There is another odd section in Wisconsin’s new and recently updated native amphibian and reptile regulations in CR 25-092 worth taking a closer look at. Section 9 of the rule states the following:

Section 9 NR 16.12 (4) is amended to read:

NR 16.12 (4) Exhibiting. The exhibiting of live native reptiles and amphibians requires a license under s. 169.07, Stats.

Previously, this section of NR 16.12(4) allowed for the exhibition of live native amphibians and reptiles without a license if the animals were exhibited solely for “educational, noncommercial purposes”. This comes from the first comprehensive set of Wisconsin captive wildlife regulations back in 2003 which came to be NR 16.12:

(4) Exhibiting. The exhibiting of live native reptiles and amphibians possessed under the authority of sub. (3) (b) and s. NR 19.275 (2), does not require a license under s. 169.07, Stats., when those captive wild animals are exhibited exclusively for noncommercial, educational purposes.

So why is CR 25-092 now making the assertion that reptiles and amphibians require a license under Chapter 169.07, when they have not previously for at least the past 23 years? Let’s first look at the types of licenses currently found in Chapter 169 for captive wildlife:

-169.15 Captive Wild Animal Farm Licenses.
-169.18 Wild Fur Farm License.
-169.19 Bird Hunting Preserve Licenses.
-169.20 Dog Training Licenses.
-169.21 Dog Trial Licenses.
-169.23 Stocking License.
-169.24 Rehabilitation License.
-169.25 Scientific Research License.
-169.26 Nonprofit Educational Exhibiting License.
-169.27 Nonresident Temporary Exhibiting License.
-169.29 Validation Licenses.

So when it comes to educational outreach, only one of these licenses apply, and that would be s. 169.26 Nonprofit Educational Exhibiting License. But the problem here is one has to be a nonprofit in order to get one, and many exhibitors who even do an informal educational show and tell at a local school, library, nature center, scout group, or other community fair or festival do not qualify for one. That’s a problem.

But what could the explanation be that WDNR was able to promulgate CR 03-031 back in 2003 allowing for the solely noncommercial, educational exception for live reptile and amphibian exhibition? It could have been WDNR's interpretation that §169.07 did not reach this particular category of exhibition because the animals were already lawfully possessed under NR 16.12(3)(b) and NR 19.275(2), and therefore the statutory phrase “except as authorized” was being satisfied through another authorization structure.

In other-words, it could point back to the same statutory construction problems with CR 25-092 we’ve been discussing previously in greater length and detail. It never explicitly states in s. 169.12 specifically that reptiles and amphibians do require any of the Chapter 169 licenses listed above, so they could already be legally kept without a license.

But that would be a much more difficult conclusion to arrive to if we just examined the text of s. 169.07itself, unless WDNR was relying on another statutory authority or interpretation that is not apparent from §169.07 itself.

The only way to resolve this question would be through another records request, and further information into the exact authorizing statute(s) and/or statute(s) interpreted that it used back in 2003 to create that exception.

But if WDNR’s intrepretation of the exhibition issue in CR 25-092 is in fact correct, then that would be a big problem, as most, if not all of the licenses listed are either commercial licenses or hunting-type licenses most people who exhibit live native amphibians and reptiles do not actually qualify for. That creates a huge disconnect between the statutes and all practical reality when it comes to most modern and commonplace exhibition activities relating to herpetoculture.

This is the same dilemma as to why requiring a $200 commercial Class A Wild Animal License to even keep a spring peeper (a species of small frog the size of one’s thumbnail) non-commercially makes absolutely no sense. The Legislature needs to fix this problem by working with knowledgeable stakeholders in the Wisconsin reptile community by amending s. 169.07 to exclude reptiles and amphibians, and subjecting exhibition of them to 169.12 instead.