Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed 2007-08 Migratory Game Bird Hunting Regulations (Preliminary) With Requests for Indian Tribal Proposals and Requests for 2008 Spring/Summer Migratory Bird Subsistence Harvest Proposals in Alaska, 18328-18337 [07-1750]
Download as PDF
18328
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 20
RIN 1018–AV12
Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed
2007–08 Migratory Game Bird Hunting
Regulations (Preliminary) With
Requests for Indian Tribal Proposals
and Requests for 2008 Spring/Summer
Migratory Bird Subsistence Harvest
Proposals in Alaska
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; availability of
supplemental information.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS2
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (hereinafter the Service or we)
proposes to establish annual hunting
regulations for certain migratory game
birds for the 2007–08 hunting season.
We annually prescribe outside limits
(frameworks) within which States may
select hunting seasons. This proposed
rule provides the regulatory schedule,
describes the proposed regulatory
alternatives for the 2007–08 duck
hunting seasons, requests proposals
from Indian tribes that wish to establish
special migratory game bird hunting
regulations on Federal Indian
reservations and ceded lands, and
requests proposals for the 2008 spring/
summer migratory bird subsistence
season in Alaska. Migratory game bird
hunting seasons provide hunting
opportunities for recreation and
sustenance; aid Federal, State, and tribal
governments in the management of
migratory game birds; and permit
harvests at levels compatible with
migratory game bird population status
and habitat conditions.
DATES: You must submit comments on
the proposed regulatory alternatives for
the 2007–08 duck hunting seasons and
the draft environmental assessment for
the take of Lower Colorado River Valley
Population of sandhill cranes by May
15, 2007. Following later Federal
Register documents, you will be given
an opportunity to submit comments for
proposed early-season frameworks by
July 31, 2007, and for proposed lateseason frameworks and subsistence
migratory bird seasons in Alaska by
August 31, 2007. Tribes must submit
proposals and related comments by June
1, 2007. Proposals from the Comanagement Council for the 2008
spring/summer migratory bird
subsistence harvest season must be
submitted to the Flyway Councils and
the Service by June 15, 2007.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:19 Apr 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
Send your comments on the
proposals to the Chief, Division of
Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, Department of the
Interior, MS MBSP–4107–ARLSQ, 1849
C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20240.
All comments received, including
names and addresses, will become part
of the public record. You may inspect
comments during normal business
hours in room 4107, Arlington Square
Building, 4501 North Fairfax Drive,
Arlington, Virginia. Proposals for the
2008 spring/summer migratory bird
subsistence season in Alaska should be
sent to the Executive Director of the Comanagement Council, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, 1011 E. Tudor Road,
Anchorage, AK 99503, or fax to (907)
786–3306 or email to ambcc@fws.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron
W. Kokel, at: Division of Migratory Bird
Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Department of the Interior, MS
MBSP–4107–ARLSQ, 1849 C Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20240, (703) 358–
1714. For information on the migratory
bird subsistence season in Alaska,
contact Fred Armstrong, (907) 786–
3887, or Donna Dewhurst, (907) 786–
3499, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
1011 E. Tudor Road, Mail Stop 201,
Anchorage, AK 99503.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ADDRESSES:
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Background and Overview
Migratory game birds are those bird
species so designated in conventions
between the United States and several
foreign nations for the protection and
management of these birds. Under the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C.
703–712), the Secretary of the Interior is
authorized to determine when ‘‘hunting,
taking, capture, killing, possession, sale,
purchase, shipment, transportation,
carriage, or export of any * * * bird, or
any part, nest, or egg’’ of migratory game
birds can take place, and to adopt
regulations for this purpose. These
regulations are written after giving due
regard to ‘‘the zones of temperature and
to the distribution, abundance,
economic value, breeding habits, and
times and lines of migratory flight of
such birds’ and are updated annually
(16 U.S.C. 704(a)). This responsibility
has been delegated to the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) of the
Department of the Interior as the lead
Federal agency for managing and
conserving migratory birds in the
United States.
The Service develops migratory game
bird hunting regulations by establishing
the frameworks, or outside limits, for
season lengths, bag limits, and areas for
migratory game bird hunting.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Acknowledging regional differences in
hunting conditions, the Service has
administratively divided the nation into
four Flyways for the primary purpose of
managing migratory game birds. Each
Flyway (Atlantic, Mississippi, Central,
and Pacific) has a Flyway Council, a
formal organization generally composed
of one member from each State and
Province in that Flyway. The Flyway
Councils, established through the
International Association of Fish and
Wildlife Agencies (IAFWA), also assist
in researching and providing migratory
game bird management information for
Federal, State, and Provincial
Governments, as well as private
conservation agencies and the general
public.
The process for adopting migratory
game bird hunting regulations, located
at 50 CFR 20, is constrained by three
primary factors. Legal and
administrative considerations dictate
how long the rulemaking process will
last. Most importantly, however, the
biological cycle of migratory game birds
controls the timing of data-gathering
activities and thus the dates on which
these results are available for
consideration and deliberation.
The process includes two separate
regulations-development schedules,
based on early and late hunting season
regulations. Early hunting seasons
pertain to all migratory game bird
species in Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico,
and the Virgin Islands; migratory game
birds other than waterfowl (i.e., dove,
woodcock, etc.); and special early
waterfowl seasons, such as teal or
resident Canada geese. Early hunting
seasons generally begin prior to October
1. Late hunting seasons generally start
on or after October 1 and include most
waterfowl seasons not already
established.
There are basically no differences in
the processes for establishing either
early or late hunting seasons. For each
cycle, Service biologists gather, analyze,
and interpret biological survey data and
provide this information to all those
involved in the process through a series
of published status reports and
presentations to Flyway Councils and
other interested parties. Because the
Service is required to take abundance of
migratory game birds and other factors
into consideration, the Service
undertakes a number of surveys
throughout the year in conjunction with
Service Regional Offices, the Canadian
Wildlife Service, and State and
Provincial wildlife-management
agencies. To determine the appropriate
frameworks for each species, we
consider factors such as population size
and trend, geographical distribution,
E:\FR\FM\11APP2.SGM
11APP2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules
annual breeding effort, the condition of
breeding and wintering habitat, the
number of hunters, and the anticipated
harvest.
After frameworks, or outside limits,
are established for season lengths, bag
limits, and areas for migratory game bird
hunting, migratory game bird
management becomes a cooperative
effort of State and Federal governments.
After Service establishment of final
frameworks for hunting seasons, the
States may select season dates, bag
limits, and other regulatory options for
the hunting seasons. States may always
be more conservative in their selections
than the Federal frameworks but never
more liberal.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS2
Notice of Intent To Establish Open
Seasons
This notice announces our intent to
establish open hunting seasons and
daily bag and possession limits for
certain designated groups or species of
migratory game birds for 2007–08 in the
contiguous United States, Alaska,
Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin
Islands, under §§ 20.101 through 20.107,
20.109, and 20.110 of subpart K of 50
CFR part 20.
For the 2007–08 migratory game bird
hunting season, we will propose
regulations for certain designated
members of the avian families Anatidae
(ducks, geese, and swans); Columbidae
(doves and pigeons); Gruidae (cranes);
Rallidae (rails, coots, moorhens, and
gallinules); and Scolopacidae
(woodcock and snipe). We describe
these proposals under Proposed 2007–
08 Migratory Game Bird Hunting
Regulations (Preliminary) in this
document. We published definitions of
waterfowl flyways and mourning dove
management units, as well as a
description of the data used in and the
factors affecting the regulatory process,
in the March 14, 1990, Federal Register
(55 FR 9618).
Regulatory Schedule for 2007–08
This document is the first in a series
of proposed, supplemental, and final
rulemaking documents for migratory
game bird hunting regulations. We will
publish additional supplemental
proposals for public comment in the
Federal Register as population, habitat,
harvest, and other information become
available. Because of the late dates
when certain portions of these data
become available, we anticipate
abbreviated comment periods on some
proposals. Special circumstances limit
the amount of time we can allow for
public comment on these regulations.
Specifically, two considerations
compress the time for the rulemaking
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:19 Apr 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
process: The need, on one hand, to
establish final rules early enough in the
summer to allow resource agencies to
select and publish season dates and bag
limits prior to the beginning of hunting
seasons and, on the other hand, the lack
of current status data on most migratory
game birds until later in the summer.
Because the regulatory process is
strongly influenced by the times when
information is available for
consideration, we divide the regulatory
process into two segments: Early
seasons and late seasons (further
described and discussed under the
Background and Overview section).
Major steps in the 2007–08 regulatory
cycle relating to open public meetings
and Federal Register notifications are
illustrated in the diagram at the end of
this proposed rule. All publication dates
of Federal Register documents are target
dates.
All sections of this and subsequent
documents outlining hunting
frameworks and guidelines are
organized under numbered headings.
These headings are:
1. Ducks
A. General Harvest Strategy
B. Regulatory Alternatives
C. Zones and Split Seasons
D. Special Seasons/Species
Management
i. September Teal Seasons
ii. September Teal/Wood Duck
Seasons
iii. Black ducks
iv. Canvasbacks
v. Pintails
vi. Scaup
vii. Mottled ducks
viii. Youth Hunt
2. Sea Ducks
3. Mergansers
4. Canada Geese
A. Special Seasons
B. Regular Seasons
C. Special Late Seasons
5. White-fronted Geese
6. Brant
7. Snow and Ross’s (Light) Geese
8. Swans
9. Sandhill Cranes
10. Coots
11. Moorhens and Gallinules
12. Rails
13. Snipe
14. Woodcock
15. Band-tailed Pigeons
16. Mourning Doves
17. White-winged and White-tipped
Doves
18. Alaska
19. Hawaii
20. Puerto Rico
21. Virgin Islands
22. Falconry
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
18329
23. Other
Later sections of this and subsequent
documents will refer only to numbered
items requiring your attention.
Therefore, it is important to note that we
will omit those items requiring no
attention, and remaining numbered
items will be discontinuous and appear
incomplete.
We will publish final regulatory
alternatives for the 2007–08 duck
hunting seasons in early June. We will
publish proposed early season
frameworks in mid-July and late season
frameworks in mid-August. We will
publish final regulatory frameworks for
early seasons on or about August 17,
2007, and those for late seasons on or
about September 14, 2007.
