Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed Frameworks for Late-Season Migratory Bird Hunting Regulations, 51124-51149 [E8-20100]

Agencies

• Fish and Wildlife Service
• DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 169 (Friday, August 29, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 51124-51149]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-20100]



Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 169 / Friday, August 29, 2008 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 51124]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 20

[FWS-R9-MB-2008-0032; 91200-1231-9BPP-L2]
RIN 1018-AV62


Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed Frameworks for Late-Season 
Migratory Bird Hunting Regulations

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; supplemental.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service (hereinafter Service or we) is 
proposing to establish the 2008-09 late-season hunting regulations for 
certain migratory game birds. We annually prescribe frameworks, or 
outer limits, for dates and times when hunting may occur and the number 
of birds that may be taken and possessed in late seasons. These 
frameworks are necessary to allow State selections of seasons and 
limits and to allow recreational harvest at levels compatible with 
population and habitat conditions.

DATES: You must submit comments on the proposed migratory bird hunting 
late-season frameworks by September 8, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on the proposals by one of the 
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing, 
Attn: 1018-AV62; Division of Policy and Directives Management; U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 222; Arlington, 
VA 22203.
    We will not accept e-mail or faxes. We will post all comments on 
https://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any 
personal information you provide us (see the Public Comments section 
below for more information).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron W. Kokel, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, Department of the Interior, MS MBSP-4107-ARLSQ, 1849 C Street, 
NW., Washington, DC 20240; (703) 358-1714.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulations Schedule for 2008

    On May 28, 2008, we published in the Federal Register (73 FR 30712) 
a proposal to amend 50 CFR part 20. The proposal provided a background 
and overview of the migratory bird hunting regulations process, and 
dealt with the establishment of seasons, limits, and other regulations 
for hunting migratory game birds under Sec. Sec.  20.101 through 
20.107, 20.109, and 20.110 of subpart K. Major steps in the 2008-09 
regulatory cycle relating to open public meetings and Federal Register 
notifications were also identified in the May 28 proposed rule. 
Further, we explained that all sections of subsequent documents 
outlining hunting frameworks and guidelines were organized under 
numbered headings.
    On June 18, 2008, we published in the Federal Register (73 FR 
34692) a second document providing supplemental proposals for early- 
and late-season migratory bird hunting regulations. The June 18 
supplement also provided detailed information on the 2008-09 regulatory 
schedule and announced the SRC and Flyway Council meetings.
    On June 25 and 26, we held open meetings with the Flyway Council 
Consultants, at which the participants reviewed information on the 
current status of migratory shore and upland game birds and developed 
recommendations for the 2008-09 regulations for these species plus 
regulations for migratory game birds in Alaska, Puerto Rico, and the 
Virgin Islands; special September waterfowl seasons in designated 
States; special sea duck seasons in the Atlantic Flyway; and extended 
falconry seasons. In addition, we reviewed and discussed preliminary 
information on the status of waterfowl as it relates to the development 
and selection of the regulatory packages for the 2008-09 regular 
waterfowl seasons. On July 24, 2008, we published in the Federal 
Register (73 FR 43290) a third document specifically dealing with the 
proposed frameworks for early-season regulations. On August 27, 2008, 
we published a rulemaking establishing final frameworks for early-
season migratory bird hunting regulations for the 2008-09 season.
    On July 30-31, 2008, we held open meetings with the Flyway Council 
Consultants, at which the participants reviewed the status of waterfowl 
and developed recommendations for the 2008-09 regulations for these 
species. This document deals specifically with proposed frameworks for 
the late-season migratory bird hunting regulations. It will lead to 
final frameworks from which States may select season dates, shooting 
hours, areas, and limits.
    We have considered all pertinent comments received through August 
1, 2008, in developing this document. In addition, new proposals for 
certain late-season regulations are provided for public comment. The 
comment period is specified above under DATES. We will publish final 
regulatory frameworks for late-season migratory game bird hunting in 
the Federal Register on or around September 22, 2008.

Population Status and Harvest

    The following paragraphs provide a brief summary of information on 
the status and harvest of waterfowl excerpted from various reports. For 
more detailed information on methodologies and results, you may obtain 
complete copies of the various reports at the address indicated under 
ADDRESSES or from our Web site at https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/
reports/reports.html.

Status of Ducks

    Federal, provincial, and State agencies conduct surveys each spring 
to estimate the size of breeding populations and to evaluate the 
conditions of the habitats. These surveys are conducted using fixed-
wing aircraft and helicopters and encompass principal breeding areas of 
North America, and cover over 2.0 million square miles. The Traditional 
survey area comprises Alaska, Canada, and the northcentral United 
States, and includes approximately 1.3 million square miles. The 
Eastern survey area includes parts of Ontario, Quebec, Labrador, 
Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick, New 
York, and Maine, an area of approximately 0.7 million square miles.

Breeding Ground Conditions

    Habitat conditions during the 2008 Waterfowl Breeding Population 
and Habitat Survey were characterized in many areas by a delayed spring 
compared to several preceding years. Drought in many parts of the 
traditional survey area contrasted sharply with record snow and 
rainfall in the eastern survey area. The total pond estimate (Prairie 
Canada and United States combined) was 4.4  0.2 million 
ponds, 37 percent below last year's estimate of 7.0  0.3 
million ponds and 10 percent lower than the long-term average of 4.9 
 0.03 million ponds. The 2008 estimate of ponds in Prairie 
Canada was 3.1  0.1 million. This was a 39 percent decrease 
from last year's estimate (5.0  0.3 million), and 11 
percent below the 1955-2007 average (3.4  0.03 million). 
The 2008 pond estimate for the north-central United States (1.4  0.1 million) was 30 percent lower than last year's estimate (2.0 
 0.1 million) and 11 percent below the long-term average 
(1.5  0.02 million).

