
Rule Type
Permanent.
Finding/Nature of Emergency (Emergency Rule Only)
These will be permanent rules.
Detailed Description of the Objective of the Proposed Rule
This proposal will establish a general framework of season dates, bag limits, and conditions for taking migratory game birds by hunting or falconry. Primary objectives of the rule will be to reduce the amount of migratory bird-related emergency rule making that is needed each year, to simplify regulations, codify provisions already in effect by emergency rule, and repeal a sunset provision.
Description of the Existing policies Relevant to the Rule, New Policies Proposed to be Included in the Rule, and an Analysis of Policy Alternatives
In the past, the department has annually promulgated emergency and permanent rules establishing the same year's migratory bird hunting regulations. The emergency rule is necessary because migratory game bird hunting is regulated by the United States Fish & Wildlife Service which offers a final season framework to Wisconsin on approximately August 1 each year. This timeframe does not allow for promulgation of a permanent rule prior to the hunting season. As part of the federal regulation of migratory game bird hunting, groups of states are organized into councils by migratory flyways to work together on the management and regulation of migratory game birds. Wisconsin is part of the Mississippi Flyway Council (MFC) which consists of 14 states and 3 Canadian provinces and state rules are subject to flyway council management plans and agreements. The department has promulgated permanent rules in the past so that information related to zones, tagging requirements for geese, and other regulations remain current. However, season dates and bag limits established in the Wis. Admin. Code reflect the previous year's season framework and are not useful, current information.
Through this rulemaking process, the department will evaluate ways to establish more general descriptions of the migratory bird hunting season in Wis. Admin. Code. For example, new rule language might start the duck season on the “last Saturday in September" instead of a specific date. Emergency rulemaking will still be required of the department as the federal frameworks are established each year, but a result would be less rulemaking overall.
Through this rulemaking process, the department will investigate what authority it has or which can be established to modify season dates or bag limits through an order of the department secretary instead of by rule. The ability to modify regulations, specifically when necessary to remain in compliance with the federal season framework, could reduce the amount of emergency rulemaking that is needed. A rule of this nature could establish sideboards requiring the department to take full advantage of the federal framework.
The department will also recommend ways to simplify Canada goose hunting regulations. Current rules require tagging geese that are harvested in the Horicon Zone but a simpler process of recording harvest may be possible. Additionally, the department will consider eliminating the permit application deadline for Horicon zone hunters and simply issue harvest permits while recognizing the flyway management and federal protections against overharvest of the Mississippi Valley Population. The department will also consider reducing the size of the Horicon zone which would result in expanded hunting opportunities in areas no longer in that zone.
The department will consider other simplifications to migratory bird hunting regulations that may be identified during this rulemaking process.
Through this rulemaking, the department may suggest revisions to the existing prohibition and exceptions for open-water hunting. Most waterfowl hunters are required to be partially or entirely concealed in emergent vegetation while hunting from a boat, blind or similar device on state water. This requirement preserves open water areas as safe resting areas for migrating waterfowl. By emergency rule, the department has established an exception for disabled permit holders and their assistants. This would establish the same exception by permanent rule in Wis. Admin. Code. Additional revisions of a housekeeping nature could be made. The department will consider other suggested ways to modify the provision, including advisory resolutions offered by the Wisconsin Conservation Congress.
This proposal would eliminate the sunset of 1:00 p.m. closure of migratory bird hunting at two wildlife management areas - Lake Mills Wildlife Area, Jefferson County, and Mead Wildlife Management Area, Wood, Marathon, and Portage Counties. Similar regulations in other states have been shown to provide good hunting across an entire property rather than just near refuges and hold ducks in an area for a longer period of time. This regulation sunsets after 3 years but there continues to be public support so the rule would be reauthorized under this proposal. At Lake Mills, mourning dove hunting hours also close at 1:00 p.m. The department may ask hunters if they would like this or similar opportunities at additional properties which are managed for mourning dove hunting.
These rules may modify the regulations of people who practice falconry for pursuing migratory game birds if necessary changes are identified during the rulemaking process.
The department may include other, minor, non-controversial rule proposals passed at the annual Spring Fish & Wildlife Hearings as advisory questions by the Conservation Congress.
Detailed Explanation of Statutory Authority for the Rule (Including the Statutory Citation and Language)
The chapter on wild animals and plants, in s.
29.014, Stats., “rule making for this chapter", establishes that the department shall maintain open and closed seasons for fish and game and any limits, rest days, and conditions for taking fish and game. This grant of rule-making authority allows the department to promulgate rules related to migratory game bird hunting.
Special regulations on the taking of certain wild animals are authorized under s.
29.192, Stats., including specific language that authorizes rules related to Canada goose hunting.
The establishment of migratory game bird refuges is authorized in s.
