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.