Request for 2008 Spring/Summer
Migratory Bird Subsistence Harvest
Proposals in Alaska
Background
The 1916 Convention for the
Protection of Migratory Birds between
the United States and Great Britain (for
Canada) established a closed season for
the taking of migratory birds between
March 10 and September 1. Residents of
northern Alaska and Canada
traditionally harvested migratory birds
for nutritional purposes during the
spring and summer months. The
governments of Canada, Mexico, and the
United States recently amended the
1916 Convention and the subsequent
1936 Mexico Convention for the
Protection of Migratory Birds and Game
Mammals. The amended treaties
provide for the legal subsistence harvest
of migratory birds and their eggs in
Alaska and Canada during the closed
season.
On August 16, 2002, we published in
the Federal Register (67 FR 53511) a
final rule that established procedures for
incorporating subsistence management
into the continental migratory bird
management program. These
regulations, developed under a new comanagement process involving the
Service, the Alaska Department of Fish
and Game, and Alaska Native
representatives, established an annual
procedure to develop harvest guidelines
for implementation of a spring/summer
migratory bird subsistence harvest.
Eligibility and inclusion requirements
necessary to participate in the spring/
summer migratory bird subsistence
season in Alaska are outlined in 50 CFR
part 92.
This proposed rule calls for proposals
for regulations that will expire on
August 31, 2008, for the spring/summer
subsistence harvest of migratory birds in
Alaska. Each year, seasons will open on
E:\FR\FM\11APP2.SGM
11APP2
18330
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Review of Public Comments
or after March 11 and close prior to
September 1.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS2
Alaska Spring/Summer Subsistence
Harvest Proposal Procedures
We will publish details of the Alaska
spring/summer subsistence harvest
proposals in later Federal Register
documents under 50 CFR part 92. The
general relationship to the process for
developing national hunting regulations
for migratory game birds is as follows:
(a) Alaska Migratory Bird CoManagement Council. Proposals may be
submitted by the public to the Comanagement Council during the period
of November 1–December 15, 2007, to
be acted upon for the 2008 migratory
bird subsistence harvest season.
Proposals should be submitted to the
Executive Director of the Comanagement Council, listed above
under the caption ADDRESSES.
(b) Flyway Councils. (1) Proposed
2008 regulations recommended by the
Co-management Council will be
submitted to all Flyway Councils for
review and comment. The Council’s
recommendations must be submitted
prior to the Service Regulations
Committee’s last regular meeting of the
calendar year in order to be approved
for spring/summer harvest beginning
March 11 of the following calendar year.
(2) Alaska Native representatives may
be appointed by the Co-management
Council to attend meetings of one or
more of the four Flyway Councils to
discuss recommended regulations or
other proposed management actions.
(c) Service regulations committee.
Proposed annual regulations
recommended by the Co-management
Council will be submitted to the Service
Regulations Committee (SRC) for their
review and recommendation to the
Service Director. Following the Service
Director’s review and recommendation,
the proposals will be forwarded to the
Department of the Interior for approval.
Proposed annual regulations will then
be published in the Federal Register for
public review and comment, similar to
the annual migratory game bird hunting
regulations. Final spring/summer
regulations for Alaska will be published
in the Federal Register in the preceding
fall.
Because of the time required for
review by us and the public, proposals
from the Co-management Council for
the 2008 spring/summer migratory bird
subsistence harvest season must be
submitted to the Flyway Councils and
the Service by June 15, 2007, for
Council comments and Service action at
the late-season SRC meeting.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:19 Apr 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
This proposed rulemaking contains
the proposed regulatory alternatives for
the 2007–08 duck hunting seasons. This
proposed rulemaking also describes
other recommended changes or specific
preliminary proposals that vary from the
2006–07 final frameworks (see August
29, 2006, Federal Register (71 FR
51406) for early seasons and September
22, 2006, Federal Register (71 FR
55654) for late seasons) and issues
requiring early discussion, action, or the
attention of the States or tribes. We will
publish responses to all proposals and
written comments when we develop
final frameworks for the 2007–08
season. We seek additional information
and comments on the recommendations
in this proposed rule.
Consolidation of Notices
For administrative purposes, this
document consolidates the notice of
intent to establish open migratory game
bird hunting seasons, the request for
tribal proposals, and the request for
Alaska migratory bird subsistence
seasons with the preliminary proposals
for the annual hunting regulationsdevelopment process. We will publish
the remaining proposed and final
rulemaking documents separately. For
inquiries on tribal guidelines and
proposals, tribes should contact the
following personnel:
Region 1 (California, Idaho, Nevada,
Oregon, Washington, Hawaii, and the
Pacific Islands)—Brad Bortner, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, 911 NE. 11th
Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97232–4181;
(503) 231–6164.
Region 2 (Arizona, New Mexico,
Oklahoma, and Texas)—Jeff Haskins,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box
1306, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103;
(505) 248–7885.
Region 3 (Illinois, Indiana, Iowa,
Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio,
and Wisconsin)—Steve Wilds, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, Federal Building,
One Federal Drive, Fort Snelling,
Minnesota 55111–4056; (612) 713–5432.
Region 4 (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida,
Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Mississippi, North Carolina, Puerto
Rico/Virgin Islands, South Carolina, and
Tennessee)—David Viker, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, 1875 Century
Boulevard, Room 324, Atlanta, Georgia
30345; (404) 679–4000.
Region 5 (Connecticut, Delaware,
Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New
Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont,
Virginia, and West Virginia)—Diane
Pence, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
300 Westgate Center Drive, Hadley,
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Massachusetts 01035–9589; (413) 253–
8576.
Region 6 (Colorado, Kansas, Montana,
Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota,
Utah, and Wyoming)—Stephanie Jones,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box
25486, Denver Federal Building,
Denver, Colorado 80225; (303) 236–
8145.
Region 7 (Alaska)—Russ Oates, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 1011 East
Tudor Road, Anchorage, Alaska 99503;
(907) 786–3423.
Requests for Tribal Proposals
Background
Beginning with the 1985–86 hunting
season, we have employed guidelines
described in the June 4, 1985, Federal
Register (50 FR 23467) to establish
special migratory game bird hunting
regulations on Federal Indian
reservations (including off-reservation
trust lands) and ceded lands. We
developed these guidelines in response
to tribal requests for our recognition of
their reserved hunting rights, and for
some tribes, recognition of their
authority to regulate hunting by both
tribal and nontribal members
throughout their reservations. The
guidelines include possibilities for:
(1) On-reservation hunting by both
tribal and nontribal members, with
hunting by nontribal members on some
reservations to take place within Federal
frameworks, but on dates different from
those selected by the surrounding
State(s);
(2) On-reservation hunting by tribal
members only, outside of usual Federal
frameworks for season dates and length,
and for daily bag and possession limits;
and
(3) Off-reservation hunting by tribal
members on ceded lands, outside of
usual framework dates and season
length, with some added flexibility in
daily bag and possession limits.
In all cases, tribal regulations
established under the guidelines must
be consistent with the annual March 10
to September 1 closed season mandated
by the 1916 Convention Between the
United States and Great Britain (for
Canada) for the Protection of Migratory
Birds (Convention). The guidelines are
applicable to those tribes that have
reserved hunting rights on Federal
Indian reservations (including offreservation trust lands) and ceded lands.
They also may be applied to the
establishment of migratory game bird
hunting regulations for nontribal
members on all lands within the
exterior boundaries of reservations
where tribes have full wildlife
management authority over such
E:\FR\FM\11APP2.SGM
11APP2
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules
hunting, or where the tribes and affected
States otherwise have reached
agreement over hunting by nontribal
members on non-Indian lands.
Tribes usually have the authority to
regulate migratory game bird hunting by
nonmembers on Indian-owned
reservation lands, subject to our
approval. The question of jurisdiction is
more complex on reservations that
include lands owned by non-Indians,
especially when the surrounding States
have established or intend to establish
regulations governing migratory bird
hunting by non-Indians on these lands.
In such cases, we encourage the tribes
and States to reach agreement on
regulations that would apply throughout
the reservations. When appropriate, we
will consult with a tribe and State with
the aim of facilitating an accord. We
also will consult jointly with tribal and
State officials in the affected States
where tribes may wish to establish
special hunting regulations for tribal
members on ceded lands. It is
incumbent upon the tribe and/or the
State to request consultation as a result
of the proposal being published in the
Federal Register. We will not presume
to make a determination, without being
advised by either a tribe or a State, that
any issue is or is not worthy of formal
consultation.
One of the guidelines provides for the
continuation of tribal members’ harvest
of migratory game birds on reservations
where such harvest is a customary
practice. We do not oppose this harvest,
provided it does not take place during
the closed season required by the
Convention, and it is not so large as to
adversely affect the status of the
migratory game bird resource. Since the
inception of these guidelines, we have
reached annual agreement with tribes
for migratory game bird hunting by
tribal members on their lands or on
lands where they have reserved hunting
rights. We will continue to consult with
tribes that wish to reach a mutual
agreement on hunting regulations for
on-reservation hunting by tribal
members.
Tribes should not view the guidelines
as inflexible. We believe that they
provide appropriate opportunity to
accommodate the reserved hunting
rights and management authority of
Indian tribes while also ensuring that
the migratory game bird resource
receives necessary protection. The
conservation of this important
international resource is paramount.
Use of the guidelines is not required if
a tribe wishes to observe the hunting
regulations established by the State(s) in
which the reservation is located.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:19 Apr 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
Details Needed in Tribal Proposals
Tribes that wish to use the guidelines
to establish special hunting regulations
for the 2007–08 migratory game bird
hunting season should submit a
proposal that includes:
(1) The requested migratory game bird
hunting season dates and other details
regarding the proposed regulations;
(2) Harvest anticipated under the
proposed regulations;
(3) Methods that will be employed to
measure or monitor harvest (mailquestionnaire survey, bag checks, etc.);
(4) Steps that will be taken to limit
level of harvest, where it could be
shown that failure to limit such harvest
would seriously impact the migratory
game bird resource; and
(5) Tribal capabilities to establish and
enforce migratory game bird hunting
regulations.
A tribe that desires the earliest
possible opening of the migratory game
bird season for nontribal members
should specify this request in its
proposal, rather than request a date that
might not be within the final Federal
frameworks. Similarly, unless a tribe
wishes to set more restrictive
regulations than Federal regulations will
permit for nontribal members, the
proposal should request the same daily
bag and possession limits and season
length for migratory game birds that
Federal regulations are likely to permit
the States in the Flyway in which the
reservation is located.
Tribal Proposal Procedures
We will publish details of tribal
proposals for public review in later
Federal Register documents. Because of
the time required for review by us and
the public, Indian tribes that desire
special migratory game bird hunting
regulations for the 2007–08 hunting
season should submit their proposals as
soon as possible, but no later than June
1, 2007.