[[Page 51125]]

Breeding Population Status

    In the Waterfowl Breeding Population and Habitat Survey traditional 
survey area (strata 1-18, 20-50, and 75-77), the total duck population 
estimate was 37.3  0.6 [SE] million birds. This was 9 
percent lower than last year's estimate of 41.2  0.7 
million birds, but 11 percent above the 1955-2007 long-term average. 
Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) abundance was 7.7  0.3 million 
birds, similar to last year's estimate of 8.3  0.3 million 
birds and to the long-term average. Blue-winged teal (A. discors) 
estimated abundance was 6.6  0.3 million birds similar to 
last year's estimate of 6.7  0.4 million birds, and 45 
percent above the long-term average. Estimated abundances of gadwall 
(A. strepera; 2.7  0.2 million) and northern shovelers (A. 
clypeata; 3.5  0.2 million) were lower than those of last 
year (-19 percent and -23 percent, respectively), but both remained 56 
percent above their long-term averages. Estimated abundance of American 
wigeon (A. americana; 2.5  0.2 million) was similar to the 
2007 estimate and the long-term average. Estimated abundances of green-
winged teal (A. crecca; 3.0  0.2 million) and redheads 
(Aythya americana; 1.1  0.1 million) were similar to last 
year's, but were each >50 percent above their long-term averages. The 
redhead and green-winged teal estimates were the highest and the second 
highest ever for the traditional survey area. The canvasback (A. 
valisineria) estimate of 0.5  0.05 million was down 44 
percent relative to 2007's record high, and 14 percent below the long-
term average. Northern pintails (Anas acuta; 2.6  0.1 
million) were 22 percent below last year's estimate and 36 percent 
below their long-term average. The scaup (Aythya affinis and A. marila 
combined; 3.7  0.2 million) estimate was similar to that of 
2007, and remained 27 percent below the long-term average.
    The eastern survey area was restratified in 2005 and is now 
composed of strata 51-72. Estimates of mallards, scaup, scoters (black 
[Melanitta nigra], white-winged [M. fusca], and surf [M. 
perspicillata]), green-winged teal, American wigeon, bufflehead (B. 
albeola), American black duck (A. rubripes), ring-necked duck (Aythya 
collaris), mergansers (red-breasted [Mergus serrator], common [M. 
merganser], and hooded [Lophodytes cucullatus]), and goldeneye (common 
[Bucephala clangula] and Barrow's [B. islandica]) all were similar to 
their 2007 estimates and long-term averages.

Fall Flight Estimate

    The mid-continent mallard population is composed of mallards from 
the traditional survey area (revised in 2008 to exclude Alaska 
mallards), Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin, and was estimated to be 
7.7  0.3 million. This was similar to the revised 2007 
estimate of 8.5  0.3 million. In 2007, we reported a 
projected mallard fall-flight index of 11.4 million  1.0 
million. After the removal of Alaska mallards from the mid-continent 
stock, the revised 2007 fall-flight estimate was 10.9  1.0 
million, which was not significantly different from the 2008 estimate 
of 9.2  0.8 million. These indices were based on mid-
continent mallard population models revised in 2002, and the 2008 
updated model weights, and therefore differ from those previously 
published.
    See section 1.A. Harvest Strategy Considerations for further 
discussion of the implications of this information for this year's 
selection of the appropriate hunting regulations.

Status of Geese and Swans

    We provide information on the population status and productivity of 
North American Canada geese (Branta canadensis), brant (B. bernicla), 
snow geese (Chen caerulescens), Ross' geese (C. rossii), emperor geese 
(C. canagica), white-fronted geese (Anser albifrons), and tundra swans 
(Cygnus columbianus). In May of 2008, much of eastern Arctic and 
subarctic Canada experienced well above-average temperatures which 
contributed to average or early availability of nesting sites. Reports 
from most other important goose and swan nesting areas indicated near-
average nesting phenology and average production of young in 2008. Poor 
nesting conditions were reported from Wrangel Island, Russia and 
relatively small areas along western Hudson Bay, Bristol Bay (Alaska), 
and interior Alaska. Reduced wetland abundance in the Canadian and U.S. 
prairies, and a cool and wet spring in other southern areas may have 
reduced the production of some temperate-nesting Canada geese in 2008. 
Primary abundance indices increased for 17 goose populations and 
decreased for 9 goose populations in 2008 compared to 2007. Primary 
abundance indices for both populations of tundra swans decreased in 
2008 from 2007 levels. The following populations displayed significant 
positive trends during the most recent 10-year period (P < 0.05): 
Mississippi Flyway Giant, Aleutian, Atlantic Canada geese, Western 
Arctic/Wrangel Island snow geese, and Pacific white-fronted geese. No 
populations showed a significant negative 10-year trend. The forecast 
for the production of geese and swans in North America in 2008 is 
regionally variable, but production for many populations will be 
improved from the generally low production observed in 2007.

Waterfowl Harvest and Hunter Activity

    National surveys of migratory bird hunters were conducted during 
the 2006 and 2007 hunting seasons. About 1.2 million waterfowl hunters 
harvested 13,808,100 ( 4 percent) ducks and 3,579,100 
( 5 percent) geese in 2006, and harvested 14,578,900 
( 4 percent) ducks and 3,666,100 ( 6 percent) 
geese in 2007. Mallard, green-winged teal, gadwall, blue-winged/
cinnamon teal (Anas cyanoptera), and wood duck (Aix sponsa) were the 
most-harvested duck species, and Canada goose was the predominant goose 
species in the harvest. Coot hunters (about 39,400 in 2006 and 33,700 
in 2007) harvested 199,100 ( 29 percent) coots in 2006 and 
198,300 ( 29 percent) in 2007.

Review of Public Comments and Flyway Council Recommendations

    The preliminary proposed rulemaking, which appeared in the May 28, 
2008, Federal Register, opened the public comment period for migratory 
game bird hunting regulations. The supplemental proposed rule, which 
appeared in the June 18, 2008, Federal Register, discussed the 
regulatory alternatives for the 2008-09 duck hunting season. Late-
season comments are summarized below and numbered in the order used in 
the May 28 and June 18 Federal Register documents. We have included 
only the numbered items pertaining to late-season issues for which we 
received written comments. Consequently, the issues do not follow in 
successive numerical or alphabetical order.
    We received recommendations from all four Flyway Councils. Some 
recommendations supported continuation of last year's frameworks. Due 
to the comprehensive nature of the annual review of the frameworks 
performed by the Councils, support for continuation of last year's 
frameworks is assumed for items for which no recommendations were 
received. Council recommendations for changes in the frameworks are 
summarized below.
    We seek additional information and comments on the recommendations 
in this supplemental proposed rule. New proposals and modifications to 
previously described proposals are discussed below. Wherever possible,

[[Page 51126]]

they are discussed under headings corresponding to the numbered items 
in the May 28 and June 18, 2008, Federal Register documents.