23.09 (2) (b), Stats., relating to the department's ability to designate locations reasonably necessary for the purpose of providing safe retreats in which birds may rest and replenish adjacent hunting grounds.
Wisconsin's boundary waters with other states are popular waterfowl hunting locations. Specific authority to regulate hunting in and on all interstate boundary waters and outlying waters is established in s.
29.041, Stats.
Sections
23.11 and
29.014, Stats., allow for the protection of natural resources, establish general department powers on lands it manages including migratory bird refuges, and authority to establish hunting and trapping regulations on department managed lands.
Estimate of Amount of Time that State Employees Will Spend Developing 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.
List with Description of all Entities that may be Affected by the Proposed Rule
These rules will impact migratory game bird hunters, primarily those pursuing ducks and geese.
Summary and Preliminary Comparison with any Existing or Proposed Federal Regulation that Is Intended to Address the Activities to be Regulated by the Proposed Rule
Migratory game bird hunting is regulated by the United States Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS), in
50 CFR part 20. 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 annually evaluates migratory game bird populations and breeding habitat in cooperation with state provincial agencies and the Canadian Wildlife Service. After considering recommendations from the flyway councils of states and the guidance of cooperatively developed harvest strategies, the USFWS establishes annual frameworks within flyway or bird populations regions. States can then establish hunting seasons within the sideboards for each species and region. As a result, the hunting seasons of neighboring states are similar to Wisconsin migratory game bird hunting regulations because they are subject to the same federal frameworks.
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 Northern Ontario. The Mississippi Flyway Council has tested the use of a standard season framework for 5 years, ending in 2011. Season lengths and bag limits for each MVP harvest state remained unchanged. In 2012, the MFC conducted an evaluation of harvest impacts of these stable regulations and established a framework for future seasons. It was agreed within the MFC that states harvesting MVP Canada geese could take small steps toward liberalization while impacts are cooperatively monitored.
Anticipated Economic impact of Implementing the Rule (Note if the Rule is Likely to Have a Significant Economic Impact on Small Businesses)
No economic impacts are anticipated. The hunting season frameworks proposed in this rule will be comparable to those in place during the previous season. These rules are applicable to individual hunters and impose no compliance or reporting requirements for small business, nor are any design or operational standards contained in the rule.
Contact Person
Safety and Professional Services — Examining Board of Architects, Landscape Architects, Professional Engineers, Designers, and Land Surveyors
This statement of scope was approved by the governor on March 6, 2013.
Rule No.
Relating to
Continuing Education (CE).
Rule Type
Permanent.
Finding/Nature of Emergency (Emergency Rule Only)
NA.
Detailed Description of the Objective of the Proposed Rule
The objective of this proposed rule-making is to clarify various provisions of ch.
A-E 13, Wis. Admin. Code, which sets forth minimum standards for continuing education for professional engineers and to resolve inconsistencies between the rules in that chapter. In particular, this proposal is intended to revise the rules so that newly registered comity applicants are treated consistently with newly registered Wisconsin engineers with respect to continuing education. This proposal may include amendments to other A-E Code chapters as necessary based on the changes to ch.
A-E 13.
It is also intended to clarify the rules for a person who has retired from the profession and is seeking a waiver from the continuing education requirements. It will revise the rules to state retirees may not perform or provide professional engineering services nor receive remuneration to be eligible for the waiver.
Description of the Existing Policies Relevant to the Rule, New Policies Proposed to be Included in the Rule, and an Analysis of Policy Alternatives
Policies relevant to ch.
A-E 13, Wis. Admin. Code: All registered professional engineers, like any other professional, should adhere to minimum standards of practice, where such standards have been promulgated by engineer-practitioners knowledgeable in both the practice and its governing law. Minimum professional standards must be easily understood by practitioners. They must also be consistent with each other, the statutes, and other related law; and should reflect current practices of the profession. These policies remain in effect. No new alternative policies are involved, making an analysis of policy alternatives unnecessary.
Detailed Explanation of Statutory Authority for the Rule (Including the Statutory Citation and Language)
Examining Boards are generally empowered by the legislature pursuant to ss.
15.08 (5) (b) and
227.11, Stats., to promulgate rules that govern their profession. The Examining Board of Architects, Landscape Architects, Professional Engineers, Designers and Land Surveyors (Board)are specifically authorized by s.
443.015, Stats., to establish rules governing continuing education requirements. Therefore the Board is authorized generally and specifically to promulgate the proposed rules. See sections
15.08 (5) (b),
227.11 (2) (a), and
443.015 (2), Stats.
Estimate of Amount of Time that State Employees will Spend Developing the Rule and of Other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
100 hours
List with Description of all Entities that may be Affected by the Proposed rule
Registered professional engineers and individuals and entities using their services.