Tribes should direct inquiries
regarding the guidelines and proposals
to the appropriate Service Regional
Office listed above under the caption
Consolidation of Notices. Tribes that
request special migratory game bird
hunting regulations for tribal members
on ceded lands should send a courtesy
copy of the proposal to officials in the
affected State(s).
Public Comments Solicited
The Department of the Interior’s
policy is, whenever practicable, to
afford the public an opportunity to
participate in the rulemaking process.
Accordingly, we invite interested
persons to submit written comments,
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
18331
suggestions, or recommendations
regarding the proposed regulations.
Before promulgation of final migratory
game bird hunting regulations, we will
take into consideration all comments
received. Such comments, and any
additional information received, may
lead to final regulations that differ from
these proposals. We invite interested
persons to participate in this rulemaking
by submitting written comments to the
address indicated under the caption
ADDRESSES.
Before including your address, phone
number, e-mail address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
You may inspect comments received
on the proposed annual regulations
during normal business hours at the
Service’s Division of Migratory Bird
Management office in room 4107, 4501
North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Virginia.
For each series of proposed
rulemakings, we will establish specific
comment periods. We will consider, but
possibly may not respond in detail to,
each comment. As in the past, we will
summarize all comments received
during the comment period and respond
to them after the closing date in any
final rules.
NEPA Consideration
NEPA considerations are covered by
the programmatic document ‘‘Final
Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement: Issuance of Annual
Regulations Permitting the Sport
Hunting of Migratory Birds (FSES 88–
14),’’ filed with the Environmental
Protection Agency on June 9, 1988. We
published Notice of Availability in the
Federal Register on June 16, 1988 (53
FR 22582). We published our Record of
Decision on August 18, 1988 (53 FR
31341). In addition, an August 1985
environmental assessment entitled
‘‘Guidelines for Migratory Bird Hunting
Regulations on Federal Indian
Reservations and Ceded Lands’’ is
available from the address indicated
under the caption ADDRESSES.
In a notice published in the
September 8, 2005, Federal Register (70
FR 53376), we announced our intent to
develop a new Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement for the
migratory bird hunting program. Public
scoping meetings were held in the
spring of 2006, as detailed in a March
E:\FR\FM\11APP2.SGM
11APP2
18332
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules
9, 2006, Federal Register (71 FR 12216).
We have prepared a scoping report
summarizing the scoping comments and
scoping meetings. The report is
available by either writing to the
address indicated under ADDRESSES or
by viewing on our Web site at https://
fws.gov/migratorybirds.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS2
Endangered Species Act Consideration
Prior to issuance of the 2007–08
migratory game bird hunting
regulations, we will comply with
provisions of the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C.
1531–1543; hereinafter the Act), to
ensure that hunting is not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of
any species designated as endangered or
threatened or modify or destroy its
critical habitat and is consistent with
conservation programs for those species.
Consultations under Section 7 of this
Act may cause us to change proposals
in this and future supplemental
proposed rulemaking documents.
Executive Order 12866
The migratory bird hunting
regulations are economically significant
and were reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
Executive Order 12866. As such, a cost/
benefit analysis was initially prepared
in 1981. This analysis was subsequently
revised annually from 1990–96, updated
in 1998 and updated again in 2004. It is
further discussed below under the
heading Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Results from the 2004 analysis indicate
that the expected welfare benefit of the
annual migratory bird hunting
frameworks is on the order of $734 to
$1,064 million, with a mid-point
estimate of $899 million. Copies of the
cost/benefit analysis are available upon
request from the address indicated
under ADDRESSES or from our Web site
at https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/
reports/SpecialTopics/
EconomicAnalysis-Final-2004.pdf.
Executive Order 12866 also requires
each agency to write regulations that are
easy to understand. We invite comments
on how to make this rule easier to
understand, including answers to
questions such as the following:
(1) Are the requirements in the rule
clearly stated?
(2) Does the rule contain technical
language or jargon that interferes with
its clarity?
(3) Does the format of the rule
(grouping and order of sections, use of
headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or
reduce its clarity?
(4) Would the rule be easier to
understand if it were divided into more
(but shorter) sections?
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:19 Apr 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
(5) Is the description of the rule in the
‘‘Supplementary Information’’ section of
the preamble helpful in understanding
the rule?
(6) What else could we do to make the
rule easier to understand?
Send a copy of any comments that
concern how we could make this rule
easier to understand to: Office of
Regulatory Affairs, Department of the
Interior, Room 7229, 1849 C Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20240. You may
also e-mail the comments to this
address: Exsec@ios.doi.gov.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
These regulations have a significant
economic impact on substantial
numbers of small entities under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.). We analyzed the economic
impacts of the annual hunting
regulations on small business entities in
detail as part of the 1981 cost-benefit
analysis discussed under Executive
Order 12866. This analysis was revised
annually from 1990–95. In 1995, the
Service issued a Small Entity Flexibility
Analysis (Analysis), which was
subsequently updated in 1996, 1998,
and 2004. The primary source of
information about hunter expenditures
for migratory game bird hunting is the
National Hunting and Fishing Survey,
which is conducted at 5-year intervals.
The 2004 Analysis was based on the
2001 National Hunting and Fishing
Survey and the U.S. Department of
Commerce’s County Business Patterns,
from which it was estimated that
migratory bird hunters would spend
between $481 million and $1.2 billion at
small businesses in 2004. Copies of the
Analysis are available upon request
from the address indicated under
ADDRESSES or from our Web site at
htttp://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/
reports/SpecialTopics/
EconomicAnalysis-Final-2004.pdf.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act
This rule is a major rule under 5
U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act.
For the reasons outlined above, this rule
has an annual effect on the economy of
$100 million or more. However, because
this rule establishes hunting seasons, we
do not plan to defer the effective date
under the exemption contained in 5
U.S.C. 808(1).
Paperwork Reduction Act
We examined these regulations under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
The various recordkeeping and
reporting requirements imposed under
regulations established in 50 CFR part
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
20, Subpart K, are utilized in the
formulation of migratory game bird
hunting regulations. Specifically, OMB
has approved the information collection
requirements of the surveys associated
with the Migratory Bird Harvest
Information Program and assigned
clearance number 1018–0015 (expires
2/29/2008). This information is used to
provide a sampling frame for voluntary
national surveys to improve our harvest
estimates for all migratory game birds in
order to better manage these
populations. OMB has also approved
the information collection requirements
of the Sandhill Crane Harvest Survey
and assigned clearance number 1018–
0023 (expires 11/30/2007). The
information from this survey is used to
estimate the magnitude and the
geographical and temporal distribution
of the harvest, and the portion it
constitutes of the total population.
Lastly, OMB has approved the
information collection requirements of
the Alaska Subsistence Household
Survey, an associated voluntary annual
household survey used to determine
levels of subsistence take in Alaska. The
OMB control number for the
information collection is 1018–0124
(expires 1/31/2010). A Federal agency
may not conduct or sponsor and a
person is not required to respond to a
collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
We have determined and certify, in
compliance with the requirements of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 2
U.S.C. 1502 et seq., that this rulemaking
will not impose a cost of $100 million
or more in any given year on local or
State government or private entities.
Therefore, this rule is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act.
Civil Justice Reform—Executive Order
12988
The Department, in promulgating this
proposed rule, has determined that this
proposed rule will not unduly burden
the judicial system and that it meets the
requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988.
Takings Implication Assessment
In accordance with Executive Order
12630, this proposed rule, authorized by
the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, does not
have significant takings implications
and does not affect any constitutionally
protected property rights. This rule will
not result in the physical occupancy of
property, the physical invasion of
property, or the regulatory taking of any
E:\FR\FM\11APP2.SGM
11APP2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules
property. In fact, these rules allow
hunters to exercise otherwise
unavailable privileges and, therefore,
reduce restrictions on the use of private
and public property.
Energy Effects—Executive Order 13211
On May 18, 2001, the President issued
Executive Order 13211 on regulations
that significantly affect energy supply,
distribution, and use. Executive Order
13211 requires agencies to prepare
Statements of Energy Effects when
undertaking certain actions. While this
proposed rule is a significant regulatory
action under Executive Order 12866, it
is not expected to adversely affect
energy supplies, distribution, or use.
Therefore, this action is not a significant
energy action and no Statement of
Energy Effects is required.
Federalism Effects
Due to the migratory nature of certain
species of birds, the Federal
Government has been given
responsibility over these species by the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act. We annually
prescribe frameworks from which the
States make selections regarding the
hunting of migratory birds, and we
employ guidelines to establish special
regulations on Federal Indian
reservations and ceded lands. This
process preserves the ability of the
States and tribes to determine which
seasons meet their individual needs.
Any State or Indian tribe may be more
restrictive than the Federal frameworks
at any time. The frameworks are
developed in a cooperative process with
the States and the Flyway Councils.
This process allows States to participate
in the development of frameworks from
which they will make selections,
thereby having an influence on their
own regulations. These rules do not
have a substantial direct effect on fiscal
capacity, change the roles or
responsibilities of Federal or State
governments, or intrude on State policy
or administration. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 13132,
these regulations do not have significant
federalism effects and do not have
sufficient federalism implications to
warrant the preparation of a Federalism
Assessment.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS2
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 20
Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation, Wildlife.
The rules that eventually will be
promulgated for the 2007–08 hunting
season are authorized under 16 U.S.C.
703–711, 16 U.S.C. 712, and 16 U.S.C.
742 a–j.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:19 Apr 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
Dated: March 21, 2007.
David M. Verhey,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and
Wildlife and Parks.
Proposed 2007–08 Migratory Game
Bird Hunting Regulations (Preliminary)
Pending current information on
populations, harvest, and habitat
conditions, and receipt of
recommendations from the four Flyway
Councils, we may defer specific
regulatory proposals. At this time, we
are proposing no changes from the final
2006–07 frameworks established on
August 29 and September 22, 2006 (71
FR 51406 and 71 FR 55654). Other
issues requiring early discussion, action,
or the attention of the States or tribes are
contained below:
1. Ducks
Categories used to discuss issues
related to duck harvest management are:
(A) General Harvest Strategy, (B)
Regulatory Alternatives, (C) Zones and
Split Seasons, and (D) Special Seasons/
Species Management. Only those
containing substantial recommendations
are discussed below.
