5 Plain Language Analysis:
Section1 clarifies that properties that touch at the corners are considered contiguous for the purposes of wildlife damage and abatement.
Section 2 creates a definition for what is considered an active bird nest to be consistent with the migratory bird treaty act.
Sections 3 AND 4 changes the definition of a lessee so that it better aligns with statutory language.
Sections 5- 7 amends definitions, clarifies hunter age and safety requirements for participating in animal removal permits. It also gives the department discretion to issue CWD permits on properties smaller than 5 acres and adds to the list of wildlife species which need department approval to be live trapped and relocated. It also deletes repeated language and creates consistency with the language in the migratory bird treaty act.
Section 8 clarifies that a DNR permit is not needed to remove mink causing damage or nuisance.
Section 9 makes a variety of housekeeping changes and clarifies when wild birds may be harassed or disturbed to relieve nuisance or damage in urban areas or golf courses.
Section 10 eliminates the live capture and relocation of Canada geese.
Section 11 clarifies that public hunting access is only required during an open hunting season for the species causing damage. It also deletes redundant language and updates references to federal rules, clarifies the application deadline for shooting deer causing damage, and updates the list that an enrollee may not consider reasonable cause for refusing hunter access.
Section 12 eliminates department assistance on animal removal permits. The department hasn’t assisted with animal removal permits in decades and doesn’t have the capacity provide assistance.
Section 13 updates terminology and clarifies a valid harvest authorization is needed anywhere shooting permit activities are taking place. It also allows for the suspension of permits if the conditions are violated. It also amends the definition of “minimum hunter effort,” amends the effective date of deer shooting permits and clarifies deer carcass disposition.
Section 14 eliminates a section of code that previously only applied to the Horicon Canada goose zone. This zone no longer exists.
Section 15 eliminates language to reduce confusion over statutory implementation of the wildlife damage abatement and claims program (WDACP), adds a monetary threshold for WDACP enrollment, and updates code to reflect language passed in 2017 Wisconsin Act 59. Section 16 repeals a definition of “lands suitable for deer and elk” which is out of date.
_Hlk152937892Section 17 broadens the definition of “livestock holding area.” It also deletes a reference to a specific volume of the WDACP technical manual in administrative code and provides counties better flexibility for when they submit reimbursement requests. This Section also establishes that enrollees may not require any services for hunting access under the WDACP. Section 18 repeals a section of code that is already found in state statute and referred to in code. This section also deletes a requirement that the enrolled land has been in cultivation for 5 years.
_Hlk151020333Section 19 makes a variety of housekeeping changes to record retention, fencing and appeals. It also creates deadlines for obtaining signatures for the landowners of leased properties that are enrolled in the WDACP. It also refines rules related to lands that are required to allow open hunting access due to enrollment in the WDACP. This includes requiring enrollees to make reasonable attempts to respond to requests from hunters. This Section also allows the denial of further abatement and claims assistance if a verified violation of the hunter access requirements occurs. Sections 20 – 34 implement federal changes to the agricultural depredation order of Canada geese causing agricultural damages in the spring.
6. Summary of, and Comparison with, Existing or Proposed Federal Statutes and Regulations:
These rules are consistent with any federal regulations that guide wildlife damage management. Federal agencies also partner with the state in implementing wildlife damage and abatement programs.
7. If Held, Summary of Comments Received During Preliminary Comment Period
and at Public Hearing on the Statement of Scope:
No preliminary public hearing was required.
8. Comparison with Similar Rules in Adjacent States:
The US department of agriculture’s wildlife services and US fish and wildlife service partner with the state in implementing wildlife damage and abatement programs in Minnesota and Illinois and these rules are generally similar with nuisance wildlife management in those states. USDA Wildlife Services does not partner with Michigan but their rules on wildlife conflict management are similar to that of Wisconsin.
9. Summary of Factual Data and Analytical Methodologies Used and How Any Related Findings Support the Regulatory Approach Chosen:
_Hlk174695652This rule updates the list of species for which department approval is needed to live trap and relocate a wild animal. These updates provide better protections for species which may be sensitive to relocation. This rule also eliminates the ability for individuals to live capture and relocate Canada geese. This change was made due to growing populations of resident Canada geese and concerns over Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI). The US fish and wildlife service, through an agricultural depredation order, gave the department the authority to permit the removal of Canada geese causing spring agricultural damage. Previously the department only had the authority to remove Canada geese during the fall in the Horicon goose management zone. This zone no longer exists and the need to remove geese in that area no longer applies. This rulemaking also updates code to be consistent with federal rules that allow the removal of Canada geese causing agricultural damages in the spring.
2017 Wisconsin Act 59 expanded the crop types eligible for abatement assistance under the WDACP to include cover crops grown at licensed bird hunting preserves. 2017 Wisconsin Act 59 expanded the crop types eligible for abatement assistance under the WDACP to include cover crops grown at licensed bird hunting preserves. This rule updates administrative code so that it is consistent with the statutory change. This rule clarifies that the department may suspend or revoke permits if the conditions are violated. This rule also clarifies the situations in which the county or their agent can determine that an enrollee is uncooperative when administering the WDACP program. This provides clearer expectations and better accountability for individuals who are receiving assistance under the WDACP.
Under previous administrative code, the department used to calculate suitable deer and elk range when calculating deer density goals. This calculation was used when determining hunter densities for producers enrolled under the managed hunting access program. The department no longer calculates suitable deer and elk range and instead uses county population goals of increasing decreasing or maintaining the deer population.
This rule deletes a requirement that enrolled land must be in cultivation for the previous five years. It is often difficult to know if a property met this requirement and deleting it provides better assistance for producers and current agricultural practices.
10. Analysis and Supporting Documents Used to Determine the Effect on Small Business or in Preparation of an Economic Impact Report: These rules, and the legislation which grants the department rule-making authority, do not have fiscal effects on the private sector or small businesses. No costs to the private sector or small businesses are associated with compliance to these rules.
_Hlk12812777011. Effect on Small Business (final regulatory flexibility analysis): These rules are applicable to individual sportspersons and impose no compliance or reporting requirements for small businesses, and no design standards are contained in the rule. 13. Place where comments are to be submitted and deadline for submission:
A public comment period on the draft rule occurred from July 15 to August 9, 2024, and a public hearing was held on August 8, 2024. RULE TEXT
1Section 1 NR 12.001 (1) is renumbered to NR 12.001 (1i) and amended to read: NR 12.001 (1i) “Contiguous land" means lands under the same ownership which are connected or adjacent to lands on which wildlife are causing damage including lands separated by a roadway, easement, license or waterway. Lands that touch at the corners are considered contiguous.
2Section 2 NR 12.001 (1d) is created to read: NR 12.001 (1d) “Active nest" means a nest with eggs or chicks present.
3Section 3 NR 12.001 (4), is renumbered to NR 12.001 (4) (intro.) and amended to read: NR 12.001 (4) “Lessee" means any person possessing a written lease for use of land for the production of commercial seedlings, crops, orchard trees, Christmas trees, nursery stock, honey, and livestock. or similar agreement for one of the following:
4Section 4 NR 12.001 (4) (a), (b), and (c) are created to read: NR 12.001 (4) (a) Use of land owned by another for the production of commercial seedlings, crops, orchard trees, Christmas trees, nursery stock, honey, or livestock.
(b) The placement or keeping of apiaries or livestock on land owned by another.
(c) Use of land owned by another as a bird hunting preserve licensed under ch. 169, Stats.
