CR_14-025 Revises sections NR 10.02, 16.12, 16.13, 19.275, 21.13, 22.13, and Chapter NR 27, relating to the addition of the Blanding's turtle to the State's Protected Wild Animal list, possession exemptions, and turtle seasons and limits; and ...

Season date modifications may have the impact of opening a small number of refuges, which are established in chs. NR 11 and 15 , to additional deer hunting during the late firearm season that begins on December 24. These refuges are located primarily on department managed lands and most of them were established to provide undisturbed resting areas for migrating waterfowl. This deer hunt will occur very late in fall migration and will normally be after all waterfowl seasons are closed.

The department is recommending deer hunting season date modifications as a result of this rulemaking. The report generally recommended, "keeping seasons and bag limits consistent for longer periods of time to allow better assessment of management progress". The season date modifications in the proposal may lead to more long term stability of seasons. These rules will maintain the current season for hunting deer by archery methods. This proposal maintains the traditional Wisconsin firearm deer season opener on the Saturday before Thanksgiving and 9 day structure. The current 10 day muzzleloader season is maintained under this proposal. This proposal modifies that "holiday hunt" which has been held in the CWD management zone so that it will be antlerless only and end on January 1 instead of the Sunday nearest January 6. The holiday hunt will be expanded geographically to include entire counties where previously the hunt was held only in a portion of the county. This holiday deer hunt occurs under current rules in the CWD management zone. It has been a low-pressure event but, for some, a greatly appreciated opportunity for additional deer hunting at a time when families are together and around which some new deer hunting traditions are developing. The late firearm season, or holiday hunt, is similar to seasons offered in other adjacent states and will occur during a time of the year when more residents are traditionally taking vacation or home for the holidays as in the case of veterans. Finally, only in areas that are part of the CWD season under current rules, archery deer hunting has been allowed on the day before the traditional 9-day firearm season opens. Under this proposal, the archery deer season will be open statewide on the day before the traditional 9-day firearm season for statewide consistency.

In metropolitan deer management subunits a 19-day firearm deer hunting season has been in place and is maintained by this rule proposal.

Under current rule, numerous state parks are listed in the table that establishes deer seasons because the DNR was required to establish hunting seasons in state parks by administrative rule. Under 2011 ACT 168, hunting is allowed at state parks except where, or at times when, the Natural Resources Board has prohibited the activity in order to protect public safety or a unique plant or animal community. Because the old presumption that state parks are closed unless opened by rule has been replaced by a presumption that state parks are open unless board action has been taken to close them, most state park names have been removed from the table. Those parks will be open to deer hunting under normal statewide regulations at times when hunting has not been prohibited for safety related purposes by natural resources board order. A number of parks, which had deer hunting seasons or regulations which are not the same as the ones that apply statewide are still found in the season table in order to preserve those unique seasons or regulations. All state park deer management unit number designations have been repealed and state parks are simply referred to by their name. Current rules require that deer hunters in state parks in the CWD management zone obtain a free access permit to a park. The number of access permits is not restricted. This rule repeals that requirement because it is no longer needed considering that access to other parks will not be monitored to this extent. Finally, the deer hunt at the Loew Lake Unit of the Kettle Moraine State Forest, which had been a limited entry/draw hunt, will now be open to participation by any licensed hunter. However, this season will continue to be muzzleloader only. These changes are made for consistency with other changes made at state parks which previously had limited entry hunts.

The trustee's report generally recommends a more passive approach than current department policy to the management of Chronic Wasting Disease. This approach is reflected by the establishment of deer seasons in CWD affected areas that are similar to other areas of the state. Management of CWD in the state's deer herd is still important under these rules. These rules retain the firearm deer season occurring over the Christmas holiday, although it will now be an antlerless-only season and will end on January 1. There is an option to issue landowner permits for sampling or for additional harvest opportunities, and rule language that provides advice on when an October firearm season will be held if necessary in CWD affected areas. While the promulgation of emergency rules is required under s. 29.016 , Stats., before an October firearm season can be held, establishing by permanent rule when that season would occur is intended to simplify development of an emergency rule if that authority is utilized. These rules modify the current CWD zone management system by designating it as the CWD-affected area using county boundaries to describe the zone instead of the previous DMU configuration based on roads and natural features such as rivers. A process for efficiently adding new counties as CWD-affected areas when the disease is discovered in new areas is created. The department currently establishes numeric population goals for deer units that are in a CWD zone. Those goals are modified by these rules so that they are consistent with the manner in which objectives for other units are expressed.