A. General Harvest Strategy
We propose to continue use of
adaptive harvest management (AHM) to
help determine appropriate duckhunting regulations for the 2007–08
season. AHM is a tool that permits
sound resource decisions in the face of
uncertain regulatory impacts, as well as
providing a mechanism for reducing
that uncertainty over time. The current
AHM protocol is used to evaluate four
alternative regulatory levels based on
the population status of mallards
(special hunting restrictions are enacted
for species of special concern, such as
canvasbacks, scaup, and pintails).
In recent years, the prescribed
regulatory alternative for the Pacific,
Central, and Mississippi Flyways has
been based on the status of mallards and
breeding-habitat conditions in central
North America (Federal survey strata 1–
18, 20–50, and 75–77, and State surveys
in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and
Michigan). For the 2007 hunting season,
however, we are considering setting
hunting regulations in the Pacific
Flyway based on the status and
dynamics of a newly defined stock of
‘‘western’’ mallards. For now, western
mallards would be defined as those
breeding in Alaska (as based on federal
surveys in strata 1–12), and in California
and Oregon (as based on stateconducted surveys). Efforts to improve
survey designs in Washington State and
British Columbia are ongoing, and
mallards breeding in these areas would
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
18333
be included in regulatory assessments
when a sufficient time-series of
abundance estimates is available for
analysis. Predicting changes in the
abundance of western mallards due to
harvest and uncontrolled environmental
factors would be based on a model of
density-dependent growth, with
appropriate allowances for model
uncertainty and the impact of hunting.
Various harvest-management
objective(s) for western mallards are
being considered but, in any case,
would not allow for a harvest higher
than the estimated maximum
sustainable yield. More specifics
concerning this proposed change in
AHM protocol are available on our
website at https://www.fws.gov/
migratorybirds/mgmt/AHM/AHMintro.htm and will be provided in a
supplemental proposed rule in May
along with Flyway Council
recommendations and comments. The
final AHM protocol for the 2007–08
season will be detailed in the earlyseason proposed rule, which will be
published in July (see Schedule of
Regulations Meetings and Federal
Register Publications at the end of this
proposed rule for further information).
Finally, since 2000, we have prescribed
a regulatory alternative for the Atlantic
Flyway based on the population status
of mallards breeding in eastern North
America (Federal survey strata 51–54
and 56, and State surveys in New
England and the mid-Atlantic region).
We are recommending a continuation of
this protocol for the 2007–08 season.
We will propose a specific regulatory
alternative for each of the Flyways
during the 2007–08 season after survey
information becomes available in late
summer. More information on AHM is
located at https://www.fws.gov/
migratorybirds/mgmt/AHM/AHMintro.htm.
B. Regulatory Alternatives
The basic structure of the current
regulatory alternatives for AHM was
adopted in 1997. The alternatives
remained largely unchanged until 2002,
when we (based on recommendations
from the Flyway Councils) extended
framework dates in the ‘‘moderate’’ and
‘‘liberal’’ regulatory alternatives by
changing the opening date from the
Saturday nearest October 1 to the
Saturday nearest September 24, and
changing the closing date from the
Sunday nearest January 20 to the last
Sunday in January. These extended
dates were made available with no
associated penalty in season length or
bag limits. At that time we stated our
desire to keep these changes in place for
3 years to allow for a reasonable
E:\FR\FM\11APP2.SGM
11APP2
18334
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules
opportunity to monitor the impacts of
framework-date extensions on harvest
distribution and rates of harvest prior to
considering any subsequent use (67 FR
12501).
For 2007–08, we are proposing to
maintain the same regulatory
alternatives that were in effect last year
(see accompanying table for specifics of
the proposed regulatory alternatives).
Alternatives are specified for each
Flyway and are designated as ‘‘RES’’ for
the restrictive, ‘‘MOD’’ for the moderate,
and ‘‘LIB’’ for the liberal alternative. We
will announce final regulatory
alternatives in early June. Public
comments will be accepted until May
15, 2007, and should be sent to the
address under the caption ADDRESSES.
D. Special Seasons/Species
Management
iii. Black Ducks
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS2
For several years we have consulted
with the Atlantic and Mississippi
Flyway Councils, the Canadian Wildlife
Service, and provincial wildlife
agencies in eastern Canada concerning
the development of an international
harvest strategy for black ducks. In
November 2006, a working group of
Federal, provincial, and State
technicians expressed a desire to move
forward with development of a strategy
this year, with implementation to occur
in 2008. The strategy would consist of
a maximum harvest rate for the
continental black duck population, as
well as criteria for maintaining
approximate parity in harvest between
the two countries. Further consultations
are required, however, to determine an
acceptable upper limit to the overall
harvest rate, procedures for determining
whether the realized harvest rate is
below this limit, procedures for
determining whether the distribution of
harvest between the countries is
acceptable, and rules for changing
regulations if the harvest-rate and parity
criteria are not met. Based on the
outcome of those consultations, we are
planning to propose the specifics of a
joint harvest strategy with Canada in the
early-season proposed rule, which will
be published in July (see Schedule of
Regulations Meetings and Federal
Register Publications at the end of this
proposed rule for further information).
v. Pintails
In collaboration with scientists from
the U.S. Geological Survey, progress has
been made in the development of a
compensatory harvest-mortality model
for pintails. The model predicts that
pintail survival during the period
following the hunting season is density-
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:19 Apr 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
dependent, and represents an
alternative hypothesis about the effect of
hunting mortality on pintail population
change. We are considering the
inclusion of a ‘‘strong’’ compensatory
model as a competing model in the
analytical framework used to prescribe
harvest regulations under the current
pintail harvest strategy. Presently, in the
current pintail harvest strategy, hunting
mortality is assumed to be ‘‘additive’’ to
natural forms of mortality. Predictions
of pintail population size derived from
the additive and compensatory models
will be compared to the results of past
population surveys to determine the
initial predictive reliability of each
alternative model. These comparisons
will be used to weight each model in a
manner that reflects past predictive
ability. Model weights determine the
influence that the alternative harvestmortality models will have on
subsequent regulatory decisions. Model
weights will be updated annually by
comparing model predictions with
survey results such that the model with
greater predictive ability exerts greater
influence in regulatory decisions over
time. We remain committed to the
development of a framework to inform
pintail harvest management based on a
formal, derived strategy and clearly
articulated management objectives.
vi. Scaup
In 2006, we did not change scaup
harvest regulations with the
understanding that a draft harvest
strategy would be available for Flyway
Council review prior to the 2007 winter
meetings (see September 22, 2007,
Federal Register, 71 FR 55654). In
response to this expectation, we have
developed models to represent scaup
population and harvest dynamics that
rely on the available scaup monitoring
information and account for
uncertainties about factors affecting
scaup population change. The details of
the models and assessment methods
used to derive a scaup harvest strategy
were presented during the Winter
Flyway Technical Section meetings and
a summary is available at https://
www.fws.gov/migatorybirds/reports. As
part of the strategy-development
process, we provide several example
harvest strategies based on a range of
potential harvest-management
objectives in order to solicit feedback
regarding the appropriate objective for
scaup harvest management.
The final scaup harvest strategy will
be detailed in the July early-season
proposed rule (see Schedule of
Regulations Meetings and Federal
Register Publications at the end of this
proposed rule for further information).
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
vii. Mottled Ducks
The Service and other agencies have
been concerned about the status of
mottled ducks since at least the late
1990’s. This concern stems from
negative trends in population survey
data, loss and degradation of habitat,
interbreeding with captive-reared and
feral mallards, and increased harvest
rates as the result of longer hunting
seasons since 1997. In the past, we have
expressed our desire to work with the
States to develop a harvest-management
strategy for mottled ducks. Since 2005,
several workshops have been convened
with State agencies, the U.S. Geological
Survey, and others to discuss the status
of mottled ducks, population structure
and delineation, and to evaluate current
monitoring programs and plan for the
development of new population
surveys. Major conclusions from these
workshops are that mottled ducks
should be managed as two separate
stocks, a Florida stock and a Western
Gulf Coast stock, and that the lack of a
range-wide population survey for
Western Gulf Coast mottled ducks is a
significant impediment to management.
Although progress has been made
toward development of monitoring
systems to improve assessment
capabilities for mottled ducks, we
remain concerned about the status of
mottled ducks across their range,
especially in the Western Gulf Coast.
Reasons for these concerns were
mentioned previously. We will provide
the Flyway Councils with analyses of
harvest data that examine potential
harvest restrictions to reduce harvest
rates, should that be deemed necessary.
We encourage the Flyway Councils to
examine the status of mottled ducks and
assess the potential need for any
regulatory actions for the 2007–08
season.
9. Cranes
Greater and lesser (and Canadian)
sandhill cranes are presently hunted in
parts of their range and have been
divided into management populations
based on their geographic distribution
during Fall and Winter. The Flyway
Management Plan for the Lower
Colorado River Valley Population
(LCRVP) of sandhill cranes (Pacific
Flyway Council 1983, revised in 1989,
1995) allows for hunting of this
population when the wintering
population exceeds 2,500 cranes. This
population level has now been
exceeded. In 2005, the Pacific Flyway
Council proposed a limited open season
on this population. In response to the
Pacific Flyway Council’s proposal, we
stated in the August 29, 2006, Federal
E:\FR\FM\11APP2.SGM
11APP2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS2
Register (71 FR 51406) that while we
were in general support of allowing a
very limited, carefully controlled
harvest of sandhill cranes from this
population, we did not believe that this
limited harvest was of immediate
concern, and recommended that prior to
initiating such a season, which would
be the first time harvest from this
population has been permitted, a more
detailed harvest strategy be developed
by the Flyway Council. We stated that
this harvest strategy should be included
as an appendix to the management plan
prior to any hunting season being
initiated. In further response to this
proposal, we have now prepared a draft
environmental assessment (DEA)
considering the action to begin a limited
harvest of sandhill cranes from the
LCRVP by reviewing current
management strategies and population
objectives, and examining alternatives
to current management programs.
Copies of the DEA can be obtained by
writing Robert Trost, Pacific Flyway
Representative, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Division of Migratory Bird
Management, 911 NE. 11th Avenue,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:19 Apr 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
Portland, Oregon 97232–4181. The DEA
may also be viewed via the Fish and
Wildlife Service home page at https://
fws.gov/migratorybirds. Written
comments should be sent to the address
above. You must submit comments on
the Draft Environmental Assessment by
May 15, 2007.
16. Mourning Doves
Last year, we approved guidelines
that will be used to guide zone/split
seasons for doves (see July 28, 2006,
Federal Register, 71 FR 43008) with
implementation beginning in the 2007–
08 season. The initial period will be 4
years (2007–2010); beginning in 2011,
zoning will conform to a 5-year period.
