The United States Department of Agriculture administers federal regulations related to the interstate movement of animals, particularly with respect to certain major diseases. States regulate intrastate movement and imports into the state. The fees and rules included in this rule draft do not duplicate or conflict with any federal fees or regulations.
Summary of Comments Received during Preliminary Comment Period
and at Public Hearing on Statement of Scope
The Department held a preliminary public hearing and comment period on the statement of scope on March 28, 2024, with comments accepted through April 1, 2024. In addition to publication in the Administrative Register, the Department also sent an email notice to licensees on March 18, 2024. The public hearing was a hybrid, combining in-person attendance at the DATCP building and remotely via zoom, with both internet access and telephone access.
There were 14 attendees at the hearing. Of these, 8 provided comments and 6 registered for information only and did not provide comments. There were 2 written comments received. In total, there were 9 individual commenters.
Comments discussed the following:
•- Regarding fees, commenters stated the following: •o 5 commenters stated that they do not oppose increases to fees at this time, providing the increases are reasonable. •o 1 commenter stated concern about increases in fees for each level of fish farm. •o 1 commenter asked the Department to consider making a license fee exemption for closed loop aquaponics gardens for personal consumption. •o 1 commenter asked why the Department has not used the biennial budget process rather than fee increases. The commenter also stated that the title of the scope does not include the word fees, that the new fees are not listed in the proposal, and asked for additional information as to what the proposed changes would be prior to the DATCP Board approving the scope. •- Regarding the fish farm program, commenters stated the following: •o 1 commenter asked that DATCP stays in charge of fish farms and does not delegate out its authority. The commenter also stated that any diseases to be added or removed should be discussed with the fish farms with plenty of time ahead to adjust. The commenter also stated that there are misunderstandings regarding bait licenses and that there should be a statement clarifying that a fish farm registration is also required and that health procedures need to be followed. •o 1 commenter requested clarification on the section with the import and movement of animals, and what oversight would be from industry. The commenter stated concern that this could be weaponized against a particular farmer. •o 1 commenter requested clarification on how a closed containment facility interacts with regulations. The commenter also would like to understand the importation process and requirements, and how the state differentiates from federal requirements under Title 50, or if federal requirements are substantial enough. •- Regarding the farm-raised deer program, commenters stated the following: •o 1 commenter asked why DNR does not share immediate reportable CWD detection in all deer to DATCP to better inform farm-raised deer keepers. The commenter also asked what DATCP can do to have DNR do something to contain CWD in the state in the wild deer population. •o 1 commenter requested clarification from DATCP about s. 95.20, Stat., which states that the Department is authorized to prohibit or regulate the import or movement of animals. The commenter also asked DATCP to update language to apply to susceptible cervid species, as based on the USDA CWD Herd Certification Program, and specifically to list fallow deer on the non-susceptible species list. •o 1 commenter stated concern about any movements, restrictions, or expansions, and requested clarification if that is something to be proposed. The commenter also stated that positive farms are waiting for indemnity. The commenter would also like to work with the state to move positive bucks from positive farms to other positive ranches. In response to public comments regarding fees, the Department evaluated several changes. In the fee evaluation, the Department broke out costs program-by-program to ensure that the proposed fees reflected actual costs in that specific program. Available segregated revenue fund (SEG) was distributed in a way to reduce the highest fee increases by as much as possible, given the available funding. The proposed rule does not exempt closed loop aquaponics gardens for personal consumption from the license fee, because the registration is required by statute (Wis. Stat. § 95.60 (3m)), but did cap the increase to the applicable license fee category (type 1, 1 license) at the lowest percentage increase within the fish farm program. At this time, there is no biennial budget item that would remove the need for fee increases. The preliminary rule draft title includes the word “fees” for clarity. The statement of scope for this rule package (SS 014-24) is specific to just evaluating fees and ATCP 10 subchapter I and appendices. The Department is unable to evaluate more substantive changes to other rule requirements, such as the fish farm program and the farm-raised deer program, within this current scope. Comparison with Rules in Adjacent States
Neighboring states (Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Illinois) primarily fund these types of programs through General Program Revenue (GPR), therefore they have lower fees than Wisconsin’s current fees. While Wisconsin’s program fees are collected from a small number of licensees (as little as 1 licensee for some programs), these critical programs have impacts and benefits across animal health, animal industries, and public health.