Summary and Preliminary Comparison with any Existing or Proposed Federal Regulation that Is Intended to Address the Activities to be Regulated by the Proposed Rule
No federal laws regulate the practice of professional engineering as it relates to the activities regulated by the rules proposed herein.
Anticipated Economic Impact of Implementing the Rule (Note if the Rule is Likely to Have a Significant Economic Impact on Small Businesses)
None.
Contact Person
Shawn Leatherwood, (608) 261-4438,
Shancethea.Leatherwood@Wisconsin.gov.
Safety and Professional Services
Professional Services, Chs.
SPS 1—299
This statement of scope was approved by the governor on March 6, 2013.
Rule No.
Relating to
Hearings, injunctions, and warnings.
Rule Type
Permanent.
Finding/Nature of Emergency (Emergency Rule Only)
NA.
Detailed Description of the Objective of the Proposed Rule
The objective of the proposed rule is to address an outdated process and fix typographical errors.
Description of the Existing Policies Relevant to the Rule, New Policies Proposed to be Included in the Rule, and an Analysis of Policy Alternatives
Sections
SPS 1.08 (2) and
2.10 (1) currently provide for the designation of the presiding officer to be employed by the Department unless the credentialing authority designates otherwise. These sections also indicate the administrative law judge shall be an attorney in the department designated by department general counsel, an employee borrowed from another agency or a person employed as a special project or limited term employee. The Department of Safety and Professional Services no longer has designated administrative law judges within the Department and contracts with Department of Administration, Division of Hearing and Appeals to preside over hearings. The proposed policy is to have the presiding officer of Class 1 and Class 2 hearings be an administrative law judge employed by the Department of Administration.
Detailed Explanation of Statutory Authority for the Rule (Including the Statutory Citation and Language)
Section
440.03(1), Wis. Stats. The department may promulgate rules defining uniform procedures to be used by the department, the real estate appraisers board, and all examining boards and affiliated credentialing boards, attached to the department or an examining board, for receiving, filing and investigating complaints, for commencing disciplinary proceedings and for conducting hearings.
Section
440.205, Wis. Stats. The department shall promulgate rules establishing uniform procedures for the issuance and use of administrative warnings.
Estimate of Amount of Time that State Employees Will Spend Developing the Rule and of Other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
20 hours
List with Description of all Entities that may be Affected by the Proposed Rule
Credential holders.
Summary and Preliminary Comparison with any Existing or proposed Federal Regulation that Is Intended to Address the Activities to be Regulated by the Proposed Rule
None.
Anticipated Economic Impact of Implementing the Rule (Note if the Rule is Likely to Have a Significant Economic Impact on Small Businesses)
None.
Contact Person
Sharon Henes, (608) 261-2377.
Safety and Professional Services
Professional Services, Chs.
SPS 1—299
This statement of scope was approved by the governor on February 18, 2013.
Rule No.
Relating to
Mixed martial arts, amateur boxing, and professional boxing.
Rule Type
Permanent.
Finding/Nature of Emergency (Emergency Rule Only)
Not applicable.
Detailed Description of the Objective of the Proposed Rule
The objective of the proposed rule changes is to clarify inconsistencies, delete any unnecessary requirements, add any missing requirements, and improve various administrative elements — primarily for mixed martial arts fighting contests — and to repeal all the rules for amateur boxing. However, some of the improvements that the Department expects to develop for mixed martial arts may be similarly helpful for the Department's requirements for professional boxing. In addition, these rule changes may include combining the current requirements for mixed martial arts fighting contests and for professional boxing contests into fewer and simpler chapters than are currently used. Consequently, the objectives of this rulemaking may be incorporated into more than one rulemaking project.
Description of the Existing Policies Relevant to the Rule, New Policies Proposed to be Included in the Rule, and an Analysis of Policy Alternatives
The existing policies for mixed martial arts fighting contests, and the corresponding rules in chapters SPS 192 to 196, have been in place only since April 2011 – and were developed and implemented very quickly in response to requirements and corresponding deadlines in
2009 Wisconsin Act 111. Although the rules in these chapters established a workable initial framework for this new program, experience in the program since its onset has identified several inconsistencies and unnecessary requirements in these rules, several missing requirements, and several potential improvements for the administrative elements, which should be helpful to the various stakeholders.
The existing rules for amateur boxing, in chapters SPS 100 to 105, have been irrelevant since enactment of
2003 Wisconsin Act 285, which (1) reduced the Department's role in boxing to addressing only professional boxing and (2) required amateur boxing contests to instead be sanctioned by and conducted under the rules of the national governing body for amateur boxing that is recognized by the U.S. Olympic Committee under
36 USC 220521.
Detailed Explanation of Statutory Authority for the Rule (Including the Statutory Citation and Language)
Section
227.11 (2) (a) of the Statutes authorizes the Department to “promulgate rules interpreting the provisions of any statute enforced or administered" by the Department.