Guidelines for Dove Zones and Split
Seasons in the Eastern and Central
Mourning Dove Management Units
1. A zone is a geographic area or
portion of a State, with a contiguous
boundary, for which independent
seasons may be selected for dove
hunting.
2. States may select a zone/split
option during an open season. It must
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
18335
remain in place for the following 5 years
except that States may make a one-time
change and revert back to their previous
zone/split configuration in any year of
the 5-year period. Formal approval will
not be required, but States must notify
the Service prior to making the change.
3. Zoning periods for dove hunting
will conform to those years used for
ducks, e.g., 2006–2010.
4. The zone/split configuration
consists of two zones with the option for
3-way (3-segment) split seasons in one
or both zones. As a grandfathered
arrangement, Texas will have three
zones with the option for 2-way (2segment) split seasons in one, two, or all
three zones.
5. States that do not wish to zone for
dove hunting may split their seasons
into no more than 3 segments.
We request that States notify us
whether or not they plan to change their
zone/split configurations for the
upcoming 4-year period (2007–2010) by
May 1, 2007.
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
E:\FR\FM\11APP2.SGM
11APP2
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules
13:19 Apr 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\11APP2.SGM
11APP2
EP11AP07.000
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS2
18336
18337
[FR Doc. 07–1750 Filed 4–10–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–C
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:19 Apr 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\11APP2.SGM
11APP2
EP11AP07.001
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 69 (Wednesday, April 11, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18328-18337]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-1750]
[[Page 18327]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part III
Department of the Interior
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish and Wildlife Service
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Part 20
Migratory Bird Hunting: Alaska; 2007-08 Spring/Summer Subsistence
Harvest Regulations; Indian Tribal Proposals and Requests; Proposed
Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 18328]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 20
RIN 1018-AV12
Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed 2007-08 Migratory Game Bird
Hunting Regulations (Preliminary) With Requests for Indian Tribal
Proposals and Requests for 2008 Spring/Summer Migratory Bird
Subsistence Harvest Proposals in Alaska
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; availability of supplemental information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (hereinafter the Service or
we) proposes to establish annual hunting regulations for certain
migratory game birds for the 2007-08 hunting season. We annually
prescribe outside limits (frameworks) within which States may select
hunting seasons. This proposed rule provides the regulatory schedule,
describes the proposed regulatory alternatives for the 2007-08 duck
hunting seasons, requests proposals from Indian tribes that wish to
establish special migratory game bird hunting regulations on Federal
Indian reservations and ceded lands, and requests proposals for the
2008 spring/summer migratory bird subsistence season in Alaska.
Migratory game bird hunting seasons provide hunting opportunities for
recreation and sustenance; aid Federal, State, and tribal governments
in the management of migratory game birds; and permit harvests at
levels compatible with migratory game bird population status and
habitat conditions.
DATES: You must submit comments on the proposed regulatory alternatives
for the 2007-08 duck hunting seasons and the draft environmental
assessment for the take of Lower Colorado River Valley Population of
sandhill cranes by May 15, 2007. Following later Federal Register
documents, you will be given an opportunity to submit comments for
proposed early-season frameworks by July 31, 2007, and for proposed
late-season frameworks and subsistence migratory bird seasons in Alaska
by August 31, 2007. Tribes must submit proposals and related comments
by June 1, 2007. Proposals from the Co-management Council for the 2008
spring/summer migratory bird subsistence harvest season must be
submitted to the Flyway Councils and the Service by June 15, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Send your comments on the proposals to the Chief, Division
of Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Department of the Interior, MS MBSP-4107-ARLSQ, 1849 C Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20240. All comments received, including names and
addresses, will become part of the public record. You may inspect
comments during normal business hours in room 4107, Arlington Square
Building, 4501 North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Virginia. Proposals for
the 2008 spring/summer migratory bird subsistence season in Alaska
should be sent to the Executive Director of the Co-management Council,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1011 E. Tudor Road, Anchorage, AK
99503, or fax to (907) 786-3306 or email to ambcc@fws.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron W. Kokel, at: Division of
Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department
of the Interior, MS MBSP-4107-ARLSQ, 1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC
20240, (703) 358-1714. For information on the migratory bird
subsistence season in Alaska, contact Fred Armstrong, (907) 786-3887,
or Donna Dewhurst, (907) 786-3499, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1011
E. Tudor Road, Mail Stop 201, Anchorage, AK 99503.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background and Overview
Migratory game birds are those bird species so designated in
conventions between the United States and several foreign nations for
the protection and management of these birds. Under the Migratory Bird
Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-712), the Secretary of the Interior is
authorized to determine when ``hunting, taking, capture, killing,
possession, sale, purchase, shipment, transportation, carriage, or
export of any * * * bird, or any part, nest, or egg'' of migratory game
birds can take place, and to adopt regulations for this purpose. These
regulations are written after giving due regard to ``the zones of
temperature and to the distribution, abundance, economic value,
breeding habits, and times and lines of migratory flight of such birds'
and are updated annually (16 U.S.C. 704(a)). This responsibility has
been delegated to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) of the
Department of the Interior as the lead Federal agency for managing and
conserving migratory birds in the United States.
The Service develops migratory game bird hunting regulations by
establishing the frameworks, or outside limits, for season lengths, bag
limits, and areas for migratory game bird hunting. Acknowledging
regional differences in hunting conditions, the Service has
administratively divided the nation into four Flyways for the primary
purpose of managing migratory game birds. Each Flyway (Atlantic,
Mississippi, Central, and Pacific) has a Flyway Council, a formal
organization generally composed of one member from each State and
Province in that Flyway. The Flyway Councils, established through the
International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (IAFWA), also
assist in researching and providing migratory game bird management
information for Federal, State, and Provincial Governments, as well as
private conservation agencies and the general public.
The process for adopting migratory game bird hunting regulations,
located at 50 CFR 20, is constrained by three primary factors. Legal
and administrative considerations dictate how long the rulemaking
process will last. Most importantly, however, the biological cycle of
migratory game birds controls the timing of data-gathering activities
and thus the dates on which these results are available for
consideration and deliberation.
The process includes two separate regulations-development
schedules, based on early and late hunting season regulations. Early
hunting seasons pertain to all migratory game bird species in Alaska,
Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands; migratory game birds other
than waterfowl (i.e., dove, woodcock, etc.); and special early
waterfowl seasons, such as teal or resident Canada geese. Early hunting
seasons generally begin prior to October 1. Late hunting seasons
generally start on or after October 1 and include most waterfowl
seasons not already established.
There are basically no differences in the processes for
establishing either early or late hunting seasons. For each cycle,
Service biologists gather, analyze, and interpret biological survey
data and provide this information to all those involved in the process
through a series of published status reports and presentations to
Flyway Councils and other interested parties. Because the Service is
required to take abundance of migratory game birds and other factors
into consideration, the Service undertakes a number of surveys
throughout the year in conjunction with Service Regional Offices, the
Canadian Wildlife Service, and State and Provincial wildlife-management
agencies. To determine the appropriate frameworks for each species, we
consider factors such as population size and trend, geographical
distribution,
[[Page 18329]]
annual breeding effort, the condition of breeding and wintering
habitat, the number of hunters, and the anticipated harvest.
After frameworks, or outside limits, are established for season
lengths, bag limits, and areas for migratory game bird hunting,
migratory game bird management becomes a cooperative effort of State
and Federal governments. After Service establishment of final
frameworks for hunting seasons, the States may select season dates, bag
limits, and other regulatory options for the hunting seasons. States
may always be more conservative in their selections than the Federal
frameworks but never more liberal.
Notice of Intent To Establish Open Seasons
This notice announces our intent to establish open hunting seasons
and daily bag and possession limits for certain designated groups or
species of migratory game birds for 2007-08 in the contiguous United
States, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands, under
Sec. Sec. 20.101 through 20.107, 20.109, and 20.110 of subpart K of 50
CFR part 20.
For the 2007-08 migratory game bird hunting season, we will propose
regulations for certain designated members of the avian families
Anatidae (ducks, geese, and swans); Columbidae (doves and pigeons);
Gruidae (cranes); Rallidae (rails, coots, moorhens, and gallinules);
and Scolopacidae (woodcock and snipe). We describe these proposals
under Proposed 2007-08 Migratory Game Bird Hunting Regulations
(Preliminary) in this document. We published definitions of waterfowl
flyways and mourning dove management units, as well as a description of
the data used in and the factors affecting the regulatory process, in
the March 14, 1990, Federal Register (55 FR 9618).
Regulatory Schedule for 2007-08
This document is the first in a series of proposed, supplemental,
and final rulemaking documents for migratory game bird hunting
regulations. We will publish additional supplemental proposals for
public comment in the Federal Register as population, habitat, harvest,
and other information become available. Because of the late dates when
certain portions of these data become available, we anticipate
abbreviated comment periods on some proposals. Special circumstances
limit the amount of time we can allow for public comment on these
regulations.
Specifically, two considerations compress the time for the
rulemaking process: The need, on one hand, to establish final rules
early enough in the summer to allow resource agencies to select and
publish season dates and bag limits prior to the beginning of hunting
seasons and, on the other hand, the lack of current status data on most
migratory game birds until later in the summer. Because the regulatory
process is strongly influenced by the times when information is
available for consideration, we divide the regulatory process into two
segments: Early seasons and late seasons (further described and
discussed under the Background and Overview section).
Major steps in the 2007-08 regulatory cycle relating to open public
meetings and Federal Register notifications are illustrated in the
diagram at the end of this proposed rule. All publication dates of
Federal Register documents are target dates.
All sections of this and subsequent documents outlining hunting
frameworks and guidelines are organized under numbered headings. These
headings are:
1. Ducks
A. General Harvest Strategy
B. Regulatory Alternatives
C. Zones and Split Seasons
D. Special Seasons/Species Management
i. September Teal Seasons
ii. September Teal/Wood Duck Seasons
iii. Black ducks
iv. Canvasbacks
v. Pintails
vi. Scaup
vii. Mottled ducks
viii. Youth Hunt
2. Sea Ducks
3. Mergansers
4. Canada Geese
A. Special Seasons
B. Regular Seasons
C. Special Late Seasons
5. White-fronted Geese
6. Brant
7. Snow and Ross's (Light) Geese
8. Swans
9. Sandhill Cranes
10. Coots
11. Moorhens and Gallinules
12. Rails
13. Snipe
14. Woodcock
15. Band-tailed Pigeons
16. Mourning Doves
17. White-winged and White-tipped Doves
18. Alaska
19. Hawaii
20. Puerto Rico
21. Virgin Islands
22. Falconry
23. Other
Later sections of this and subsequent documents will refer only to
numbered items requiring your attention. Therefore, it is important to
note that we will omit those items requiring no attention, and
remaining numbered items will be discontinuous and appear incomplete.
