No. 32299 (Amendment): R657-44-3. Damage to Cultivated Crops, Fences, or Irrigation Equipment by Big Game Animals

DAR File No.: 32299
Filed: 01/13/2009, 09:55
Received by: NL

RULE ANALYSIS

Purpose of the rule or reason for the change:

This rule is being amended pursuant to Regional Advisory Council and Wildlife Board meetings conducted annually for taking public input and reviewing the Division of Wildlife Resources' (DWR) rule pursuant to depredation and mitigation permits.

Summary of the rule or change:

The proposed revision to the above listed rule authorizes a mitigation permit voucher for antlerless deer to take one or two deer as determined by DWR.

State statutory or constitutional authorization for this rule:

Sections 23-16-2, 23-16-3, 13-16-3.1, 23-16-3.2, and 23-16-4

Anticipated cost or savings to:

the state budget:

This amendment allows the removal of one or two antlerless deer as determined by DWR in depredation situations, as such DWR determines that these amendments do not create a cost or savings impact to the state budget or DWR's budget, since the changes will not increase workload and can be carried out with existing budget.

local governments:

Since this amendment only allows for the taking of one or two antlerless deer as determined by DWR with a mitigation voucher, this should have little to no effect on the local government. This filing does not create any direct cost or savings impact to local governments because they are not directly affected by the rule. Nor are local governments indirectly impacted because the rule does not create a situation requiring services from local governments.

small businesses and persons other than businesses:

This amendment allows for the taking of one or two antlerless deer as determined by DWR with a mitigation voucher in depredation situations. Since this amendment requires the same purchase of a mitigation voucher, it does not increase the cost to each sportsmen. Therefore, the amendments do not have the potential to generate a cost or savings impact to other persons.

Compliance costs for affected persons:

DWR determines that these amendments will not create additional costs for mitigation voucher holders. The fee is the same, the only difference is two antlerless deer may be taken in situations approved by DWR.

Comments by the department head on the fiscal impact the rule may have on businesses:

The amendments to this rule do not create an impact on businesses. Michael R. Styler, Executive Director

The full text of this rule may be inspected, during regular business hours, at the Division of Administrative Rules, or at:

Natural Resources
Wildlife Resources
1594 W NORTH TEMPLE
SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116-3154

Direct questions regarding this rule to:

Staci Coons at the above address, by phone at 801-538-4718, by FAX at 801-538-4709, or by Internet E-mail at [e-mail]

Interested persons may present their views on this rule by submitting written comments to the address above no later than 5:00 p.m. on:

03/03/2009

This rule may become effective on:

03/10/2009

Authorized by:

James F Karpowitz, Director

RULE TEXT

R657. Natural Resources, Wildlife Resources.

R657-44. Big Game Depredation.

R657-44-3. Damage to Cultivated Crops, Fences, or Irrigation Equipment by Big Game Animals.

(1) If big game animals are damaging cultivated crops on cleared and planted land, or fences or irrigation equipment on private land, the landowner or lessee shall immediately, upon discovery of big game damage, request that the division take action by notifying a division representative in the appropriate regional office pursuant to Section 23-16-3(1).

(2) Notification may be made:

(a) orally to expedite a field investigation; or

(b) in writing to a division representative in the appropriate division regional office.

(3)(a) The regional supervisor or division representative shall contact the landowner or lessee within 72 hours after receiving notification to determine the nature of the damage and take appropriate action for the extent of the damage experienced or expected during the damage incident period.

(b) The division shall consider the big game population management objectives as established in the wildlife unit management plan approved by the Wildlife Board.

(c) Division action shall include:

(i) removing the big game animals causing depredation; or

(ii) implementing a depredation mitigation plan pursuant to Sections 23-16-3(2)(b) through 23-16-3(2)(f) and approved in writing by the landowner or lessee.