This rulemaking establishes 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 at the local level. The rule establishes enrollment fees for participation in the program and statute has established that revenue will be credited back to implementation of the program. This proposal establishes a separate half-price fee of $6.00 for antlerless deer hunting permits obtained through participation in the program. The lower fee is intended to be an incentive for participation. The program is a central recommendation of the report which recommended 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.

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 update a cross reference with Ch. NR 10 . Other out-of-date cross-references exist in this chapter but are not revised here as that might be more appropriate as a stand-alone, more thorough review. The report did not recommend changes to this chapter of administrative code.

Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business or in preparation of an economic impact analysis

The department estimates that the economic impact of these rules will be none or minimal and, pursuant to 2011 Executive Order 50 , facilitated a 14 day period for comment on a draft economic impact analysis. The comment period began on October 7 and ended on October 21, 2013. Although s. 227.14 , Stats., does not require an economic impact analysis for emergency rules, an analysis was prepared for this rule and related permanent rules and is included for informational purposes and in fulfillment of the fiscal impact analysis requirement.

This proposal modifies rules that establish the department's habitat and deer harvest management strategies. Examples of the new management efforts include: increased emphasis of habitat management on private land through the Deer Management Assistance Program, eliminating the requirement to use a specific method of measuring and estimating deer populations even though that model may still be used and considered, and new ways to describe desired deer population levels. These rules will result in moderate revisions to regulations that apply to individual deer hunters. Examples of the types of changes proposed include adjustments to deer management unit boundaries, 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 none or a minimal effect on the financial health of industries, governments, and groups. The department anticipates there will be no economic effects of these regulations for individual hunters and landowners.

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 changes. 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 is 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 were not 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 has summarized 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 none or minimal economic effects. The final economic analysis for these rules includes a description of the specific impacts of deer and deer hunting in this state based on surveys and research done by the department and other state and federal agencies. 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 includes significant narrative descriptions of anticipated economic impacts.

Impact on Small Business

Pursuant to s. 227.114 , Stats., it is not anticipated that the proposed rule will have an economic impact on small businesses. The Department's Small Business Regulatory Coordinator may be contacted at [e-mail] or by calling [phone].

Environmental Impact

The Department has made a 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.

Contact Person

Scott Loomans, Bureau of Wildlife Management

P.O. Box 7921

Madison, WI 53707

Phone: [phone]

E-mail: [e-mail] .

Notice of Hearing

Natural Resources

Fish, Game, etc., Chs. 1—

CR 14-025

(DNR# ER-30-13 )

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT pursuant to ss. 227.16 and 227.17 , Stats., the Department of Natural Resources, hereinafter the Department, will hold a public hearing on amendments to sections NR 10.02 , 16.12 , 16.13 , 19.275 , 21.13 , and 22.13 and Chapter NR 27 , relating to the addition of the Blanding's turtle to the State's Protected Wild Animal list, possession exemptions, and turtle seasons and limits and to updating scientific and common names and federal listing status on the date(s) and at the time(s) and location(s) listed below.

Hearing Dates and Locations

Date:   Wednesday, April 2, 2014
Time:   11:00 a.m.
Location:   Wisconsin Natural Resources Building
  101 S. Webster St.
  Room 613
  Madison, WI 53707

There will be Live Meeting availability for those who are unable to attend in person. To request a Live Meeting link, please contact Terrell Hyde at [e-mail] or by calling [phone].

Reasonable accommodations, including the provision of informational material in an alternative format, will be provided for qualified individuals with disabilities upon request. Contact Terrell Hyde, Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Natural Heritage Conservation, 101 S. Webster St, Madison, WI, 53707-7921; by E-mail to [e-mail] or by calling [phone]. A request must include specific information and be received at least 10 days before the date of the scheduled hearing.

Availability of the p roposed r ules and f iscal e stimate

The proposed rule and supporting documents, including the fiscal estimate, may be viewed and downloaded from the Administrative Rules System Web site which can be accessed through the link https://health.wisconsin.gov/admrules/public/Home . If you do not have Internet access, a printed copy of the proposed rule and supporting documents, including the fiscal estimate, may be obtained free of charge by contacting Terrell Hyde, Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Natural Heritage Conservation, 101 S. Webster St, Madison, WI, 53707-7921, or by calling [phone].