We will publish final regulatory alternatives for the 2007-08 duck
hunting seasons in early June. We will publish proposed early season
frameworks in mid-July and late season frameworks in mid-August. We
will publish final regulatory frameworks for early seasons on or about
August 17, 2007, and those for late seasons on or about September 14,
2007.
Request for 2008 Spring/Summer Migratory Bird Subsistence Harvest
Proposals in Alaska
Background
The 1916 Convention for the Protection of Migratory Birds between
the United States and Great Britain (for Canada) established a closed
season for the taking of migratory birds between March 10 and September
1. Residents of northern Alaska and Canada traditionally harvested
migratory birds for nutritional purposes during the spring and summer
months. The governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United States
recently amended the 1916 Convention and the subsequent 1936 Mexico
Convention for the Protection of Migratory Birds and Game Mammals. The
amended treaties provide for the legal subsistence harvest of migratory
birds and their eggs in Alaska and Canada during the closed season.
On August 16, 2002, we published in the Federal Register (67 FR
53511) a final rule that established procedures for incorporating
subsistence management into the continental migratory bird management
program. These regulations, developed under a new co-management process
involving the Service, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, and
Alaska Native representatives, established an annual procedure to
develop harvest guidelines for implementation of a spring/summer
migratory bird subsistence harvest. Eligibility and inclusion
requirements necessary to participate in the spring/summer migratory
bird subsistence season in Alaska are outlined in 50 CFR part 92.
This proposed rule calls for proposals for regulations that will
expire on August 31, 2008, for the spring/summer subsistence harvest of
migratory birds in Alaska. Each year, seasons will open on
[[Page 18330]]
or after March 11 and close prior to September 1.
Alaska Spring/Summer Subsistence Harvest Proposal Procedures
We will publish details of the Alaska spring/summer subsistence
harvest proposals in later Federal Register documents under 50 CFR part
92. The general relationship to the process for developing national
hunting regulations for migratory game birds is as follows:
(a) Alaska Migratory Bird Co-Management Council. Proposals may be
submitted by the public to the Co-management Council during the period
of November 1-December 15, 2007, to be acted upon for the 2008
migratory bird subsistence harvest season. Proposals should be
submitted to the Executive Director of the Co-management Council,
listed above under the caption ADDRESSES.
(b) Flyway Councils. (1) Proposed 2008 regulations recommended by
the Co-management Council will be submitted to all Flyway Councils for
review and comment. The Council's recommendations must be submitted
prior to the Service Regulations Committee's last regular meeting of
the calendar year in order to be approved for spring/summer harvest
beginning March 11 of the following calendar year.
(2) Alaska Native representatives may be appointed by the Co-
management Council to attend meetings of one or more of the four Flyway
Councils to discuss recommended regulations or other proposed
management actions.
(c) Service regulations committee. Proposed annual regulations
recommended by the Co-management Council will be submitted to the
Service Regulations Committee (SRC) for their review and recommendation
to the Service Director. Following the Service Director's review and
recommendation, the proposals will be forwarded to the Department of
the Interior for approval. Proposed annual regulations will then be
published in the Federal Register for public review and comment,
similar to the annual migratory game bird hunting regulations. Final
spring/summer regulations for Alaska will be published in the Federal
Register in the preceding fall.
Because of the time required for review by us and the public,
proposals from the Co-management Council for the 2008 spring/summer
migratory bird subsistence harvest season must be submitted to the
Flyway Councils and the Service by June 15, 2007, for Council comments
and Service action at the late-season SRC meeting.
Review of Public Comments
This proposed rulemaking contains the proposed regulatory
alternatives for the 2007-08 duck hunting seasons. This proposed
rulemaking also describes other recommended changes or specific
preliminary proposals that vary from the 2006-07 final frameworks (see
August 29, 2006, Federal Register (71 FR 51406) for early seasons and
September 22, 2006, Federal Register (71 FR 55654) for late seasons)
and issues requiring early discussion, action, or the attention of the
States or tribes. We will publish responses to all proposals and
written comments when we develop final frameworks for the 2007-08
season. We seek additional information and comments on the
recommendations in this proposed rule.
Consolidation of Notices
For administrative purposes, this document consolidates the notice
of intent to establish open migratory game bird hunting seasons, the
request for tribal proposals, and the request for Alaska migratory bird
subsistence seasons with the preliminary proposals for the annual
hunting regulations-development process. We will publish the remaining
proposed and final rulemaking documents separately. For inquiries on
tribal guidelines and proposals, tribes should contact the following
personnel:
Region 1 (California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Hawaii,
and the Pacific Islands)--Brad Bortner, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
911 NE. 11th Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97232-4181; (503) 231-6164.
Region 2 (Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas)--Jeff Haskins,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 1306, Albuquerque, New Mexico
87103; (505) 248-7885.
Region 3 (Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri,
Ohio, and Wisconsin)--Steve Wilds, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Federal Building, One Federal Drive, Fort Snelling, Minnesota 55111-
4056; (612) 713-5432.
Region 4 (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Mississippi, North Carolina, Puerto Rico/Virgin Islands, South
Carolina, and Tennessee)--David Viker, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
1875 Century Boulevard, Room 324, Atlanta, Georgia 30345; (404) 679-
4000.
Region 5 (Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts,
New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island,
Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia)--Diane Pence, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, 300 Westgate Center Drive, Hadley, Massachusetts
01035-9589; (413) 253-8576.
Region 6 (Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South
Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming)--Stephanie Jones, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, P.O. Box 25486, Denver Federal Building, Denver, Colorado
80225; (303) 236-8145.
Region 7 (Alaska)--Russ Oates, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1011
East Tudor Road, Anchorage, Alaska 99503; (907) 786-3423.
Requests for Tribal Proposals
Background
Beginning with the 1985-86 hunting season, we have employed
guidelines described in the June 4, 1985, Federal Register (50 FR
23467) to establish special migratory game bird hunting regulations on
Federal Indian reservations (including off-reservation trust lands) and
ceded lands. We developed these guidelines in response to tribal
requests for our recognition of their reserved hunting rights, and for
some tribes, recognition of their authority to regulate hunting by both
tribal and nontribal members throughout their reservations. The
guidelines include possibilities for:
(1) On-reservation hunting by both tribal and nontribal members,
with hunting by nontribal members on some reservations to take place
within Federal frameworks, but on dates different from those selected
by the surrounding State(s);
(2) On-reservation hunting by tribal members only, outside of usual
Federal frameworks for season dates and length, and for daily bag and
possession limits; and
(3) Off-reservation hunting by tribal members on ceded lands,
outside of usual framework dates and season length, with some added
flexibility in daily bag and possession limits.
In all cases, tribal regulations established under the guidelines
must be consistent with the annual March 10 to September 1 closed
season mandated by the 1916 Convention Between the United States and
Great Britain (for Canada) for the Protection of Migratory Birds
(Convention). The guidelines are applicable to those tribes that have
reserved hunting rights on Federal Indian reservations (including off-
reservation trust lands) and ceded lands. They also may be applied to
the establishment of migratory game bird hunting regulations for
nontribal members on all lands within the exterior boundaries of
reservations where tribes have full wildlife management authority over
such
[[Page 18331]]
hunting, or where the tribes and affected States otherwise have reached
agreement over hunting by nontribal members on non-Indian lands.
Tribes usually have the authority to regulate migratory game bird
hunting by nonmembers on Indian-owned reservation lands, subject to our
approval. The question of jurisdiction is more complex on reservations
that include lands owned by non-Indians, especially when the
surrounding States have established or intend to establish regulations
governing migratory bird hunting by non-Indians on these lands. In such
cases, we encourage the tribes and States to reach agreement on
regulations that would apply throughout the reservations. When
appropriate, we will consult with a tribe and State with the aim of
facilitating an accord. We also will consult jointly with tribal and
State officials in the affected States where tribes may wish to
establish special hunting regulations for tribal members on ceded
lands. It is incumbent upon the tribe and/or the State to request
consultation as a result of the proposal being published in the Federal
Register. We will not presume to make a determination, without being
advised by either a tribe or a State, that any issue is or is not
worthy of formal consultation.
One of the guidelines provides for the continuation of tribal
members' harvest of migratory game birds on reservations where such
harvest is a customary practice. We do not oppose this harvest,
provided it does not take place during the closed season required by
the Convention, and it is not so large as to adversely affect the
status of the migratory game bird resource. Since the inception of
these guidelines, we have reached annual agreement with tribes for
migratory game bird hunting by tribal members on their lands or on
lands where they have reserved hunting rights. We will continue to
consult with tribes that wish to reach a mutual agreement on hunting
regulations for on-reservation hunting by tribal members.
Tribes should not view the guidelines as inflexible. We believe
that they provide appropriate opportunity to accommodate the reserved
hunting rights and management authority of Indian tribes while also
ensuring that the migratory game bird resource receives necessary
protection. The conservation of this important international resource
is paramount. Use of the guidelines is not required if a tribe wishes
to observe the hunting regulations established by the State(s) in which
the reservation is located.
Details Needed in Tribal Proposals
Tribes that wish to use the guidelines to establish special hunting
regulations for the 2007-08 migratory game bird hunting season should
submit a proposal that includes:
(1) The requested migratory game bird hunting season dates and
other details regarding the proposed regulations;
(2) Harvest anticipated under the proposed regulations;
(3) Methods that will be employed to measure or monitor harvest
(mail-questionnaire survey, bag checks, etc.);
(4) Steps that will be taken to limit level of harvest, where it
could be shown that failure to limit such harvest would seriously
impact the migratory game bird resource; and
(5) Tribal capabilities to establish and enforce migratory game
bird hunting regulations.
A tribe that desires the earliest possible opening of the migratory
game bird season for nontribal members should specify this request in
its proposal, rather than request a date that might not be within the
final Federal frameworks. Similarly, unless a tribe wishes to set more
restrictive regulations than Federal regulations will permit for
nontribal members, the proposal should request the same daily bag and
possession limits and season length for migratory game birds that
Federal regulations are likely to permit the States in the Flyway in
which the reservation is located.