General

    Written Comments: An individual commenter protested the entire 
migratory bird hunting regulations process, the killing of all 
migratory birds, and the Flyway Council process.
    Service Response: Our long-term objectives continue to include 
providing opportunities to harvest portions of certain migratory game 
bird populations and to limit harvests to levels compatible with each 
population's ability to maintain healthy, viable numbers. Having taken 
into account the zones of temperature and the distribution, abundance, 
economic value, breeding habits, and times and lines of flight of 
migratory birds, we believe that the hunting seasons provided herein 
are compatible with the current status of migratory bird populations 
and long-term population goals. Additionally, we are obligated to, and 
do, give serious consideration to all information received as public 
comment. While there are problems inherent with any type of 
representative management of public-trust resources, we believe that 
the Flyway-Council system of migratory bird management has been a 
longstanding example of State-Federal cooperative management since its 
establishment in 1952. However, as always, we continue to seek new ways 
to streamline and improve the process.

1. Ducks

    Categories used to discuss issues related to duck harvest 
management are: (A) Harvest Strategy Considerations, (B) Regulatory 
Alternatives, (C) Zones and Split Seasons, and (D) Special Seasons/
Species Management. The categories correspond to previously published 
issues/discussion, and only those containing substantial 
recommendations are discussed below.
A. Harvest Strategy Considerations
    Council Recommendations: The Atlantic and Pacific Flyway Councils 
and the Upper- and Lower-Regulations Committees of the Mississippi 
Flyway Council recommended the adoption of the ``liberal'' regulatory 
alternative.
    The Mississippi Flyway Council opposed the implementation of the 
western mallard Adaptive Harvest Management (AHM) protocol and 
recommended the midcontinent mallard AHM protocol should be used for 
all three western Flyways.
    The Central Flyway Council also recommended the ``liberal'' 
alternative. However, as part of their Hunter's Choice experiment, they 
recommended continuation of the following bag limits:

    In Colorado, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, and Oklahoma, the 
daily bag limit would be six ducks, with species and sex 
restrictions as follows: five mallards (no more than two of which 
may be females), two redheads, two scaup, two wood ducks, one 
pintail, one mottled duck, and one canvasback. For pintails and 
canvasbacks, the season length would be 39 days, which may be split 
according to applicable zones/split duck hunting configurations 
approved for each State.
    In Kansas, North Dakota, South Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming, the 
daily bag limit would be five ducks, with species and sex 
restrictions as follows: two scaup, two redheads, and two wood 
ducks, and only one from the following group--hen mallards, mottled 
ducks, pintails, canvasbacks.

    Service Response: We are continuing development of an AHM protocol 
that would allow hunting regulations to vary among Flyways in a manner 
that recognizes each Flyway's unique breeding-ground derivation of 
mallards. In the July 24 Federal Register, we described and adopted a 
protocol for regulatory decision-making for the newly defined stock of 
western mallards. For the 2008 hunting season, we believe that the 
prescribed regulatory choice for Pacific Flyway should be based on the 
status of this western mallard breeding stock, while the regulatory 
choice for the Mississippi and Central Flyways should depend on the 
status of the recently redefined mid-continent mallard stock. In 
defining the western breeding stock, based on available data, mallards 
breeding in Alaska were disassociated with the mid-continent mallard 
stock and reassigned to the western stock. We also recommend that the 
regulatory choice for the Atlantic Flyway continue to depend on the 
status of eastern mallards.
    For the 2008 hunting season, we are continuing to consider the same 
regulatory alternatives as those used last year. The nature of the 
restrictive, moderate, and liberal alternatives has remained 
essentially unchanged since 1997, except that extended framework dates 
have been offered in the moderate and liberal regulatory alternatives 
since 2002. Also, in 2003, we agreed to place a constraint on closed 
seasons in the western three Flyways whenever the midcontinent mallard 
breeding-population size (as defined prior to 2008; traditional survey 
area plus Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin) was >=5.5 million. As we 
described in the July 24 Federal Register, redefinition of the 
midcontinent mallard stock through the removal of Alaska necessitated 
that both the population constraint (North American Waterfowl 
Management Plan goal plus Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin) and the 
closed season constraint in the midcontinent mallard objective function 
be rescaled to 4.75 million in order to achieve performance of the mid-
continent mallard strategy that is comparable to performance prior to 
the stock redefinition.
    Optimal AHM strategies for the 2008 hunting season were calculated 
using: (1) Harvest-management objectives specific to each mallard 
stock; (2) the 2008 regulatory alternatives; and (3) current population 
models and associated weights for midcontinent, western, and eastern 
mallards. Based on this year's survey results of 7.87 million 
midcontinent mallards (traditional survey area minus Alaska plus 
Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan), 3.06 million ponds in Prairie 
Canada, 913.8 thousand western mallards (381.1 and 532.4 thousand 
respectively in California-Oregon and Alaska) and 815 thousand eastern 
mallards, the prescribed regulatory choice for all four Flyways is the 
liberal alternative.
    Therefore, we concur with the recommendations of the Atlantic, 
Mississippi, Central, and Pacific Flyway Councils regarding selection 
of the ``liberal'' regulatory alternative and propose to adopt the 
``liberal'' regulatory alternative, as described in the June 18 Federal 
Register.
    Regarding Hunter's Choice, we support continuation of the Central 
Flyway Council's recommendation for a 3-year evaluation of the Central 
Flyway's Hunter's Choice duck bag limit. The Central Flyway's Hunter's 
Choice regulations are intended to limit harvest on pintails and 
canvasbacks in a manner similar to the season-within-a-season 
regulations. Hunter's Choice regulations should also reduce harvests of 
mottled ducks and hen mallards, while maintaining full hunting 
opportunity on abundant species such as drake mallards. For the species 
included in the aggregate bag limit, the harvest of one species is 
intended to ``buffer'' the harvest of the others, thus reducing the 
harvest of all species included in the one-bird category. The Central 
Flyway has accumulated 4 years of baseline information on harvests 
resulting from ``season-within-a-season'' regulations in the Central 
Flyway; the season length for pintails and canvasbacks in season-
within-a-season States under the ``liberal'' alternative will be 39 
days.
    Five States (Kansas, North Dakota, South Dakota, Texas, and 
Wyoming)