Submitting Comments

Comments on the proposed rule must be received on or before April 2, 2014. Written comments may be submitted by U.S. mail, fax, E-mail, or through the Internet and will have the same weight and effect as oral statements presented at the public hearing. Written comments and any questions on the proposed rules should be submitted to:

Terrell Hyde

Department of Natural Resources

Bureau of Natural Heritage Conservation

101 S Webster St, Madison, WI 53707-7921

Phone: [phone]

Fax: [phone]

E-mail: [e-mail]

Internet: https://health.wisconsin.gov/admrules/public/Home search "ER-30-13"

Analysis Prepared by the Department of Natural Resources

Statutory authority, statutes interpreted and explanation

Statutes that authorize the promulgation of these rules are: ss. 29.011 , 29.014 , 29.039 , and 29.604 , Stats. These statutes establish management authority with the department, provide that the title to wild animals is vested with the state, and provide the department with authority to maintain open and closed seasons and other regulations and programs to conserve game and nongame species. Section 29.604 (3) (b) , Stats., has been interpreted as allowing the department the authority to create and amend the list of Wisconsin's endangered and threatened species, s. NR 27.03 , Wis. Admin. Code. All rules promulgated under this authority are subject to review under ch. 227 , Stats.

Related statutes or rules

Existing policies relevant to the rule are Wisconsin Adm. Codes, Chapter NR 27 and sections NR 10.02 , 16.12 , 16.13 , 19.275 , 21.13 , and 22.13 . No new policies are being proposed.

The department is also promulgating a corresponding emergency rule (ER-31-13 (E)). The emergency and permanent rules both contemplate the following changes: add Blanding's turtle to the list of Wild Protected Animals (s. NR 10.02 ); add Blanding's turtles to the Captive Wildlife — Reptile and Amphibian Possession Exemptions (s. NR 16.12 (3) ( b)); and add Blanding's turtles to the turtle season/limits with a season/limit of none/zero on ss. NR 19.275 (4) , 21.13 (4) , and 22.13 (4) . The permanent rule only will also contemplate performing housekeeping on scientific and common names, and Federal Protection Status on administrative rules ss. NR 10.02 , 16.12 , 16.13 , 19.275 , 21.13 , and 22.13 and ch. NR 27 , and other related rules listing native plant and animal species.

Plain language analysis

The objective of this proposed rule is to protect Blanding's turtles from the threat of harvest and collection once they are removed from the Wisconsin Threatened species list. The Blanding's turtle was delisted on January 1, 2014 per administrative rule ER-27-11. This emergency and permanent rule is a follow-up action that was proposed during the public comment for ER-27-11. As stated by the Department in the final adopted rule order for ER-27-11, that while the Blanding's turtle no longer meets the scientific criteria for listing as Threatened, the population is vulnerable to harvest and collection and should be added to the Protected Wild Animal list (s. NR 10.02 ) and harvest/collection limits.

SECTIONS 1, 3, 5, and 11-32 update scientific, common, and family names. These changes reflect current understanding of the scientific community and include mostly placement of species into a different Genus or taxonomic group. Several discrepancies in spelling and missing common names are also corrected. All of these taxa are still regarded as valid species.

SECTIONS 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 add the Blanding's turtle to the list of Wild Protected Animals, Captive Wildlife Exemptions, and to the turtle season's and limits in Wisconsin's waters to protect them from harvest and collection.

SECTIONS 9 and 10 replace the list of endangered and threatened U.S. foreign and native species with a link to the latest publication as published in the Government Printing Office's Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants 50 eCFR 17.11 and 17.12. This "adoption by reference" meets the expectation set by Wis. Stats. 29.604 (3) (b) to establish the list of wild animals and wild plants on the U.S. list of endangered and threatened foreign species; wild animals and wild plants on the U.S. list of endangered and threatened native species. The U.S. list is updated daily and is found on the US Fish and Wildlife Services' endangered species web page ( http://www.fws.gov/endangered/ ).

Summary of, and comparison with, existing or proposed federal statutes and regulations

There are no federal regulations that would be in conflict with this proposed action. Blanding's turtles are not federally listed. In 2013, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service proposed addition of the Blanding's turtle to The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) list: http://www.fws.gov/international/cites/cop16/blandings-turtle.html .

