The Department has made a preliminary determination that this action does not involve significant adverse environmental effects and does not need an environmental analysis under ch.
NR 150, Wis. Adm. Code. However, based on the comments received, the Department may prepare an environmental analysis before proceeding with the proposal. This environmental review document would summarize the Department's consideration of the impacts of the proposal and reasonable alternatives.
Fiscal Estimate
Assumptions used in arriving at fiscal estimate
This proposed rule making will require a license issued under the authority of Ch.
169, Stats., Captive Wildlife, for the possession of mute swans, wolf-dog hybrids and feral or wild swine.
The process used by the department to collect fees, store licensing information, reports, and issue renewal notices is already established. The department anticipates that most individuals would apply for a Class B Captive Wild Animal Farm License (CWAFL). The fee for a CWAFL is $50 the first year and $25 for annual renewal. The higher cost during the first year is to compensate for site inspections that may be conducted by department staff during initial licensing.
Only people who possess feral or wild swine prior to the effective date of this rule and for the purpose of meat production may be licensed. It is anticipated that as few as two facilities may be eligible. Prior to January 1, 2003 the department had authority to require game farm or exhibiting licenses for people who possess mute swans. The maximum number of licensed facilities with mute swans was 8. Because of the limited number of these licenses to be issued and the department's ability to generate approximately $500 to recover the cost of inspections, no fiscal impact is anticipated by requiring licenses for these species.
The number of people who currently possess wolf-dog hybrids and will require a license under this rulemaking is difficult to estimate; however, it is possible that Wisconsin's numbers may be comparable to Michigan, which already requires similar licensing under its Wolf-Dog Cross Act and licensed a total of 29 individuals in 2007 to possess wolf-dog hybrids.
One-Time Costs/Revenues
It will take a wildlife manager approximately 2 hours to inspect a facility multiplied by the average value of salary and fringe of $32. Therefore, assuming that Wisconsin permitting activity will be comparable to Michigan, total one-time costs to permit new facilities will be $1,856 ($64 x 29 permittees) and total one-time revenues for new permittees will be $1,450 ($50 x 29 permittees). While department staff are learning how to permit these new facilities, it is possible that multiple site visits may be needed in an effort to work cooperatively with some permittees to ensure their facilities are compliant, which would result in higher costs. It is also possible that the number of permittees may be higher in Wisconsin than Michigan.
Ongoing Costs/Revenues
The effort required to license new facilities for these species will be greatest upon initial implementation. Therefore, in subsequent years, no significant costs are anticipated whereas ongoing revenues are estimated to be $725 ($25 annual renewal fee x 29 permittees).
State fiscal effect
Increase costs — that may be possible to absorb within the agency's budget.
Local government fiscal effect
None.
Fund sources affected
SEG.
Affected Ch.
20 appropriations
Agency Contact Person
Scott Loomans
101 South Webster St.
PO Box 7921
Madison, WI 53707-7921
(608) 267-2452
Notice of Hearings
Natural Resources
Fish, Game, etc., Chs.
NR 1—
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss.
29.014 and
227.11, Stats., the Department of Natural Resources will hold public hearings on revisions to Chapter
NR 10, Wis. Adm. Code relating to deer management unit population goals.
Hearing Information
The hearings will be held beginning at 7:00 p.m. on the following dates and locations:
August 13, Thursday
West Bend Public Agency Center, Room 1113 A and B,
333 E. Washington St., West Bend, 53095
August 18, Tuesday
Wausau Best Western Midway Hotel,
2901 Hummingbird Road, Wausau, 54401
August 18, Tuesday
Rhinelander's James Williams Middle School,
915 Acacia Lane, Rhinelander, 54501
August 19, Wednesday
La Crosse State Office Bldg., Basement Conference Rooms, 3550 Mormon Coulee Road, La Crosse, 54601
August 19, Wednesday
Northeast Wis. Technical College, Room CB 213 A and B, 2740 W. Mason Street, Green Bay, 54307
August 27, Thursday
Northern Great Lakes Visitor Center,
29270 County Highway G, Ashland, 54806
August 31, Monday
Dunn County Fish and Game Association Clubhouse,
1600 Pine Ave E., Menomonie, 54751
The hearing will be preceded by a public hearing on Board Order WM-21-07 relating to regulating feral or wild swine, wolf-dog hybrids and mute swans as captive wild animals. The hearing on WM-21-07 begins at 6:00 p.m. at the same location.
Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, reasonable accommodations, including the provision of informational material in an alternative format, will be provided for qualified individuals with disabilities upon request. Please call Scott Loomans at (608) 267-2452 with specific information on your request at least 10 days before the date of the scheduled hearing.
Copies of Proposed Rules and Submission of Written Comments
The proposed 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. Scott Loomans, Bureau of Wildlife Management, P.O. Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707. Comments may be submitted until August 31, 2009. 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. Loomans.
Analysis Prepared by Department of Natural Resources
Statutes interpreted
Statutory authority
Related statute or rule
Deer unit boundaries and goals are reviewed every 3 years according to s.
NR 10.104 (3), Wis. Adm. Code and Voigt case stipulations (Chippewa treaty rights).
Plain language rule analysis
There are currently 131 deer management units with individual overwinter populations goals and a statewide over winter population goal of approximately 737,000 deer. Over winter population goals and DMUs serve as the foundation for managing the deer herd and determining deer hunting season structures. All goals referred to in this rule are the over winter deer population goal for a DMU. The hunting season population will generally be substantially larger than the over winter population goal.
The Department is proposing raising deer population goals in 13 management units and lowering the goal in three.
These changes are recommended to provide hunters with more deer hunting opportunities in instances where goals are proposed for increases and to alleviate agricultural damage in the instances where the goals have been recommended for a decrease. The department does not anticipate significant ecological, agricultural or forestry impacts because of the proposed goal increases. However, there is a concern that a higher goal with low hunter densities will mean continuous herd control seasons.
Deer
Management Unit
|
Current Goal Density
|
Proposed Goal Density
|
3
|
16
|
15
|
6
|
12
|
15
|
14
|
14
|
18
|
49A
|
25
|
20
|
57
|
22
|
25
|
59B
|
15
|
20
|
59M
|
10
|
15
|
60A
|
20
|
25
|
60B
|
20
|
25
|
60M
|
10
|
15
|
64
|
20
|
25
|
64M
|
10
|
15
|
68B
|
30
|
25
|
77C
|
15
|
20
|
77M
|
10
|
15
|
80B
|
20
|
25
|
Comparison with federal regulations
Provided state rules and statutes do not relieve individuals from the restrictions, requirements and conditions of federal statutes and regulations. Regulation of hunting and trapping of native species has been delegated to state fish and wildlife agencies. Additionally, none of the proposed rules exceed the authorities granted the states in
50 CFR 10.
Comparison with rules in adjacent states
All of Wisconsin's neighboring states have established management units for the purpose of managing deer populations. By using units with identifiable boundaries, deer populations can be monitored and kept at various population levels to more effectively control the deer herd and to address regional differences in habitat, population (human and deer) and to reduce conflict with other land uses such as residential, agricultural or forested.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies
The Department has evaluated the need for deer population goal reviews based on the following criteria; 1) Carrying capacity as determined by unit population responses to habitat quality and historical records of winter severity, 2) Hunter success in harvesting and seeing deer and public deer viewing opportunities, 3) Ecological and economic impacts of deer browsing, 4) Disease transmission, 5) Concern for deer vehicle collisions, 6) Chippewa treaty harvest, 7) Hunter access to land in a deer management unit, 8) Ability to keep the deer herd in a deer management unit at goal, 9) Tolerable levels of deer damage to crops. In addition, an Environmental Assessment was prepared in 1995. Copies of Deer Population Goals and Harvest Management Environmental Assessment are available from the department upon request.
Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business
These rules, and the legislation which grants the department rule making authority, do not have a significant fiscal effect on the private sector or small businesses.
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.
Small Business Impact
Pursuant to s.
227.114, Stats., it is not anticipated that the proposed rules will have a significant economic impact on small businesses.
Environmental Impact
The Department has made a preliminary determination that this action does not involve significant adverse environmental effects and does not need an environmental analysis under ch.
NR 150, Wis. Adm. Code. However, based on the comments received, the Department may prepare an environmental analysis before proceeding with the proposal. This environmental review document would summarize the Department's consideration of the impacts of the proposal and reasonable alternatives.
Fiscal Estimate
Assumptions used in arriving at fiscal estimate
A potential fiscal impact of increasing deer population goals is an increase of agricultural damage and associated claims and abatement costs. Fiscal impacts are not anticipated as a result of this rulemaking, however, because the proposed increases are minor, five or fewer deer per square mile of deer range. Some units currently have deer populations which are actually higher than the proposed goals.
State fiscal effect
None.
Local government fiscal effect
None.
Long-range fiscal implications
None.
Agency Contact Information
Keith Warnke
101 S. Webster Street
PO Box 7921