[[Page 51127]]

were randomly assigned to Hunter's Choice regulations and the remaining 
five States (Colorado, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, and Oklahoma) 
serve as controls (season-within-a-season regulations) as the 
evaluation proceeds. The overall duck daily bag limit is reduced from 
six to five for the Hunter's Choice States.
    While we continue to support the Central Flyway's Hunter's Choice 
experiment, we reiterate that we believe implementation of this 
experiment should not preclude any future changes in hunting 
regulations that may be deemed necessary on an annual basis for any 
other duck species in the Central Flyway, if such changes are deemed 
necessary.
    Regarding the Mississippi Flyway Council's opposition to the 
western mallard AHM protocol, we have cooperated with the Pacific 
Flyway during the past several years to develop a protocol for managing 
the harvest of the western stock of mallards. As we discussed above, in 
July 2008, we formally adopted the western mallard protocol (73 FR 
43290). This decision resulted in Alaska mallards being removed from 
the midcontinent mallard stock and placing them in the western mallard 
stock. This change resulted in an increase (+7 percent) in the 
frequency of closed seasons in the Central and Mississippi Flyways 
under the midcontinent mallard AHM protocol. As we also discussed 
above, to address this concern, we modified the closed season 
constraint for midcontinent mallards from 5.25 to 4.75 million 
mallards.
    We recognize the concerns expressed by the Mississippi Flyway 
Council with regard to implementation of the western mallard protocol. 
However, we believe that establishment of a western mallard protocol is 
justified, and we have made an appropriate adjustment to the 
midcontinent mallard protocol to reduce the impact of removing Alaska 
from that stock of birds. With regard to potential impacts of higher 
frequency of liberal seasons in the Pacific Flyway on midcontinent 
mallards, a preliminary joint optimization of western and midcontinent 
mallards was assessed. The preliminary analysis suggested that joint 
optimization does not result in a significant difference in the 
performance of either protocol. Therefore, we believe an independent 
harvest strategy for western mallards poses little risk to the 
midcontinent stock. With regard to the potential impacts of near-
permanent liberal regulations in the Pacific Flyway on other species of 
waterfowl, it is presently unclear how such impacts would be assessed. 
However, we are committed to monitoring of these potential impacts and 
will discuss any findings with all of the Flyway Councils prior to 
implementing any appropriate regulatory changes to address such 
impacts.
B. Regulatory Alternatives
    Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended 
that the Service propose a process and time line by June 2009 for 
review and modification of the regulatory alternatives for 
implementation by the 2011 season.
    Service Response: We plan to address this issue within the context 
of the new Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for the 
migratory bird hunting program (see NEPA Consideration for further 
discussion) and anticipate the issuance of the draft SEIS by the date 
desired by the Atlantic Flyway Council.
C. Special Seasons/Species Management
iii. Black Ducks
    Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended 
that black duck harvest regulations remain unchanged for the 2008-09 
season.
    Service Response: In the July 24 Federal Register we described the 
black duck interim harvest strategy developed by U.S. and Canadian 
waterfowl managers that will be employed by both countries to make 
regulatory decisions over the next three seasons (2008-09 to 2010-11), 
allowing time for the development of a formal strategy based on the 
principles of AHM. The interim harvest strategy is prescriptive, in 
that it calls for no substantive changes in hunting regulations unless 
the black duck breeding population, averaged over the most recent 3 
years, exceeds or falls below the long-term average breeding population 
by 15 percent or more. The strategy is designed to share the black duck 
harvest equally between the two countries; however, recognizing 
incomplete control of harvest through regulations, it will allow 
realized harvest in either country to vary between 40 and 60 percent.
    The 2008 composite estimate (based on hierarchical modeling and 
both Service and Canadian Wildlife Service survey data) for the Eastern 
Survey Area is 683.4 thousand. The 1998-2007 mean estimate is 713.8 
thousand and the most recent 3-year running mean estimate is 721.6 
thousand. Based on these estimates, we agree with the Atlantic Flyway 
Council that no restriction or liberalization of harvest is warranted.
iv. Canvasbacks
    Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended a 
full season for canvasbacks consisting of a 1-bird daily bag limit and 
a 60-day season in the Atlantic Flyway.
    The Upper- and Lower-Region Regulations Committees of the 
Mississippi Flyway Council reiterated their recommended alternative 
canvasback harvest management strategy that uses threshold levels based 
on breeding population size in order to determine bag limits (detailed 
in the June 18 Federal Register). Using their strategy would result in 
a 1-bird daily bag limit and a 60-day season in the Mississippi Flyway.
    The Central Flyway Council, as part of their Hunter's Choice 
experiment, recommended a full season (74 days) for canvasbacks with a 
1-bird daily bag limit in Kansas, North Dakota, South Dakota, Texas, 
and Wyoming and a 39-day season with a 1-bird daily bag limit in 
Colorado, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, and Oklahoma.
    The Pacific Flyway Council recommended a closed season for 
canvasbacks.
    Service Response: Since 1994, we have followed a canvasback harvest 
strategy that if canvasback population status and production are 
sufficient to permit a harvest of one canvasback per day nationwide for 
the entire length of the regular duck season, while still attaining a 
projected spring population objective of 500,000 birds, the season on 
canvasbacks should be opened. A partial season would be permitted if 
the estimated allowable harvest was within the projected harvest for a 
shortened season. If neither of these conditions can be met, the 
harvest strategy calls for a closed season on canvasbacks nationwide. 
In the July 24 Federal Register we announced our decision to modify the 
Canvasback Harvest Strategy to incorporate the option for a 2-bird 
daily bag limit for canvasbacks when the predicted breeding population 
the subsequent year exceeds 725,000 birds.
    This year's spring survey resulted in an estimate of 489,000 
canvasbacks. This was 44 percent below the 2007 estimate of 865,000 
canvasbacks and 14 percent below the 1955-2007 average. The estimate of 
ponds in Prairie Canada was 3.06 million, which was 39 percent below 
last year and 11 percent below the long-term average. According to the 
Canvasback Harvest Strategy, the allowable harvest in the conterminous 
United States is 24,700 birds, which is less than the expected harvest 
in the United States for all four flyways under their respective 
restrictive season