Section
440.03 (1) authorizes the Department to “promulgate rules defining uniform rules to be used by the department . . . for receiving, filing and investigating complaints, for commencing disciplinary proceedings and for conducting hearings."
Section
440.03 (7m) authorizes the Department to “promulgate rules that establish procedures for submitting an application for a credential or credential renewal by electronic transmission."
Section
444.02 (2) authorizes the Department to “issue, and for cause limit, suspend, or revoke, a license to conduct professional contests or amateur mixed martial arts fighting contests to any promoter or incorporated club formed as provided in [the] chapter" and to “reprimand a promoter or club for violating this chapter or any rule of the department."
Under section 444.035, the Department must “by rule require a promoter or club conducting a professional contest or amateur mixed martial arts fighting contest to post a bond or other surety in a reasonable amount determined by the department to ensure payment of the promoter's or club's expenses in conducting the contest, including payments to contestants and to the department."
Section
444.04 authorizes the Department to “limit, suspend, revoke, or assess a forfeiture to the promoter or club" for failure to furnish an accurate written report to the Department after a fighting contest, showing the number of tickets sold, the amount of the gross proceeds, and all other information the Department requires by rule to be included in the report.
Section
444.06 requires the Department to “appoint official inspectors" for mixed martial arts fighting contests and states that “at least one inspector shall be present at all professional contests and all amateur mixed martial arts fighting contests and see that the rules are strictly observed," and authorizes the Department to require a promoter or club to pay for inspectors.
Section
444.095 (3) requires the Department to “promulgate rules that establish all of the following with respect to mixed martial arts fighting contests: (a) Qualifications and fees for licensure of referees and judges for mixed martial arts fighting contests. (b) Requirements for regular health examinations of mixed martial arts fighting contestants, including all of the following: 1. Annual physical examinations by physicians and annual eye examinations by physicians who are board-certified ophthalmologists. 2. Annual screening for HIV, hepatitis B, and hepatitis C. 3. For female contestants, pregnancy tests before contests. (c) Policies prohibiting contestants from using drugs, including anabolic steroids, and mandating drug testing of contestants."
Section
444.095 (4) requires conducting mixed martial arts fighting contests “under the Association of Boxing Commissions' uniform rules of mixed martial arts," and the Department consequently includes these rules in chapter SPS 195.
Section
444.11 authorizes the Department to “grant licenses . . . to matchmakers, managers, referees . . . mixed martial arts fighters, seconds, and trainers in professional contests and amateur mixed martial arts fighting contests."
Section
444.19 authorizes the Department to "by rule adjust the fees under [the] chapter to account for changes in the department's costs in administering and enforcing [the] chapter."
Estimate of Amount of Time that State Employees Will Spend Developing the Rule and of Other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
The Department estimates approximately 400 hours will be needed to perform the review and develop the needed rule changes. This time includes meeting with stakeholders, drafting the rule changes and processing the changes through public hearings, legislative review, and adoption. The Department will assign existing staff to perform the review and develop the rule changes, and no other resources will be needed.
List with Description of all Entities that may be Affected by the Proposed Rule
Entities engaged in promoting and conducting mixed martial arts contests, such as promoters, clubs, matchmakers, contestants, judges, referees, ringside physicians, seconds, inspectors and timekeepers.
Summary and Preliminary Comparison with any Existing or proposed Federal Regulation that Is Intended to Address the Activities to be Regulated by the Proposed Rule
Chapter
89 of Title 15 of the United States Code regulates the safety of professional boxing. Under the definition of “mixed martial arts" in chapter SPS 192 and the definition of “mixed martial arts fighting" in chapter 444 of the Statutes, techniques from boxing are allowed in mixed martial arts fighting – including “striking an opponent's head with the intent to cause unconsciousness or inflict damage." Consequently, some of the requirements in
15 USC chapter 89 may bear at least indirectly on the mixed martial arts fighting that is addressed by chapters SPS 192 to 196, such as the requirement in
15 USC 6305 for contestants to register with a state boxing commission and obtain a nationwide personal identification number from an entity certified by the Association of Boxing Commissions. This rule project may include codifying the Department's current requirement that mixed martial arts contestants obtain a nationwide mixed martial arts personal identification number prior to participating in a fighting contest.
Anticipated Economic Impact of Implementing the Rule (Note if the Rule is Likely to Have a Significant Economic Impact on Small Businesses)
None to minimal.
Contact Person
Sam Rockweiler, at P.O. Box 8935, Madison, WI 53708-8935; or at
sam.rockweiler@wi.gov; or at telephone (608) 266-0797 or Contact Through Relay.