(4)(a) The division mitigation plan may incorporate any of the following measures:

(i) sending a division representative onto the premises to control or remove the big game animals, including:

(A) herding;

(B) capture and relocation;

(C) temporary or permanent fencing; or

(D) removal, as authorized by the division director or the division director's designee;

(ii) recommending to the Wildlife Board an antlerless big game hunt in the next big game season framework;

(iii) scheduling a depredation hunter pool hunt in accordance with Sections R657-44-7, R657-44-8, or R657-44-9;

(iv) issuing mitigation permits to the landowner or lessee for the harvest of big game animals causing depredation during a general or special season hunt authorized by the Wildlife Board, of which:

(A) the hunting area for big game animals may include a buffer zone established by the division that surrounds, or is adjacent to, the lands where depredation is occurring;

(B) the landowner or lessee may retain no more than five antlerless deer, five doe pronghorn, and two antlerless elk;

(C) each qualified recipient of a mitigation permit will receive from the division a Mitigation Permit Hunting License that satisfies the hunting license requirements in R657-44-11(c) to obtain the mitigation permit.

(D) the Mitigation Permit Hunting License does not authorize the holder to hunt small game; nor does it qualify the holder to apply for or obtain a cougar, bear, turkey, or other big game permit.

(v) issuing big game mitigation permit vouchers for use on the landowner's or lessee's private land during a general or special hunt authorized by the Wildlife Board.

(A) mitigation permit voucher for antlerless deer may authorize the take of one or two deer as determined by the division.

(b) The mitigation plan may describe how the division will assess and compensate for damage pursuant to Section 23-16-4.

(c) The landowner or lessee and the division may agree upon a combination of mitigation measures to be used pursuant to Subsections (4)(a)(i) through (4)(a)(v), and a payment of damage pursuant to Section 23-16-4.

(d) The agreement pursuant to Subsection (4)(c) must be made before a claim for damage is filed and the mitigation measures are taken.

(5) Vouchers may be issued in accordance with Subsection (4)(a)(v) to:

(a) the landowner or lessee; or

(b) a landowner association that:

(i) applies in writing to the division;

(ii) provides a map of the association lands;

(iii) provides signatures of the landowners in the association; and

(iv) designates an association representative to act as liaison with the division.

(6) In determining appropriate mitigation, the division shall consider the landowner's or lessee's revenue pursuant to Subsections 23-16-3(2)(f) and 23-16-4(3)(b).

(7) Mitigation permits or vouchers may be withheld from persons who have violated this rule, any other wildlife rule, the Wildlife Resources Code, or are otherwise ineligible to receive a permit.

(8)(a) The options provided in Subsections (4)(a)(i) through (4)(a)(v) are for antlerless animals only.

(b) Deer and pronghorn hunts may be August 1 through December 31, and elk hunts may be August 1 through January 31.

(9)(a) The division director may approve mitigation permits or mitigation permit vouchers issued for antlered animals.

(b) A mitigation permit may be issued to the landowner or lessee to take big game for personal use, provided the division and the landowner or lessee desire the animals to be permanently removed.

(c) A mitigation permit voucher may be issued to the landowner or lessee, provided:

(i) the division has determined that the big game animals in the geographic area significantly contribute to the wildlife management units;

(ii) the landowner or lessee agrees to perpetuate the animals on their land; and

(iii) the damage, or expected damage, to the cultivated crop is comparable with the expected value of the mitigation permit voucher on that private land within the wildlife unit.

(10)(a) If the landowner or lessee and the division are unable to agree on the assessed damage, they shall designate a third party pursuant to Subsection 23-16-4(3)(d).

(b) Additional compensation shall be paid above the value of any mitigation permits or vouchers granted to the landowner or lessee if the damage exceeds the value of the mitigation permits or vouchers.

(11)(a) The landowner or lessee may revoke approval of the mitigation plan agreed to pursuant to Subsection (4)(c).

(b) If the landowner or lessee revokes the mitigation plan, the landowner or lessee must request that the division take action pursuant to Section 23-16-3(1)(a).

(c) Any subsequent request for action shall start a new 72-hour time limit as specified in Section 23-16-3(2)(a).

(12) The expiration of the damage incident period does not preclude the landowner or lessee from making future claims.

(13) The division may enter into a conservation lease with the landowner or lessee of private land pursuant to Section 23-16-3(5).

 

KEY: wildlife, big game, depredation

Date of Enactment or Last Substantive Amendment: [August 7, 2007]2009

Notice of Continuation: June 20, 2007

Authorizing, and Implemented or Interpreted Law: 23-16-2; 23-16-3; 23-16-3.5