[[Page 51128]]

lengths (61,758 birds). Thus, the Canvasback Harvest Strategy 
stipulates a canvasback season closure for the upcoming season.
    Last year, the estimate of canvasback abundance was a record-high 
of 865,000 birds. In response to Flyway requests for additional harvest 
opportunities due to that estimate, we increased the daily bag limit to 
2 birds per day. As expected, the harvest of canvasbacks increased last 
year, but not to the extent that could explain the large decrease in 
the estimate of canvasback abundance this spring. We have conducted a 
comprehensive review of canvasback survey information, with a 
particular focus on the change in estimates between 2007 and 2008. 
Investigations into the estimation procedures for canvasbacks revealed 
that numbers of canvasbacks observed during the May survey increased 
across many survey areas last year, but counts were consistently lower 
in those same areas this spring. We found no anomalies in the data, 
leading us to conclude with confidence that the estimate this year is 
as reliable as previous estimates. Annual canvasback estimates 
typically have higher variances than for most other species counted 
during May, and large changes from year-to-year have happened 
historically. It is possible that the discrepancy between this year's 
estimate and last year's record-high estimate is purely the result of 
sampling variation, but other factors may have contributed.
    However, we support the completion of the Hunter's Choice 
experiment in the Central Flyway. For the last 2 years, the average 
harvest of canvasbacks in the U.S. portion of the Central Flyway has 
been about 14,800 birds. This, together with the average expected 
harvest in Alaska (350 birds), is below the allowable U.S. harvest 
resulting from the strategy this year. Thus, we propose that the States 
in the Central Flyway be allowed an open season on canvasbacks this 
year according to the Hunter's Choice experimental design, but the 
seasons on canvasbacks would be closed in the Atlantic, Mississippi, 
and Pacific Flyways.
v. Pintails
    Council Recommendations: The Atlantic and Pacific Flyway Councils 
and the Upper- and Lower-Region Regulations Committees of the 
Mississippi Flyway Council recommended a full season for pintails 
consisting of a 1-bird daily bag limit and a 60-day season in the 
Atlantic and Mississippi Flyways, and a 107-day season in the Pacific 
Flyway.
    The Central Flyway Council, as part of their Hunter's Choice 
experiment, recommended a full season (74 days) for pintails with a 1-
bird daily bag limit in Kansas, North Dakota, South Dakota, Texas, and 
Wyoming and a 39-day season with a 1-bird daily bag limit in Colorado, 
Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, and Oklahoma.
    Service Response: Based on the current strategy, along with an 
observed spring breeding population of 2.61 million, an overflight-
bias-corrected breeding population of 4.24 million and a projected fall 
flight of 4.47 million pintails, the Pintail Harvest Strategy 
prescribes a full season and a 1-bird bag in all Flyways. Under the 
``liberal'' season length, this regulation is expected to result in a 
harvest of 569,000 pintails and an observed breeding population 
estimate of 3.53 million in 2009, not considering any potential effect 
from continuation of the Hunter's Choice evaluation in the Central 
Flyway.
    Furthermore, we agree with the Central Flyway Council's 
recommendation to adopt a 39-day ``season-within-a-season'' for 
pintails in Colorado, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, and Oklahoma. We 
understand that this departure from the pintail strategy is a necessary 
part of the experimental ``Hunter's Choice'' season.
vi. Scaup
    Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended 
that the following regulatory packages for scaup be allowed for the 
Atlantic Flyway for the next 3 years and that we use their harvest 
prediction methodology to predict scaup harvests in the Atlantic 
Flyway:
    (1) Under the restrictive harvest policy, a 40-day season with a 1-
bird daily bag and a 20-day season with a 2-bird daily bag. The 20 days 
with the 2-bird daily bag shall be 20 consecutive hunting days;
    (2) Under the moderate harvest policy, a 60-day season with a 2-
bird daily bag; and
    (3) Under the liberal harvest policy, a 60-day season with a 4-bird 
daily bag.
    For 2008-09, the Council recommended implementation of the 
restrictive season package, based on results of the scaup harvest 
model.
    The Upper- and Lower-Region Regulations Committees of the 
Mississippi Flyway Council recommended a 60-day season with a 2-bird 
daily bag limit for the 2008-09 season. They further recommended a 
restrictive and moderate regulatory package of 60 days with a 2-bird 
daily bag limit and a liberal regulatory package of 60 days with a 4-
bird daily bag limit.
    The Central Flyway Council recommended the continuation of the 
Hunter's Choice bag limit for the 2008-09 season. After completion of 
the Hunter's Choice experiment, the Central Flyway Council recommends 
the following potential scaup regulatory alternatives (season lengths 
and daily bag limits) for Central Flyway States:
    (1) Restrictive Policy--74 days with a 1-bird daily bag limit;
    (2) Moderate Policy--74 days with a 2-bird daily bag limit; and
    (3) Liberal Policy--74 days with a 6-bird daily bag limit.
    The Pacific Flyway Council recommended the adoption of the 
following scaup regulation packages for the Pacific Flyway for the next 
three years:
    (1) Restrictive season package: 86 days, 2 bag limit.
    (2) Moderate season package: 86 days, 3 bag limit.
    (3) Liberal season package: 107 days, 7 bag limit.
    In addition, the Pacific Flyway Council requested that split and 
zone configurations be available to individual States for scaup 
seasons, similar to the split and zone options we previously provided 
for pintail seasons. For 2008-09, the Council recommended 
implementation of the restrictive season package, based on results of 
the scaup harvest model.
    Service Response: As we have stated over the last several years, 
the continental scaup (greater Aythya marila and lesser Aythya affinis 
combined) population has experienced a long-term decline over the past 
20 years. Over the past several years in particular, we have continued 
to express our growing concern about the status of scaup (see the May 
28 Federal Register for a review of the actions we have taken over the 
last few years to synthesize data relevant to scaup harvest management 
and frame a scientifically-sound scaup harvest strategy or for a 
complete list of reports see https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/reports/
reports.html).
    In the July 24 Federal Register, we adopted a scaup harvest 
strategy that resulted from three years of development and review in 
cooperation with the Flyway Councils. The 2008 scaup breeding 
population estimate was 3.74 million. Total estimated scaup harvest in 
2007-08 was 295,000. Employing these estimates as the input to the 
scaup harvest strategy, the optimal harvest for the 2008-09 hunting 
season is 200,000 (including the 40,000 scaup harvest expected in 
Canada and

[[Page 51129]]