Comparison with similar rules in adjacent states

There are similar possession laws in adjacent other states. The Blanding's turtle is state protected in Illinois, Iowa, and Minnesota. In Michigan, Blanding's turtles shall not be taken or possessed except as authorized by the Director of the Department of Natural Resources.

Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies used and how any related findings support the regulatory approach chosen

Since 1979, when the Blanding's turtle was added to the threatened list, there has not been a pet or food trade industry for this species in the state. However, as a result of delisting, the Blanding's turtle is subject to turtle harvest regulations as all turtles not listed as threatened or endangered in ch. NR 27 or otherwise specified have a 135-day open season between July 15 and November 30 where the public may capture and possess up to 5 individuals.

Internationally there is concern for this species because of the increasing trend in the pet trade and commercial collecting. Regionally the Blanding's turtle is state protected in Illinois, Iowa, and Minnesota. In Michigan, Blanding's turtles cannot be taken or possessed except as authorized by the Director of the Department of Natural Resources.

As stated by the Department in the final adopted rule order for ER-27-11, that while the Blanding's turtle no longer meets the scientific criteria for listing as Threatened, the population is vulnerable to harvest and collection and should be added to the Protected Wild Animal list (s. NR 10.02 ) and harvest/collection limits.

These proposed rule changes were developed with the assistance of the Bureaus of Natural Heritage Conservation, Fisheries Management, Wildlife Management, and Legal Services.

Analysis and supporting documents used to determine the effect on small business or in preparation of an economic impact report

Pursuant to s. 227.137 , Wis. Stats., the department is required to solicit comments on the economic impact of the proposed rule. Small businesses, as defined in s. 227.114 (1) , Wis. Stats., were be asked to identify themselves as a small business in their comments. No comments were received in the 2-week comment period between January 22 and February 5, 2014.

The department anticipates minimal economic impact, with few entities affected as collection and possession limits will not change. Interested parties may include individuals using turtles as bait or food, and parties interested in developing a pet/food trade for the Blanding's turtle in Wisconsin.

Effect on Small Business (Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis)

Pursuant to s. 227.137 , Wis. Stats., the department is required to solicit comments on the economic impact of proposed rule. Small businesses, as defined in s. 227.114 (1) , Wis. Stats., were asked to identify themselves as a small business in their comments. No comments were received in the 2-week EIA comment period held between January 22 and February 5, 2014. The Department's email distribution list will be submitted to the Governor's Office of Regulatory Compliance. The EIA does not indicate that the proposed rule is reasonably expected to have a total impact of $20,000,000 in implementation and compliance costs.

The department will submit the rule package and economic impact analysis to the Wisconsin Legislative Council under s. 227.15 , Wis. Stats., and hearings on the proposed rule will be held by the department after proper notice in accordance with ss. 227.17 and 227.18 , Wis. Stats. A small business regulatory flexibility analysis that contains the provisions in s. 227.19 (3) (e) , Stats., will be included in the final rule order.

The Small Business Regulatory Coordinator may be contacted at [e-mail] , or by calling [phone].

Environmental Analysis

The Department has made a preliminary determination that adoption of the proposed rules would not involve significant adverse environmental effects and would not need an environmental analysis under ch. NR 150 , Wis. Adm. Code. However, based on comments received, an environmental analysis may be prepared before proceeding. This analysis would summarize the Department's consideration of the impacts of the proposal and any reasonable alternatives.

Fiscal Estimate Summary

These proposed rules do not establish any requirements on businesses or local units of government.

The department anticipates minimal economic impact as the proposed rule changes will continue similar possession and collection limits that the Blanding's turtle received under the protections afforded to the species on Wisconsin's Threatened species list. The Blanding's turtle was added to the Threatened species list in 1979. As such, there has not been a market for its collection and possession since then. No changes to the permitting process for researchers and rehabilitators are expected as part of this proposed rule change.

Agency Contact Persons

Terrell Hyde, [phone], terrell.hyde@wisconsin. gov or Erin Crain, [phone], [e-mail] . Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Natural Heritage Conservation NH/6, Madison, WI 53707-7921.