Tribal Proposal Procedures
We will publish details of tribal proposals for public review in
later Federal Register documents. Because of the time required for
review by us and the public, Indian tribes that desire special
migratory game bird hunting regulations for the 2007-08 hunting season
should submit their proposals as soon as possible, but no later than
June 1, 2007.
Tribes should direct inquiries regarding the guidelines and
proposals to the appropriate Service Regional Office listed above under
the caption Consolidation of Notices. Tribes that request special
migratory game bird hunting regulations for tribal members on ceded
lands should send a courtesy copy of the proposal to officials in the
affected State(s).
Public Comments Solicited
The Department of the Interior's policy is, whenever practicable,
to afford the public an opportunity to participate in the rulemaking
process. Accordingly, we invite interested persons to submit written
comments, suggestions, or recommendations regarding the proposed
regulations. Before promulgation of final migratory game bird hunting
regulations, we will take into consideration all comments received.
Such comments, and any additional information received, may lead to
final regulations that differ from these proposals. We invite
interested persons to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
written comments to the address indicated under the caption ADDRESSES.
Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying
information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you can
ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be
able to do so.
You may inspect comments received on the proposed annual
regulations during normal business hours at the Service's Division of
Migratory Bird Management office in room 4107, 4501 North Fairfax
Drive, Arlington, Virginia. For each series of proposed rulemakings, we
will establish specific comment periods. We will consider, but possibly
may not respond in detail to, each comment. As in the past, we will
summarize all comments received during the comment period and respond
to them after the closing date in any final rules.
NEPA Consideration
NEPA considerations are covered by the programmatic document
``Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement: Issuance of Annual
Regulations Permitting the Sport Hunting of Migratory Birds (FSES 88-
14),'' filed with the Environmental Protection Agency on June 9, 1988.
We published Notice of Availability in the Federal Register on June 16,
1988 (53 FR 22582). We published our Record of Decision on August 18,
1988 (53 FR 31341). In addition, an August 1985 environmental
assessment entitled ``Guidelines for Migratory Bird Hunting Regulations
on Federal Indian Reservations and Ceded Lands'' is available from the
address indicated under the caption ADDRESSES.
In a notice published in the September 8, 2005, Federal Register
(70 FR 53376), we announced our intent to develop a new Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement for the migratory bird hunting program.
Public scoping meetings were held in the spring of 2006, as detailed in
a March
[[Page 18332]]
9, 2006, Federal Register (71 FR 12216). We have prepared a scoping
report summarizing the scoping comments and scoping meetings. The
report is available by either writing to the address indicated under
ADDRESSES or by viewing on our Web site at https://fws.gov/
migratorybirds.
Endangered Species Act Consideration
Prior to issuance of the 2007-08 migratory game bird hunting
regulations, we will comply with provisions of the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543; hereinafter the Act), to
ensure that hunting is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence
of any species designated as endangered or threatened or modify or
destroy its critical habitat and is consistent with conservation
programs for those species. Consultations under Section 7 of this Act
may cause us to change proposals in this and future supplemental
proposed rulemaking documents.
Executive Order 12866
The migratory bird hunting regulations are economically significant
and were reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under
Executive Order 12866. As such, a cost/benefit analysis was initially
prepared in 1981. This analysis was subsequently revised annually from
1990-96, updated in 1998 and updated again in 2004. It is further
discussed below under the heading Regulatory Flexibility Act. Results
from the 2004 analysis indicate that the expected welfare benefit of
the annual migratory bird hunting frameworks is on the order of $734 to
$1,064 million, with a mid-point estimate of $899 million. Copies of
the cost/benefit analysis are available upon request from the address
indicated under ADDRESSES or from our Web site at https://www.fws.gov/
migratorybirds/reports/SpecialTopics/EconomicAnalysis-Final-2004.pdf.
Executive Order 12866 also requires each agency to write
regulations that are easy to understand. We invite comments on how to
make this rule easier to understand, including answers to questions
such as the following:
(1) Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated?
(2) Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that
interferes with its clarity?
(3) Does the format of the rule (grouping and order of sections,
use of headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce its clarity?
(4) Would the rule be easier to understand if it were divided into
more (but shorter) sections?
(5) Is the description of the rule in the ``Supplementary
Information'' section of the preamble helpful in understanding the
rule?
(6) What else could we do to make the rule easier to understand?
Send a copy of any comments that concern how we could make this
rule easier to understand to: Office of Regulatory Affairs, Department
of the Interior, Room 7229, 1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20240.
You may also e-mail the comments to this address: Exsec@ios.doi.gov.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
These regulations have a significant economic impact on substantial
numbers of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.). We analyzed the economic impacts of the annual
hunting regulations on small business entities in detail as part of the
1981 cost-benefit analysis discussed under Executive Order 12866. This
analysis was revised annually from 1990-95. In 1995, the Service issued
a Small Entity Flexibility Analysis (Analysis), which was subsequently
updated in 1996, 1998, and 2004. The primary source of information
about hunter expenditures for migratory game bird hunting is the
National Hunting and Fishing Survey, which is conducted at 5-year
intervals. The 2004 Analysis was based on the 2001 National Hunting and
Fishing Survey and the U.S. Department of Commerce's County Business
Patterns, from which it was estimated that migratory bird hunters would
spend between $481 million and $1.2 billion at small businesses in
2004. Copies of the Analysis are available upon request from the
address indicated under ADDRESSES or from our Web site at htttp://
www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/reports/SpecialTopics/EconomicAnalysis-
Final-2004.pdf.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
This rule is a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. For the reasons outlined above,
this rule has an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more.
However, because this rule establishes hunting seasons, we do not plan
to defer the effective date under the exemption contained in 5 U.S.C.
808(1).
Paperwork Reduction Act
We examined these regulations under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995. The various recordkeeping and reporting requirements imposed
under regulations established in 50 CFR part 20, Subpart K, are
utilized in the formulation of migratory game bird hunting regulations.
Specifically, OMB has approved the information collection requirements
of the surveys associated with the Migratory Bird Harvest Information
Program and assigned clearance number 1018-0015 (expires 2/29/2008).
This information is used to provide a sampling frame for voluntary
national surveys to improve our harvest estimates for all migratory
game birds in order to better manage these populations. OMB has also
approved the information collection requirements of the Sandhill Crane
Harvest Survey and assigned clearance number 1018-0023 (expires 11/30/
2007). The information from this survey is used to estimate the
magnitude and the geographical and temporal distribution of the
harvest, and the portion it constitutes of the total population.
Lastly, OMB has approved the information collection requirements of the
Alaska Subsistence Household Survey, an associated voluntary annual
household survey used to determine levels of subsistence take in
Alaska. The OMB control number for the information collection is 1018-
0124 (expires 1/31/2010). A Federal agency may not conduct or sponsor
and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
We have determined and certify, in compliance with the requirements
of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502 et seq., that this
rulemaking will not impose a cost of $100 million or more in any given
year on local or State government or private entities. Therefore, this
rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act.
Civil Justice Reform--Executive Order 12988
The Department, in promulgating this proposed rule, has determined
that this proposed rule will not unduly burden the judicial system and
that it meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of
Executive Order 12988.
Takings Implication Assessment
In accordance with Executive Order 12630, this proposed rule,
authorized by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, does not have significant
takings implications and does not affect any constitutionally protected
property rights. This rule will not result in the physical occupancy of
property, the physical invasion of property, or the regulatory taking
of any
[[Page 18333]]
property. In fact, these rules allow hunters to exercise otherwise
unavailable privileges and, therefore, reduce restrictions on the use
of private and public property.
Energy Effects--Executive Order 13211
On May 18, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13211 on
regulations that significantly affect energy supply, distribution, and
use. Executive Order 13211 requires agencies to prepare Statements of
Energy Effects when undertaking certain actions. While this proposed
rule is a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, it
is not expected to adversely affect energy supplies, distribution, or
use. Therefore, this action is not a significant energy action and no
Statement of Energy Effects is required.
Federalism Effects
Due to the migratory nature of certain species of birds, the
Federal Government has been given responsibility over these species by
the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. We annually prescribe frameworks from
which the States make selections regarding the hunting of migratory
birds, and we employ guidelines to establish special regulations on
Federal Indian reservations and ceded lands. This process preserves the
ability of the States and tribes to determine which seasons meet their
individual needs. Any State or Indian tribe may be more restrictive
than the Federal frameworks at any time. The frameworks are developed
in a cooperative process with the States and the Flyway Councils. This
process allows States to participate in the development of frameworks
from which they will make selections, thereby having an influence on
their own regulations. These rules do not have a substantial direct
effect on fiscal capacity, change the roles or responsibilities of
Federal or State governments, or intrude on State policy or
administration. Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 13132,
these regulations do not have significant federalism effects and do not
have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a
Federalism Assessment.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 20
Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Transportation, Wildlife.
The rules that eventually will be promulgated for the 2007-08
hunting season are authorized under 16 U.S.C. 703-711, 16 U.S.C. 712,
and 16 U.S.C. 742 a-j.
Dated: March 21, 2007.
David M. Verhey,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
Proposed 2007-08 Migratory Game Bird Hunting Regulations (Preliminary)
Pending current information on populations, harvest, and habitat
conditions, and receipt of recommendations from the four Flyway
Councils, we may defer specific regulatory proposals. At this time, we
are proposing no changes from the final 2006-07 frameworks established
on August 29 and September 22, 2006 (71 FR 51406 and 71 FR 55654).
Other issues requiring early discussion, action, or the attention of
the States or tribes are contained below:
1. Ducks
Categories used to discuss issues related to duck harvest
management are: (A) General Harvest Strategy, (B) Regulatory
Alternatives, (C) Zones and Split Seasons, and (D) Special Seasons/
Species Management. Only those containing substantial recommendations
are discussed below.
A. General Harvest Strategy
We propose to continue use of adaptive harvest management (AHM) to
help determine appropriate duck-hunting regulations for the 2007-08
season. AHM is a tool that permits sound resource decisions in the face
of uncertain regulatory impacts, as well as providing a mechanism for
reducing that uncertainty over time. The current AHM protocol is used
to evaluate four alternative regulatory levels based on the population
status of mallards (special hunting restrictions are enacted for
species of special concern, such as canvasbacks, scaup, and pintails).