Alaska). The available harvest results in a recommendation for a 
restrictive package in all four Flyways (except Alaska).
    We appreciate the time and attention that the Flyways have given 
this issue. We further support the recommendations received from the 
Atlantic, Central and Pacific Flyways for their restrictive, moderate 
and liberal packages for scaup. We also support the packages 
recommended by the Mississippi Flyway for their moderate and liberal 
packages. However, the restrictive package recommended by the 
Mississippi Flyway is not projected to be sufficient to achieve the 
required harvest reductions. In further consultation with the 
Mississippi Flyway Consultants, we accepted the same season structure 
recommended by the Atlantic Flyway for restrictive seasons in the 
Mississippi Flyway. These season structures will be used for the next 
three years and evaluated at the end of that period.
    In addition, we have adopted the alternative harvest prediction 
models suggested by the Atlantic and Central Flyways. We also support 
the proposal by the Pacific Flyway to afford States the opportunity to 
use their existing zone/split rules for their respective States when 
choosing scaup season frameworks.
vii. Mottled Ducks
    Council Recommendations: The Upper- and Lower-Region Regulations 
Committees of the Mississippi Flyway Council recommended continuation 
of a 60-day season and a 3-bird daily bag limit for mottled ducks for 
the 2008-09 waterfowl season. They further recommended that given 
adequate justification for a 30 percent reduction in harvest, and no 
further analyses of effects of harvest regulations on mottled duck 
harvests sometime in the future, the following:
    (a) Season length of 45 days with a daily bag limit of 1 per day in 
years when AHM prescribes a liberal or moderate regulations package.
    (b) Season length of 30 days with a daily bag limit of 2 per day in 
years when AHM prescribes a restrictive regulations package.
    (c) Outside the mottled duck breeding range, mottled duck season 
length and bag limits would be the same as for hen mallards.
    The Central Flyway Council recommended that no further harvest 
reductions were warranted at this time.
    Service Response: We are not proposing any changes to mottled duck 
regulations for the 2008-09 season. Because of our long-standing 
concern about the status of mottled ducks, we are encouraged by the 
progress made to date on improving population monitoring programs for 
this species in the Gulf Coast region. We look forward to working with 
the Flyways on continued development of such surveys. Further, we 
appreciate the Mississippi Flyway Council's recommendations on 
potential regulatory packages that could serve to reduce harvest 
pressure on mottled ducks if deemed necessary at some future date. We 
will take under consideration the Council's recommendation regarding 
regulations in areas outside the mottled duck breeding range. We also 
recognize that the Central Flyway Council has taken voluntary 
restrictions in mottled duck regulations in the past and, together with 
reductions in harvest resulting from the Hunter's Choice experiment, 
has reduced harvest pressure on mottled ducks, primarily in Texas.
viii. Wood Ducks
    Council Recommendations: The Atlantic and Central Flyway Councils 
and the Upper- and Lower-Region Regulations Committees of the 
Mississippi Flyway Council recommended that the wood duck bag limit in 
the Atlantic, Mississippi, and Central Flyways be increased to 3 birds 
per day during the regular duck season for an experimental 3-year 
period beginning in 2008.
    Service Response: We support the proposal to increase the daily bag 
limit for wood ducks from 2 to 3 birds in the Atlantic, Mississippi, 
and Central Flyways beginning in 2008. We do not, however, believe that 
this change warrants an experiment because the assessment work that 
justifies the bag limit increase has already been done. However, we 
recognize the importance of maintaining the current wood duck banding 
effort that is needed to assess the effects of the change. Further, we 
look forward to continuing involvement by the Flyways in developing a 
wood duck harvest strategy, including (1) determining specific harvest 
management objectives; (2) determining regulatory alternatives; (3) 
designation of and support for appropriate population monitoring 
programs; and (4) designation of the appropriate test criteria for 
making management decisions. We would like the Flyways to develop this 
strategy for implementation during the 2010-2011 hunting season.
viii. Youth Hunt
    Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended 
that the Service allow States to select any two weekend days, holidays 
or other non-school days for their youth waterfowl hunting days.
    Service Response: We do not support the Atlantic Flyway's proposal 
to allow the selection of any two weekend days, holidays, or other non-
school days for their youth waterfowl hunting days. In 2000, we 
expanded the special youth waterfowl hunt to two consecutive days in 
order to reduce travel and scheduling conflicts for youth hunt 
participants--issues identified by the Flyways as problems with 
promoting participation under the original 1-day youth hunt guidelines 
(65 FR 51496). The following year, we further supported a change to two 
consecutive hunting days to address the inability of some States in the 
Atlantic Flyway to hunt on Sundays (66 FR 44010). As we stated in 2003 
when presented with a similar proposal by the Atlantic Flyway, we 
believe the proposal is inconsistent with the original purpose put 
forth by the Flyway Councils in 2000 to facilitate travel and 
scheduling of youth hunt participants (68 FR 51658).

4. Canada Geese

B. Regular Seasons
    Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council forwarded a 
number of recommendations concerning Canada geese. First, the Council 
recommended that we modify the existing criteria for delineation of 
Atlantic Flyway Resident Population (AFRP) Canada goose hunting zones 
in the Atlantic Flyway by proposing that AFRP hunting zones may not 
contain more than 10 percent of all Atlantic Population (AP) band 
recoveries, or more than 10 percent of all North Atlantic Population 
(NAP) recoveries, within a State from 2002-2007.
    Second, the Council recommended that we adopt the following 
criteria for evaluation of AFRP hunting zones in the Atlantic Flyway 
during 2008-2010:
    (1) All areas holding an AFRP regular season must collectively 
account for no more than a 1 percent direct recovery rate for adults 
for any migrant goose population during the open AFRP regular seasons. 
Areas contributing disproportionately to the cumulative recovery rate 
will be identified and these areas may be eliminated to stay below the 
1 percent threshold;
    (2) AFRP hunting zones must not account for more than 10 percent of 
all AP band recoveries, or more than 10 percent of all NAP recoveries, 
in any State during the 3-year period 2008-2010;
    (3) If a season is closed for any migrant population, AFRP hunting 
zones would remain open as long as

