Bills · 2021-2022 Regular Session
Relating to: the wildlife damage abatement program and the wildlife damage claim program. (FE)
Animal Apprenticeship Claims County Damage to property Hunting Hygiene laboratory Natural resources department of — Environmental protection
- Introduced, stopped here
- Passes Assembly, not reached
- Passes Senate, not reached
- Governor signs, not reached
- 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
Votes
Assembly: Report Assembly Amendment 1 adoption recommended by Committee on Agriculture, Ayes 13, Noes 0
Passed 13–0 Feb 17, 2022 official source full pageNo individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Assembly: Report passage as amended recommended by Committee on Agriculture, Ayes 12, Noes 1
Passed 12–1 Feb 17, 2022 official source full pageNo individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Full history
- Feb 10, 2021 · Assembly
Introduced by Representatives Edming, Armstrong, Callahan, Krug, Milroy, Moses, Mursau, Plumer, Rozar, Skowronski, Spiros, Tauchen and VanderMeer; cosponsored by Senators Petrowski, Bewley, Cowles and Marklein
- Feb 10, 2021 · Assembly
Read first time and referred to Committee on Agriculture
- Mar 2, 2021 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Mar 9, 2021 · Assembly
LRB correction
- Jan 4, 2022 · Assembly
Representative Vruwink added as a coauthor
- Jan 5, 2022 · Assembly
Public hearing held
- Jan 7, 2022 · Assembly
LRB correction
- Jan 18, 2022 · Assembly
Assembly Amendment 1 offered by Representative Edming
- Feb 1, 2022 · Assembly
Executive action taken
- Feb 17, 2022 · Assembly
Report passage as amended recommended by Committee on Agriculture, Ayes 12, Noes 1
- Feb 17, 2022 · Assembly
Referred to committee on Rules
- Feb 17, 2022 · Assembly
Report Assembly Amendment 1 adoption recommended by Committee on Agriculture, Ayes 13, Noes 0
- Feb 22, 2022 · Assembly
Made a special order of business at 8:02 AM on 2-23-2022 pursuant to Assembly Resolution 29
- Feb 23, 2022 · Assembly
Read a second time
- Feb 23, 2022 · Assembly
Assembly Amendment 1 adopted
- Feb 23, 2022 · Assembly
Ordered to a third reading
- Feb 23, 2022 · Assembly
Rules suspended
- Feb 23, 2022 · Assembly
Read a third time and passed
- Feb 23, 2022 · Assembly
Ordered immediately messaged
- Feb 23, 2022 · Senate
Received from Assembly
- Feb 23, 2022 · Senate
Representative Spreitzer added as a coauthor
- Feb 24, 2022 · Senate
Read first time and referred to committee on Sporting Heritage, Small Business and Rural Issues
- Mar 15, 2022 · Senate
Failed to concur in pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1