STATE OF WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION DOA-2049 (R03/2012)	Division of Executive Budget and Finance 101 East Wilson Street, 10th Floor P.O. Box 7864 Madison, WI 53707-7864 FAX: [phone]
ADMINISTRATIVE RULES Fiscal Estimate & Economic Impact Analysis

1. Type of Estimate and Analysis
X Original   ⍽ Updated   ⍽ Corrected
2. Administrative Rule Chapter, Title and Number
This rule modifies Ch.'s NR 10 related to the list of Wild Protected Animals, NR 16 related to Captive Wildlife – Reptile and Amphibian Possession Exemptions, NR 27 related to the list of US and Wisconsin Endangered and Threatened species, and Ch.'s NR 19, NR 21, and NR 22 related to turtle seasons and limits.
3. Subject
Preliminary economic impact analysis for public comment relating to adding Blanding's turtles (Emyoidea blandingi) to the list of Wild Protected Animals, and eliminating harvest and collection through the Department's list of turtle seasons and limits and captive wildlife exemptions.
4. Fund Sources Affected			5. Chapter 20, Stats. Appropriations Affected
⍽ GPR   ⍽ FED   ⍽ PRO   ⍽ PRS   ⍽ SEG   ⍽ SEG-S
6. Fiscal Effect of Implementing the Rule
⍽ No Fiscal Effect ⍽ Indeterminate	⍽ Increase Existing Revenues ⍽ Decrease Existing Revenues		⍽ Increase Costs X Could Absorb Within Agency's Budget ⍽ Decrease Cost
7. The Rule Will Impact the Following (Check All That Apply)
⍽ State's Economy ⍽ Local Government Units		⍽ Specific Businesses/Sectors ⍽ Public Utility Rate Payers ⍽ Small Businesses (if checked, complete Attachment A)
8. Would Implementation and Compliance Costs Be Greater Than $20 million? ⍽ Yes   X No
9. Policy Problem Addressed by the Rule
The objective of this proposed rule is to protect Blanding's turtles from the threat of harvest and collection since they were removed from the Wisconsin Threatened species list. The Blanding's turtle was delisted on January 1, 2014 per administrative rule ER-27-11. This emergency and permanent rule is a follow-up action that was proposed during the public comment for ER-27-11. As stated by the Department in the final adopted rule order for ER-27-11, that while the Blanding's turtle no longer meets the scientific criteria for listing as Threatened, the population is vulnerable to harvest and collection and should be added to the Protected Wild Animal list (NR 10.02) and harvest/collection limits. Since 1979, when the Blanding's turtle was added to the threatened list, there has not been a pet or food trade industry for this species in the state. However, as a result of delisting, the Blanding's turtle is subject to turtle harvest regulations as all turtles not listed as threatened or endangered in NR 27 or otherwise specified have a 135-day open season between July 15 and November 30 where the public may capture and possess up to 5 individuals. Internationally there is concern for this species because of the increasing trend in the pet trade and commercial collecting. Regionally the Blanding's turtle is state protected in Illinois, Iowa, and Minnesota. In Michigan, Blanding's turtles cannot be taken or possessed except as authorized by the Director of the Department of Natural Resources. The proposed rule changes will continue similar possession and collection limits that the Blanding's turtle received on the State's Threatened list. As such, minimal controversy is anticipated.
10. Summary of the businesses, business sectors, associations representing business, local governmental units, and individuals that may be affected by the proposed rule that were contacted for comments.
Pursuant to s. 227.137, Wis. Stats., the department was required to solicit comments on the economic impact of the proposed rule. Small businesses, as defined in s. 227.114(1), Wis. Stats., were asked to identify themselves as a small business in their comments. The 2-week EIA comment period was between January 22 and February 5, 2014. No comments were received. The department anticipates minimal economic impact, with few entities affected as collection and possession limits will not change. Interested parties may include individuals using turtles as bait or food, and parties interested in developing a pet/food trade for the Blanding's turtle in Wisconsin.
11. Identify the local governmental units that participated in the development of this EIA.
Pursuant to s. 227.137 Wis. Stats., the department is required to solicit comments on the economic impact of the proposed rule, and if requested to coordinate with local governments in the preparation of an Economic Impact Analysis (EIA). No comments or requests to coordinate were received.
12. Summary of Rule's Economic and Fiscal Impact on Specific Businesses, Business Sectors, Public Utility Rate Payers, Local Governmental Units and the State's Economy as a Whole (Include Implementation and Compliance Costs Expected to be Incurred)
The department anticipates minimal economic impact as the proposed rule changes will continue similar possession and collection limits that the Blanding's turtle received under the protections afforded to the species on Wisconsin's Threatened species list. The Blanding's turtle was added to the Threatened species list in 1979. As such, there has not been a market for its collection and possession since then. No changes to the permitting process for researchers and rehabilitators are expected as part of this proposed rule change. As part of the administrative rule ER-27-11, researchers will need to apply for a Scientific Collectors Permit or Research License Authorization to collect or possess a Blanding's turtle instead of an Endangered and Threatened Species Permit. The effect of this proposed rule will be minimal with few entities affected as collection and possession limits will not change. Interested parties may include individuals using turtles as bait or food, and parties interested in developing a Blanding's turtle pet/food trade in the state. These proposed rules do not establish any requirements on businesses or local units of government.
13. Benefits of Implementing the Rule and Alternative(s) to Implementing the Rule
The objective of this rule is to protect Blanding's turtles from the threat of harvest and collection since they were removed from the Wisconsin Threatened species list. Given the population-age structure of the species, the impact of collection may be severe enough to place the Blanding's turtle's long term survival in the state in jeopardy, causing the species to be considered for addition back to the state's endangered and threatened species list. The proposed rule changes will continue similar possession and collection limits that the Blanding's turtle received on the State's Threatened list. As such, minimal controversy is anticipated.
14. Long Range Implications of Implementing the Rule
The long range implications of this rule proposal will be the same as the short term implications in protecting the Blanding's turtle from the threat of harvest and collection and keeping them off the Wisconsin Threatened species list. These rule proposals will continue harvest and collection limits that the Blanding's turtle received while listed on the State's Threatened species list.
15. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Federal Government
There are no federal regulations that would be in conflict with the proposed rule changes. The proposed changes would support the United States Fish and Wildlife Service proposed addition of the Blanding's turtle to The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) list: http://www.fws.gov/international/cites/cop16/blandings-turtle.html.
16. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Neighboring States (Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota )
There are similar laws in other states. The Blanding's turtle is state protected in Illinois, Iowa, and Minnesota. In Michigan, Blanding's turtles shall not be taken or possessed except as authorized by the Director of the Department of Natural Resources.
17. Contact Name				18. Contact Phone Number
Terrell Hyde				608-264-9255