[[Page 51130]]

they do not result in exceeding the cumulative 1 percent adult recovery 
rate threshold; and
    (4) Band recovery data will be examined annually, and at 3-year 
intervals all available data will be examined to determine if zone 
modifications and/or changes to opening and closing framework dates are 
needed to ensure continued compliance with the above criteria.
    As a result of the above delineation criteria modifications, the 
Council recommended modifications to existing AFRP hunting zones in New 
York, Pennsylvania, and Maryland beginning in 2008, and that we extend 
the opening and closing framework dates for Canada geese in AFRP 
harvest zones in Pennsylvania (from the fourth Saturday in October to 
March 10), Maryland and Virginia (from November 15 to March 10), and 
North Carolina (from October 1 to March 10). They also recommended 
allowing Connecticut and New York to establish new AFRP harvest zones 
with framework dates between 1 October and 15 February and bag limits 
of 5 geese per day.
    With regard to frameworks in Southern James Bay Population (SJBP) 
harvest zones, the Council recommended allowing Pennsylvania a 70-day 
Canada goose hunting season, with a 3-bird daily bag limit, between the 
second Saturday in October and February 15; Virginia, a 40-day season 
between November 15 and January 14 with a 3-bird daily bag limit and an 
experimental season between January 15-February 15 with a 5-bird daily 
bag limit; and North Carolina a 70-day season with a 5-bird daily bag 
limit between October 1 and December 31. In addition, they recommended 
modifying the SJBP harvest zone in Pennsylvania to include the former 
Pymatuning Zone and that portion of Mercer, Crawford and Erie Counties 
north of Interstate 80 and west of Interstate 79 including Lake Erie, 
Presque Isle, and the area within 150 yards of the Lake Erie shoreline.
    The Upper- and Lower-Region Regulations Committees of the 
Mississippi Flyway Council recommended a number of changes in Canada 
goose zones, seasons lengths, and bag limits for several States in the 
Flyway. These changes are a result of approved revisions to the 
Southern James Bay Population (SJBP) Canada goose harvest strategy and 
management plan that were made in agreement with the Atlantic Flyway. 
These changes are consistent with the revised harvest strategies for 
Canada geese in the Mississippi Flyway.
    The Pacific Flyway Council recommended revising Idaho zone 
designations for 2 counties (Adams and Valley Counties from Zone 2 to 
Zone 1), and reducing the bag limit on dark geese in Wyoming from 4 to 
3 geese.
    Service Response: We concur with the Atlantic Flyway Council's 
recommendations to modify existing criteria for delineation and 
subsequent evaluation of AFRP hunting zones. Evaluations of AFRP 
seasons since 2002 have demonstrated that these seasons have met the 
established criteria of less than a 1 percent direct recovery rate of 
migrant geese. We note that a migrant (AP, NAP, SJBP) direct recovery 
rate of 0.35 percent was realized for the 2005-2007 period. AFRP zones 
have resulted in higher hunter opportunity and higher AFRP goose 
harvests, and current North Atlantic Population Canada Goose Low 
Harvest zones have shown to be effective in minimizing NAP harvest. The 
Atlantic Flyway Council's proposed modification to allow certain 
portions of existing NAP Harvest zones to become AFRP zones will allow 
for greater harvest opportunity on AFRP geese while further protecting 
NAP stocks. Current direct recovery rates of NAP geese in the United 
States are 2.9 percent, equating to a harvest rate of <6 percent. As 
band return data accumulate, adjustments to existing AFRP zones and 
establishment of new zones should utilize these data. We will continue 
to evaluate these AFRP seasons annually through leg band recoveries and 
at 3-year intervals a comprehensive evaluation of all available data 
will occur to ensure compliance with established criteria. Lastly, we 
note that these proposed modifications for delineation of new AFRP 
zones in certain portions of existing NAP harvest zones are in 
accordance with the current North Atlantic Population Canada Goose 
Management Plan.
    We also concur with the Atlantic Flyway Council's recommendations 
to modify AFRP hunting zones in Maryland, New York, and Pennsylvania, 
establish new AFRP zones in Connecticut and Long Island, New York, and 
modify the AFRP zone season opening and closing framework dates in 
Maryland, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. These recommended 
changes all conform to the existing criteria, as amended above, for 
delineating AFRP hunting zones and establishing AFRP season framework 
dates. We further note that resident Canada geese are overabundant in 
many areas of the Atlantic Flyway and currently number approximately 
1.0 million birds, significantly above the goal in the Atlantic Flyway 
Resident Canada Goose Management Plan of 650,000 geese. All of the 
Flyway's objectives to increase the harvest of resident Canada geese 
are consistent with those identified in the Service's 2005 Final 
Environmental Impact Statement on Resident Canada Goose Management (70 
FR 69985, November 18, 2005).
    We also concur with the Atlantic Flyway Council's recommended 
frameworks for the SJBP harvest zones in the Atlantic Flyway. We note 
that the SJBP Management Plan was recently revised and approved by both 
the Atlantic and Mississippi Flyway Councils and guides management 
decisions in both flyways. The plan goal is to maintain the SJBP at a 
level that can sustain use throughout its current range, while allowing 
for the management of resident Canada geese. A key part of the plan is 
a harvest strategy designed to test the resident Canada goose buffering 
hypothesis. This hypothesis states that large populations of resident 
Canada geese are now buffering the harvest of SJBP geese, and therefore 
liberalization in hunting regulations will result in more harvest of 
resident Canada geese, and not SJBP Canada geese. Further, genetic 
studies and analysis of band recoveries indicate SJBP harvest zones in 
many States no longer function as concentration zones for SJBP geese 
and may therefore be ineffective at protecting SJBP geese. We agree 
that these reductions in hunting opportunity and hunting pressure on 
resident Canada geese may not be warranted when many SJBP harvest zones 
hold a smaller proportion of SJBP geese than they did historically. The 
newly revised SJBP plan also calls for holding regulations stable for a 
5-year period (2008-2013). If the spring population estimate falls 
below 50,000 in combination with either an unabated negative trend in 
the estimate over 3 years or more, and evidence of unsustainable 
harvest rates, then appropriate regulation changes will be implemented 
as/when necessary in both the Atlantic and Mississippi Flyways. We 
believe that these proposed regulation changes will provide for 
increased hunting opportunity and harvest of AFRP geese, while 
maintaining the SJBP at levels identified in the 2008 plan.
    We also concur with all of the recommendations forwarded by the 
Pacific Flyway Council. Some of these changes are designed to afford 
greater protection to Tule white-fronted geese and the Service strongly 
supports these efforts (see discussion under 5. White-fronted Geese). 
In addition, the other changes in Canada goose seasons are relatively 
minor and are being

[[Page 51131]]

undertaken for administrative reasons and are not expected to impact 
populations.