The proposed updates to subchapter I and the appendices are specific to Wisconsin rules. Surrounding state animal health programs are comparable to those in Wisconsin. Programs for important diseases in adjacent states are similar to Wisconsin, as all are based on federal standards.
CVI Forms: Iowa recently began offering VET CVI as an option in 2024. VET CVI is a mobile application paid for through a subscription fee by the state of Iowa that allows for free electronic submission of CVIs by accredited veterinarians for both large and small animals. In Iowa, paper CVIs are: $100 per 100 interstate CVIs, $25 per 50 intrastate CVIs, $25 per 50 dog and cat certificates, $25 per 25 native swine farm to farm, and $50 per 50 slaughter affidavits. Iowa also allows accredited veterinarians to use electronic CVIs developed by private companies, following a standardized messaging scheme, and paid for by the accredited veterinarian, as does Wisconsin.
Intermediate Handling Facilities: There is no equivalent facility in Iowa.
Disease Certifications: Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, and Minnesota use a different method of administering swine brucellosis and pseudorabies programs through Commuter Agreements, which do not have a fee, although producers must pay for testing and other criteria. The Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, and Minnesota state costs for administering the program are recovered through other funding, and not through fees. Ohio, South Dakota, and Indiana also use Commuter Agreements.
EIA Rest: There is no EIA retest fee in Iowa.
Equine Quarantine Stations: There are no equine quarantine stations in Iowa.
Feed Lots: In Iowa, feedlots are regulated by the Iowa Department of Natural Resources, and there are no related animal health regulations.
Medical Separation: In Iowa, all medical separation is handled on an individual case-by-case basis.
NPIP: In Iowa, the NPIP program is managed by a non-state entity, the North Central Poultry Association. The Iowa Department of Agriculture do not have any program fees for NPIP participation.
Farm-Raised Deer: In Iowa, state funds are used to cover the costs of program management.
Fish Farms: In Iowa, the fee for an aquaculture unit license is $30 for residents and $66 for nonresidents. These fees can be found in Iowa Code 571—15.10(483A). In Iowa, aquaculture units, as defined in Iowa code Ch 481A, are managed by the Iowa Department of Natural Resources. Iowa code Ch 481A also describes inspection requirements pertaining to units with bait and for certain importations. This is in contrast the Wisconsin's program which requires inspections of all type 2 and type 3 fish farms.
Michigan
CVI Forms: Michigan is not authorized to charge for paper CVIs and currently offers CVIs at no charge. Michigan is currently offering CVIs developed out of Adobe and resulting in a pdf, at no cost to the state or accredited veterinarians, but states have experienced challenges with updates and the pdf does not offer all the advantages of approved electronic CVIs. Michigan plans to begin offering VET CVI soon. VET CVI is a mobile application paid for through a subscription fee by the state of Michigan that allows for free electronic submission of CVIs by accredited veterinarians for both large and small animals. Michigan also allows accredited veterinarians to use electronic CVIs developed by private companies, following a standardized messaging scheme, and paid for by the accredited veterinarian, as does Wisconsin.
Intermediate Handling Facilities: There is no equivalent facility in Michigan.
