Skip to content

Bills · 2019-2020 Regular Session

AB 695

Died at session end Official bill text Atom feed

Relating to: the wildlife damage abatement program and the wildlife damage claim program. (FE)

Animal Appeals court — Judge Claims County Damage to property Data processing Hunting Natural resources department of — Environmental protection

  1. Introduced, stopped here
  2. Passes Assembly, not reached
  3. Passes Senate, not reached
  4. Governor signs, not reached
  5. Law, not reached

Unfamiliar terms? Glossary

What this bill does

Plain-language analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau

This bill makes changes to the wildlife damage abatement program and the

wildlife damage claim program.

Current law authorizes a person who owns, leases, or controls land on which

certain wild animals cause damage to crops or livestock (wildlife damage) to apply

to the county for wildlife damage claim payments and for wildlife damage abatement

assistance (wildlife damage payments). Wildlife damage for which a person is

eligible to receive wildlife damage payments includes damage caused by deer, bears,

geese, and cougars, as well as elk and sandhill cranes if hunting those animals is

authorized. Current law requires that, to be eligible for wildlife damage payments,

the location must be in a county that participates in the administration of these

programs. A county must apply to the Department of Natural Resources to

administer these programs, including in its application a plan of administration that

meets certain requirements. Once approved, DNR provides funding to the county for

the costs incurred in administering these programs.

Under current law and DNR rule, a county pays 75 percent of the actual costs

of providing wildlife damage abatement assistance, for which it is reimbursed by

DNR, and the person receiving the assistance pays 25 percent of the costs. DNR pays

wildlife damage claims directly.

Effective January 1, 2022, this bill removes counties from the administration

of these programs and requires DNR to administer the programs instead. The bill

specifies that, if DNR provides wildlife damage abatement assistance to a person, it

must determine the actual cost of providing that assistance and pay 75 percent of

that cost, leaving the remaining 25 percent as the responsibility of the recipient. The

bill eliminates a $10,000 limit under current law on the total amount that may be

paid to a claimant for each damage claim. The bill maintains the current law

requirement that DNR pay claimants on a prorated basis if there is not a sufficient

amount appropriated to pay all claims.

The bill also eliminates the requirement under current law that a county

participate in the administration of these programs in order to be eligible for

reimbursement by DNR for the costs that the county incurs in processing and

donating venison from certain deer carcasses and in processing and donating meat

from certain wild turkey carcasses.

Under current law, the type of wildlife damage that is eligible for wildlife

damage claim payments is limited to damage to commercial seedings or crops

growing on agricultural land, damage to crops that have been harvested for sale or

further use but that have not been removed from the agricultural land, damage to

orchard trees or nursery stock, and damage to apiaries or livestock. This bill adds

that damage to commercial seedings or crops growing on agricultural land caused by

operating a vehicle in a field in order to place a bear trap under the wildlife damage

abatement program is eligible for a wildlife damage claim payment.

What it would cost

Fiscal estimates filed by state agencies, as official PDFs

Sponsors

Introduced by: B. Meyers (D) , Considine (D) , Edming (R) , Mursau (R) , Quinn (R) , Skowronski (R) , Tauchen (R) , Thiesfeldt (R) , Tusler (R) , VanderMeer (R)

7 cosponsors

Bewley (D) , Cowles (R) , Marklein (R) , Olsen (R) , Petrowski (R) , Plumer (R) , Schachtner (D)

Votes

Assembly: Report passage recommended by Committee on Agriculture, Ayes 13, Noes 0

Passed 13–0 Feb 18, 2020 official source full page

No individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Full history

  1. Dec 23, 2019 · Assembly

    Introduced by Representatives Edming, Quinn, Considine, B. Meyers, Mursau, Skowronski, Tauchen, Thiesfeldt, Tusler and VanderMeer; cosponsored by Senators Petrowski, Bewley, Marklein, Olsen, Schachtner and Cowles

  2. Dec 23, 2019 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to Committee on Agriculture

  3. Jan 10, 2020 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  4. Jan 29, 2020 · Assembly

    Representative Plumer added as a coauthor

  5. Jan 29, 2020 · Assembly

    Public hearing held

  6. Feb 4, 2020 · Assembly

    Executive action taken

  7. Feb 18, 2020 · Assembly

    Report passage recommended by Committee on Agriculture, Ayes 13, Noes 0

  8. Feb 18, 2020 · Assembly

    Referred to committee on Rules

  9. Feb 18, 2020 · Assembly

    Made a special order of business at 10:37 AM on 2-20-2020 pursuant to Assembly Resolution 21

  10. Feb 20, 2020 · Assembly

    Ordered to a third reading

  11. Feb 20, 2020 · Assembly

    Rules suspended

  12. Feb 20, 2020 · Assembly

    Read a third time and passed

  13. Feb 20, 2020 · Assembly

    Ordered immediately messaged

  14. Feb 20, 2020 · Assembly

    Read a second time

  15. Feb 21, 2020 · Senate

    Received from Assembly

  16. Feb 21, 2020 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to committee on Senate Organization

  17. Feb 21, 2020 · Senate

    Available for scheduling

  18. Apr 1, 2020 · Senate

    Failed to concur in pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1