5. White-fronted Geese

    Council Recommendations: The Pacific Flyway Council recommended the 
following area, bag, and season length changes described below:
    (1) In the Lake County portion of the Harney, Lake, and Malheur 
County Zone reduce the daily bag limit for white-fronted geese from 2 
to 1;
    (2) In the Klamath County Zone of Oregon, for hunting days 
occurring after the last Sunday in January, change the daily bag limit 
of 2 white-fronted geese to a bag limit of 1 white-fronted goose and 3 
white geese; and
    (3) Reduce the bag limit on dark geese in Wyoming from 4 to 3 
geese.
    Service Response: We concur with the proposed changes in goose 
frameworks proposed by the Pacific Flyway Council. In general, these 
changes are designed to afford greater protection to Tule white-fronted 
geese and we strongly support these efforts. Tule greater white-fronted 
geese continue to be of concern because of low population numbers. In 
Oregon, Tule white-fronted geese are predominantly encountered in Lake 
County where the bag limit for white-fronted geese has been two for 
some time. Because of the continued concern for Tule geese, and 
uncertainty about their true population size, we agree with the Pacific 
Flyway Council that a reduction in harvest is warranted. This proposed 
change will keep Tule goose harvest in Oregon at minimum levels and 
support ongoing research efforts to assess population status.
    We note, however, that indices to the Pacific population of white-
fronted geese exceed management plan goals and this population is 
responsible for numerous agricultural depredation complaints in the 
Klamath Basin as well. However, given the concerns over the status of 
population of Tule white-fronted geese, which, as documented through 
telemetry observations, are present in at least very low numbers in the 
Oregon portion of the Klamath Basin during this time period, further 
assessment is warranted.

6. Brant

    Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommends a 
60-day season with a 3-bird daily bag limit for Atlantic brant.
    Service Response: We concur with the Atlantic Flyway Council's 
recommendation. The 2008 Mid-Winter Index (MWI) for Atlantic brant was 
160,618 brant. The Brant Management Plan prescribes a 60-day season 
with a 3-bird daily bag limit when the MWI estimate is above 150,000 
and productivity and food supplies are deemed sufficient to sustain 
additional harvest opportunity. We note that productivity for 2008 
looks very good on the main breeding grounds and that productivity in 
2007 was good, with approximately 28-31 percent young in the fall 
productivity surveys. Thus, we agree with the Council that an increase 
of 10 days with the associated daily bag limit increase is the proper 
approach for the upcoming season.

7. Snow and Ross's (Light) Geese

    Council Recommendations: The Pacific Flyway Council recommended 
several area, bag, and season length changes for light geese:
    (1) In the States of California, Oregon, and Washington increase 
the light goose season length to 107 days, and in the States of 
California and Oregon increase the bag limit to 6 light geese per day 
and extend the light goose framework ending date to March 10;
    (2) Increase the bag limit to 10 light geese per day in all other 
states of the Pacific Flyway with a framework ending date of March 10; 
and
    (3) In the Klamath County Zone of Oregon, for hunting days 
occurring after the last Sunday in January, change the daily bag limit 
of 2 white-fronted geese to a bag limit of 1 white-fronted goose and 3 
white geese.
    Service Response: We support the proposed changes for light geese 
in the Pacific Flyway. Last year the Flyway's December goose count 
exceeded 1 million for the first time, representing a doubling of this 
index since 1999. Light goose indices (Snow and Ross' geese combined) 
indicate that all recognized populations currently exceed management 
plan goals. In some areas of the Pacific Flyway, these goose 
populations are leading to increasing depredation complaints. In 
addition, numbers of light geese breeding on Wrangle Island, Russia, a 
colony that has been of concern in the past, has recovered to near 
record levels in the past few years. We support efforts to increase 
harvest of these geese in aid of limiting further population growth and 
perhaps avoiding the overabundance problems associated with the species 
that have been documented in several of the mid-continent region.

Public Comments

    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.
    You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed 
rule by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. We will not 
consider comments sent by e-mail or fax or to an address not listed in 
the ADDRESSES section. Finally, we will not consider hand-delivered 
comments that we do not receive, or mailed comments that are not 
postmarked, by the date specified in the DATES section.
    We will post your entire comment--including your personal 
identifying information--on https://www.regulations.gov. If you provide 
personal identifying information in your comment, you may request at 
the top of your document that we withhold this information from public 
review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
    Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting 
documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be 
available for public inspection on https://www.regulations.gov, or by 
appointment, during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Room 4107, 
4501 North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22203.
    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 a 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

[[Page 51132]]

under the caption FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    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 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 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or by viewing on our Web site at 
https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds.

Endangered Species Act Consideration

    Prior to issuance of the 2008-09 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 
rulemaking documents.

Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget has determined that this rule 
is significant and has reviewed this rule under Executive Order 12866. 
OMB bases its determination upon the following four criteria:
    (a) Whether the rule will have an annual effect of $100 million or 
more on the economy or adversely affect an economic sector, 
productivity, jobs, the environment, or other units of the government.
    (b) Whether the rule will create inconsistencies with other Federal 
agencies' actions.
    (c) Whether the rule will materially affect entitlements, grants, 
user fees, loan programs, or the rights and obligations of their 
recipients.
    (d) Whether the rule raises novel legal or policy issues.

Clarity of the Rule

    We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the 
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain 
language. This means that each rule we publish must:
    (a) Be logically organized;
    (b) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
    (c) Use clear language rather than jargon;
    (d) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
    (e) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
    If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us 
comments by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. To 
better help us revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as 
possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections 
or paragraphs that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences 
are too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables would be 
useful, etc.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The 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, 2004, and 2008. 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 2008 Analysis was based on the 2006 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 approximately $1.2 billion at small businesses in 
2008. Copies of the Analysis are available upon request from the 
address indicated under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or from our Web 
site at https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/reports/reports.html or at 
https://www.regulations.gov.

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 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 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 our Migratory Bird Surveys and assigned 
control number 1018-0023 (expires 2/28/2011). 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 Alaska Subsistence Household Survey, an 
associated voluntary annual household survey used to determine levels 
of subsistence take in Alaska, and assigned control number 1018-0124 
(expires 1/31/2010). A Federal agency may not conduct or sponsor and a 
person is not required to respond to a co