Disease Certifications: In Michigan, there are no fees associated with cattle programs. Tuberculosis and Brucellosis accreditation/certification is done by the USDA Veterinary Service office. There are only 3 TB accredited-free herds and no Brucellosis certified herds. Midwest states near Wisconsin (Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and South Dakota) mainly address pseudorabies and swine brucellosis tracking and interstate movement using Swine Production Health Plans (9CFR §71.19 (g) and (h)), commonly referred to as Commuter Agreements. Commuter Agreements involve the producers, their veterinarians, and state and federal regulatory agencies, and require multiple signatures. There is no fee for Commuter Agreements, although producers must pay for testing and other criteria, and state costs are recovered through other funding. The participating states have more swine than Wisconsin, and the staffing and funding to manage larger swine activities. Currently, Wisconsin only has 3 herds that have Qualified Pseudorabies Negative and Validated Brucellosis-Free herd certification statuses. EIA Rest: There is no EIA retest fee in Michigan.
Equine Quarantine Stations: There are no equine quarantine stations in Michigan.
Feed Lots: In Michigan, there is no feed lot license.
Medical Separation: In Michigan, all medical separation is handled on an individual case-by-case basis, and there are no additional fees.
NPIP: In Michigan, the NPIP program is managed by a non-state entity, the Michigan Allied Poultry Industries. The Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural does not have any program fees for NPIP participation.
Farm-Raised Deer: In Michigan, the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development pays the Michigan State University Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory directly for CWD testing of privately-owned cervids, and also pays vets on a fee-for-service basis to take and submit CWD samples; these activities are funded through state general funds. The Michigan Department of Natural Resources manages the other aspects of deer farm activities and collects associated fees. Farms pay a fee of either $450 or $750 every 3 years for their license renewal. New farms pay this license fee plus a $250 non-refundable application fee and either a $250 or $500 inspection fee. The difference between the higher and lower fees is determined by whether the farm is under or over 40 acres. Farms must also pay a $100 modification fee for things such as inspection of an expansion of the facility. The portion of the program under Michigan’s DNR was designed to have roughly 50% of the cost of the program covered by renewal fees and 50% from General Game and Fish Funds via federal government license match dollars. There are a few farms, mostly hobby farms with 1-2 animals, that were grandfathered in with lower fees than other farms and a different management process when the fee structure was adopted in 2004.
Fish Farms: In Michigan, the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development collects a fee for licensing, which includes an initial inspection of the facility. A facility registration is $100 for a new facility and $75 for a renewal. A research permit is $250 for a new permit and $100 for a renewal. Wisconsin does not have a research fee for fish farms and Wisconsin's Department of Natural Resources Scientific Research License has an exemption for fish. There is no fee for fish importation and no fee for annual inspections. Annual income from fees totals less than $3,000. Most of the program administration costs are covered by an annual appropriation from the legislature. Michigan's aquaculture fees can be found in Michigan Act 199 Section 286.877. Minnesota
CVI Forms: Minnesota was not authorized to charge for paper CVIs, and is no longer offering paper CVIs. Minnesota is offering CVIs developed out of Adobe and resulting in a pdf, at no cost to the state or accredited veterinarians, but states have experienced challenges with updates and the pdf does not offer all the advantages of approved electronic CVIs. Minnesota also allows accredited veterinarians to use electronic CVIs developed by private companies, following a standardized messaging scheme, and paid for by the accredited veterinarian, as does Wisconsin.
Intermediate Handling Facilities: In Minnesota, slaughter only handling facilities require an annual permit but have no fee.
Disease Certifications: Midwest states near Wisconsin (Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and South Dakota) mainly address pseudorabies and swine brucellosis tracking and interstate movement using Swine Production Health Plans, commonly referred to as Commuter Agreements. Commuter Agreements involve the producers, their veterinarians, and state and federal regulatory agencies, and require multiple signatures. There is no fee for Commuter Agreements, although producers must pay for testing and other criteria, and state costs are recovered through other funding. The participating states have more swine than Wisconsin, and the staffing and funding to manage larger swine activities. Currently, Wisconsin only has 3 herds that have Qualified Pseudorabies Negative and Validated Brucellosis-Free herd certification statuses.
EIA Rest: There is no EIA retest fee in Minnesota.
Equine Quarantine Stations: There are no equine quarantine stations in Minnesota.