This document can be made available in alternate formats to individuals with disabilities upon request.

Notice of Hearing

Safety and Professional Services —
Pharmacy Examining Board

CR 14-023

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to authority vested in the Pharmacy Examining Board in sections 15.08 (5) (b) and 450.02 (2), Wis. Stats., and interpreting sections 450.035 and 450.085, Wis. Stats., the Pharmacy Examining Board will hold a public hearing at the time and place indicated below to consider an order to amend sections Phar 1.02 (7) , 7.10 , and 16.03 , relating to council and exam names.

Hearing Dates and Locations

Date:   Wednesday, March 26, 2014
Time:   9:00 a.m.
Location:   1400 East Washington Avenue
  Room 121A
  (Enter at 55 North Dickinson Street)
  Madison, WI

Appearances at the Hearing

Interested persons are invited to present information at the hearing. Persons appearing may make an oral presentation but are urged to submit facts, opinions and argument in writing as well. Facts, opinions and argument may also be submitted in writing without a personal appearance by mail addressed to Sharon Henes, Administrative Rules Coordinator, Department of Safety and Professional Services, Division of Policy Development, P.O. Box 8366, Madison, Wisconsin 53708. Written comments must be received at or before the public hearing to be included in the record of rule-making proceedings.

Place Where Comments are to be Submitted and Deadline For Submission

Comments may be submitted to Sharon Henes, Administrative Rules Coordinator, Department of Safety and Professional Services, Division of Policy Development, 1400 East Washington Avenue, Room 151, P.O. Box 8366, Madison, WI 53708-8935, or by email to [e-mail] . Comments must be received at or before the public hearing to be held on March 26, 2014 , to be included in the record of rule-making proceedings.

Copies of Rule

Copies of this proposed rule are available upon request to Sharon Henes, Administrative Rules Coordinator, Department of Safety and Professional Services, Division of Policy Development, 1400 East Washington Avenue, P.O. Box 8366, Madison, Wisconsin 53708, or by email at [e-mail] .

Analysis Prepared by the Department of Safety and Professional Services

Statutes interpreted

Sections 450.035 and 450.085 , Wis. Stats.