In recent years, the prescribed regulatory alternative for the
Pacific, Central, and Mississippi Flyways has been based on the status
of mallards and breeding-habitat conditions in central North America
(Federal survey strata 1-18, 20-50, and 75-77, and State surveys in
Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan). For the 2007 hunting season,
however, we are considering setting hunting regulations in the Pacific
Flyway based on the status and dynamics of a newly defined stock of
``western'' mallards. For now, western mallards would be defined as
those breeding in Alaska (as based on federal surveys in strata 1-12),
and in California and Oregon (as based on state-conducted surveys).
Efforts to improve survey designs in Washington State and British
Columbia are ongoing, and mallards breeding in these areas would be
included in regulatory assessments when a sufficient time-series of
abundance estimates is available for analysis. Predicting changes in
the abundance of western mallards due to harvest and uncontrolled
environmental factors would be based on a model of density-dependent
growth, with appropriate allowances for model uncertainty and the
impact of hunting. Various harvest-management objective(s) for western
mallards are being considered but, in any case, would not allow for a
harvest higher than the estimated maximum sustainable yield. More
specifics concerning this proposed change in AHM protocol are available
on our website at https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/mgmt/AHM/AHM-
intro.htm and will be provided in a supplemental proposed rule in May
along with Flyway Council recommendations and comments. The final AHM
protocol for the 2007-08 season will be detailed in the early-season
proposed rule, which will be published in July (see Schedule of
Regulations Meetings and Federal Register Publications at the end of
this proposed rule for further information). Finally, since 2000, we
have prescribed a regulatory alternative for the Atlantic Flyway based
on the population status of mallards breeding in eastern North America
(Federal survey strata 51-54 and 56, and State surveys in New England
and the mid-Atlantic region). We are recommending a continuation of
this protocol for the 2007-08 season.
We will propose a specific regulatory alternative for each of the
Flyways during the 2007-08 season after survey information becomes
available in late summer. More information on AHM is located at https://
www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/mgmt/AHM/AHM-intro.htm.
B. Regulatory Alternatives
The basic structure of the current regulatory alternatives for AHM
was adopted in 1997. The alternatives remained largely unchanged until
2002, when we (based on recommendations from the Flyway Councils)
extended framework dates in the ``moderate'' and ``liberal'' regulatory
alternatives by changing the opening date from the Saturday nearest
October 1 to the Saturday nearest September 24, and changing the
closing date from the Sunday nearest January 20 to the last Sunday in
January. These extended dates were made available with no associated
penalty in season length or bag limits. At that time we stated our
desire to keep these changes in place for 3 years to allow for a
reasonable
[[Page 18334]]
opportunity to monitor the impacts of framework-date extensions on
harvest distribution and rates of harvest prior to considering any
subsequent use (67 FR 12501).
For 2007-08, we are proposing to maintain the same regulatory
alternatives that were in effect last year (see accompanying table for
specifics of the proposed regulatory alternatives). Alternatives are
specified for each Flyway and are designated as ``RES'' for the
restrictive, ``MOD'' for the moderate, and ``LIB'' for the liberal
alternative. We will announce final regulatory alternatives in early
June. Public comments will be accepted until May 15, 2007, and should
be sent to the address under the caption ADDRESSES.
D. Special Seasons/Species Management
iii. Black Ducks
For several years we have consulted with the Atlantic and
Mississippi Flyway Councils, the Canadian Wildlife Service, and
provincial wildlife agencies in eastern Canada concerning the
development of an international harvest strategy for black ducks. In
November 2006, a working group of Federal, provincial, and State
technicians expressed a desire to move forward with development of a
strategy this year, with implementation to occur in 2008. The strategy
would consist of a maximum harvest rate for the continental black duck
population, as well as criteria for maintaining approximate parity in
harvest between the two countries. Further consultations are required,
however, to determine an acceptable upper limit to the overall harvest
rate, procedures for determining whether the realized harvest rate is
below this limit, procedures for determining whether the distribution
of harvest between the countries is acceptable, and rules for changing
regulations if the harvest-rate and parity criteria are not met. Based
on the outcome of those consultations, we are planning to propose the
specifics of a joint harvest strategy with Canada in the early-season
proposed rule, which will be published in July (see Schedule of
Regulations Meetings and Federal Register Publications at the end of
this proposed rule for further information).
v. Pintails
In collaboration with scientists from the U.S. Geological Survey,
progress has been made in the development of a compensatory harvest-
mortality model for pintails. The model predicts that pintail survival
during the period following the hunting season is density-dependent,
and represents an alternative hypothesis about the effect of hunting
mortality on pintail population change. We are considering the
inclusion of a ``strong'' compensatory model as a competing model in
the analytical framework used to prescribe harvest regulations under
the current pintail harvest strategy. Presently, in the current pintail
harvest strategy, hunting mortality is assumed to be ``additive'' to
natural forms of mortality. Predictions of pintail population size
derived from the additive and compensatory models will be compared to
the results of past population surveys to determine the initial
predictive reliability of each alternative model. These comparisons
will be used to weight each model in a manner that reflects past
predictive ability. Model weights determine the influence that the
alternative harvest-mortality models will have on subsequent regulatory
decisions. Model weights will be updated annually by comparing model
predictions with survey results such that the model with greater
predictive ability exerts greater influence in regulatory decisions
over time. We remain committed to the development of a framework to
inform pintail harvest management based on a formal, derived strategy
and clearly articulated management objectives.
vi. Scaup
In 2006, we did not change scaup harvest regulations with the
understanding that a draft harvest strategy would be available for
Flyway Council review prior to the 2007 winter meetings (see September
22, 2007, Federal Register, 71 FR 55654). In response to this
expectation, we have developed models to represent scaup population and
harvest dynamics that rely on the available scaup monitoring
information and account for uncertainties about factors affecting scaup
population change. The details of the models and assessment methods
used to derive a scaup harvest strategy were presented during the
Winter Flyway Technical Section meetings and a summary is available at
https://www.fws.gov/migatorybirds/reports. As part of the strategy-
development process, we provide several example harvest strategies
based on a range of potential harvest-management objectives in order to
solicit feedback regarding the appropriate objective for scaup harvest
management.
The final scaup harvest strategy will be detailed in the July
early-season proposed rule (see Schedule of Regulations Meetings and
Federal Register Publications at the end of this proposed rule for
further information).
vii. Mottled Ducks
The Service and other agencies have been concerned about the status
of mottled ducks since at least the late 1990's. This concern stems
from negative trends in population survey data, loss and degradation of
habitat, interbreeding with captive-reared and feral mallards, and
increased harvest rates as the result of longer hunting seasons since
1997. In the past, we have expressed our desire to work with the States
to develop a harvest-management strategy for mottled ducks. Since 2005,
several workshops have been convened with State agencies, the U.S.
Geological Survey, and others to discuss the status of mottled ducks,
population structure and delineation, and to evaluate current
monitoring programs and plan for the development of new population
surveys. Major conclusions from these workshops are that mottled ducks
should be managed as two separate stocks, a Florida stock and a Western
Gulf Coast stock, and that the lack of a range-wide population survey
for Western Gulf Coast mottled ducks is a significant impediment to
management.
Although progress has been made toward development of monitoring
systems to improve assessment capabilities for mottled ducks, we remain
concerned about the status of mottled ducks across their range,
especially in the Western Gulf Coast. Reasons for these concerns were
mentioned previously. We will provide the Flyway Councils with analyses
of harvest data that examine potential harvest restrictions to reduce
harvest rates, should that be deemed necessary. We encourage the Flyway
Councils to examine the status of mottled ducks and assess the
potential need for any regulatory actions for the 2007-08 season.
9. Cranes
Greater and lesser (and Canadian) sandhill cranes are presently
hunted in parts of their range and have been divided into management
populations based on their geographic distribution during Fall and
Winter. The Flyway Management Plan for the Lower Colorado River Valley
Population (LCRVP) of sandhill cranes (Pacific Flyway Council 1983,
revised in 1989, 1995) allows for hunting of this population when the
wintering population exceeds 2,500 cranes. This population level has
now been exceeded. In 2005, the Pacific Flyway Council proposed a
limited open season on this population. In response to the Pacific
Flyway Council's proposal, we stated in the August 29, 2006, Federal
[[Page 18335]]
Register (71 FR 51406) that while we were in general support of
allowing a very limited, carefully controlled harvest of sandhill
cranes from this population, we did not believe that this limited
harvest was of immediate concern, and recommended that prior to
initiating such a season, which would be the first time harvest from
this population has been permitted, a more detailed harvest strategy be
developed by the Flyway Council. We stated that this harvest strategy
should be included as an appendix to the management plan prior to any
hunting season being initiated. In further response to this proposal,
we have now prepared a draft environmental assessment (DEA) considering
the action to begin a limited harvest of sandhill cranes from the LCRVP
by reviewing current management strategies and population objectives,
and examining alternatives to current management programs.
Copies of the DEA can be obtained by writing Robert Trost, Pacific
Flyway Representative, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of
Migratory Bird Management, 911 NE. 11th Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97232-
4181. The DEA may also be viewed via the Fish and Wildlife Service home
page at https://fws.gov/migratorybirds. Written comments should be sent
to the address above. You must submit comments on the Draft
Environmental Assessment by May 15, 2007.
16. Mourning Doves
Last year, we approved guidelines that will be used to guide zone/
split seasons for doves (see July 28, 2006, Federal Register, 71 FR
43008) with implementation beginning in the 2007-08 season. The initial
period will be 4 years (2007-2010); beginning in 2011, zoning will
conform to a 5-year period.
Guidelines for Dove Zones and Split Seasons in the Eastern and Central
Mourning Dove Management Units
1. A zone is a geographic area or portion of a State, with a
contiguous boundary, for which independent seasons may be selected for
dove hunting.
2. States may select a zone/split option during an open season. It
must remain in place for the following 5 years except that States may
make a one-time change and revert back to their previous zone/split
configuration in any year of the 5-year period. Formal approval will
not be required, but States must notify the Service prior to making the
change.
3. Zoning periods for dove hunting will conform to those years used
for ducks, e.g., 2006-2010.
4. The zone/split configuration consists of two zones with the
option for 3-way (3-segment) split seasons in one or both zones. As a
grandfathered arrangement, Texas will have three zones with the option
for 2-way (2-segment) split seasons in one, two, or all three zones.
5. States that do not wish to zone for dove hunting may split their
seasons into no more than 3 segments.
We request that States notify us whether or not they plan to change
their zone/split configurations for the upcoming 4-year period (2007-
2010) by May 1, 2007.
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
[[Page 18336]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP11AP07.000
[[Page 18337]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP11AP07.001
[FR Doc. 07-1750 Filed 4-10-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C