Statutory authority

Sections 15.08 (5) (b) and 450.02 (2) , Wis. Stats.

Explanation of agency authority

The board has authority to promulgate rules for the guidance of the profession and to interpret the provisions of the statutes it enforces. The board shall adopt rules defining the active practice of pharmacy.

Related statute or rule

None

Plain language analysis

Section 1 capitalizes the proper name of the examination.

Sections 2 and 3 correct the name of the organization which approves the course of study to Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education as amended in the statutes by 2013 Act 124 . In addition, Section 3 removes the qualification of "pharmacist" for attendance and deletes in the note the reference to a list of board approved programs which is no longer compiled.

Summary of, and comparison with, existing or proposed federal regulation

None.

Comparison with rules in adjacent states

Illinois: Illinois administrative code references the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education and the North American Pharmacy Licensing Examination.

Iowa: Iowa administrative code references the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education and the North American Pharmacy Licensing Examination.

Michigan: Michigan administrative code references the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education and the North American Pharmacy Licensing Examination.

Minnesota: Minnesota administrative code references the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education and the North American Pharmacy Licensing Examination.

Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies

The rule reflects the statutory change due to 2013 Act 124 .

Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business or in preparation of economic impact analysis

The rule was posted for economic impact comments for 14 days and none received.

Fiscal Estimate and Economic Impact Analysis

The Fiscal Estimate and Economic Impact Analysis is attached.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis or Summary

These proposed rules do not have an economic impact on small businesses, as defined in s. 227.114 (1) , Stats. The Department's Regulatory Review Coordinator may be contacted by email at [e-mail] , or by calling [phone].

Agency Contact Person

Sharon Henes, Administrative Rules Coordinator, Department of Safety and Professional Services, Division of Policy Development, 1400 East Washington Avenue, Room 151, P.O. Box 8366, Madison, Wisconsin 53708; telephone [phone]; email at [e-mail] .

STATE OF WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION DOA-2049 (R03/2012)	Division of Executive Budget and Finance 101 East Wilson Street, 10th Floor P.O. Box 7864 Madison, WI 53707-7864 FAX: [phone]
ADMINISTRATIVE RULES Fiscal Estimate & Economic Impact Analysis

1. Type of Estimate and Analysis
X Original   ⍽ Updated   ⍽ Corrected
2. Administrative Rule Chapter, Title and Number
Phar 1, 7, 16
3. Subject
Council and exam name
4. Fund Sources Affected			5. Chapter 20, Stats. Appropriations Affected
⍽ GPR   ⍽ FED   ⍽ PRO   ⍽ PRS   ⍽ SEG   ⍽ SEG-S
6. Fiscal Effect of Implementing the Rule
X No Fiscal Effect ⍽ Indeterminate	⍽ Increase Existing Revenues ⍽ Decrease Existing Revenues		⍽ Increase Costs ⍽ Could Absorb Within Agency's Budget ⍽ Decrease Cost
7. The Rule Will Impact the Following (Check All That Apply)
⍽ State's Economy ⍽ Local Government Units		⍽ Specific Businesses/Sectors ⍽ Public Utility Rate Payers ⍽ Small Businesses (if checked, complete Attachment A)
8. Would Implementation and Compliance Costs Be Greater Than $20 million? ⍽ Yes   X No
9. Policy Problem Addressed by the Rule
This rule corrects the names of the North American Pharmacy Licensing Examination and Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education.
10. Summary of the businesses, business sectors, associations representing business, local governmental units, and individuals that may be affected by the proposed rule that were contacted for comments.
None
11. Identify the local governmental units that participated in the development of this EIA.
None
12. Summary of Rule's Economic and Fiscal Impact on Specific Businesses, Business Sectors, Public Utility Rate Payers, Local Governmental Units and the State's Economy as a Whole (Include Implementation and Compliance Costs Expected to be Incurred)
None
13. Benefits of Implementing the Rule and Alternative(s) to Implementing the Rule
The benefit is to refer to both the exam and education council by their correct proper names.
14. Long Range Implications of Implementing the Rule
The benefit is to refer to both the exam and education council by their correct proper names.
15. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Federal Government
None
16. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Neighboring States (Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota )
Our neighboring states reference the North American Pharmacy Licensing Examination and Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education.
17. Contact Name				18. Contact Phone Number
Sharon Henes				[phone]

This document can be made available in alternate formats to individuals with disabilities upon request.