Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed Frameworks for Early-Season Migratory Bird Hunting Regulations; Notice of Meetings, 36870-36890 [E9-17559]

Agencies

• Fish and Wildlife Service
• DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 141 (Friday, July 24, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 36870-36890]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-17559]



[[Page 36869]]

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

Part III





Department of the Interior





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



Fish and Wildlife Service



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



50 CFR Part 20



Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed Frameworks for Early-Season Migratory 
Bird Hunting Regulations; Notice of Meetings; Proposed Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 141 / Friday, July 24, 2009 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 36870]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 20

[FWS-R9-MB-2008-0124; 91200-1231-9BPP-L2]
RIN 1018-AW31


Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed Frameworks for Early-Season 
Migratory Bird Hunting Regulations; Notice of Meetings

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; supplemental.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (hereinafter Service or we) 
is proposing to establish the 2009-10 early-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 
maximum number of birds that may be taken and possessed in early 
seasons. Early seasons may open as early as September 1, and include 
seasons in Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. 
These frameworks are necessary to allow State selections of specific 
final seasons and limits and to allow recreational harvest at levels 
compatible with population status and habitat conditions. This proposed 
rule also provides the final regulatory alternatives for the 2009-10 
duck hunting seasons.

DATES: You must submit comments on the proposed early-season frameworks 
by August 3, 2009. The Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee 
(SRC) will meet to consider and develop proposed regulations for late-
season migratory bird hunting and the 2010 spring/summer migratory bird 
subsistence seasons in Alaska on July 29 and 30, 2009. All meetings 
will commence at approximately 8:30 a.m. Following later Federal 
Register documents, you will be given an opportunity to submit comments 
for proposed late-season frameworks and subsistence migratory bird 
seasons in Alaska by August 31, 2009.

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: FWS-R9-MB-2008-0124; 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).
    The SRC will meet in room 200 of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service's Arlington Square Building, 4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Arlington, 
VA.

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 2009

    On April 10, 2009, we published in the Federal Register (74 FR 
16339) 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 
2009-10 regulatory cycle relating to open public meetings and Federal 
Register notifications were also identified in the April 10 proposed 
rule. Further, we explained that all sections of subsequent documents 
outlining hunting frameworks and guidelines were organized under 
numbered headings. As an aid to the reader, we reiterate those headings 
here:

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. Wood ducks
    ix. 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

    Subsequent documents will refer only to numbered items requiring 
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.
    On May 27, 2009, we published in the Federal Register (74 FR 25209) 
a second document providing supplemental proposals for early- and late-
season migratory bird hunting regulations. The May 27 supplement also 
provided detailed information on the 2009-10 regulatory schedule and 
announced the SRC and Flyway Council meetings.
    This document, the third in a series of proposed, supplemental, and 
final rulemaking documents for migratory bird hunting regulations, 
deals specifically with proposed frameworks for early-season 
regulations and the regulatory alternatives for the 2009-10 duck 
hunting seasons. It will lead to final frameworks from which States may 
select season dates, shooting hours, and daily bag and possession 
limits for the 2009-10 season.
    We have considered all pertinent comments received through June 30, 
2009, on the April 10 and May 27, 2009, rulemaking documents in 
developing this document. In addition, new proposals for certain early-
season regulations are provided for public comment. Comment periods are 
specified above under DATES. We will publish final regulatory 
frameworks for early seasons in the Federal Register on or about August 
17, 2009.

Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee Meetings

    Participants at the June 24-25, 2009, meetings reviewed information 
on the current status of migratory shore and upland game birds and 
developed 2009-10 migratory game bird regulations recommendations for 
these species plus regulations for migratory game birds in Alaska, 
Puerto Rico, and the U.S. 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.
    Participants at the previously announced July 29-30, 2009, meetings 
will review information on the current

[[Page 36871]]

status of waterfowl and develop recommendations for the 2009-10 
regulations pertaining to regular waterfowl seasons and other species 
and seasons not previously discussed at the early-season meetings. In 
accordance with Department of the Interior policy, these meetings are 
open to public observation and you may submit comments to the Director 
on the matters discussed.

Population Status and Harvest

    The following paragraphs provide preliminary information on the 
status of waterfowl and information on the status and harvest of 
migratory shore and upland game birds 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 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or from our Web site at https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/NewsPublicationsReports.html.

Waterfowl Breeding and Habitat Survey

    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, helicopters, and ground crews and encompass principal 
breeding areas of North America, covering an area 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.
    Overall, habitat conditions were characterized as near normal for 
most of the traditional survey area during the 2009 Waterfowl Breeding 
Population and Habitat Survey, with greatly improved wetlands 
conditions in portions of the prairies. Adequate moisture and good 
habitat conditions characterized much of the eastern survey area. The 
northernmost survey areas in both the traditional and eastern survey 
areas experienced an extremely late spring.
Traditional Survey Area (U.S. and Canadian Prairies and Parklands)
    Major improvements in wetlands conditions occurred across much of 
the traditional survey area in 2009. The prairie pothole region of 
southern Manitoba, most of the Dakotas and eastern Montana benefitted 
primarily from above average fall and winter precipitation. These areas 
were classified as good to excellent, with mostly fair habitat 
conditions confined to west-central Montana and southeastern South 
Dakota. Above average precipitation improved wetlands conditions in the 
southern grasslands of Saskatchewan but the habitats along the Alberta 
and Saskatchewan border are suffering under drought conditions.
    The parklands continued to receive below normal precipitation in 
2009. Fortunately, habitat conditions remain classified as fair to good 
because of the holdover water that resulted during the extremely wet 
year in 2008.
Bush (Alaska, Northern Manitoba, Northern Saskatchewan, Northwest 
Territories, Yukon Territory, Western Ontario)
    In the boreal forest, spring breakup was extremely late over most 
of the survey area in 2009. Most large lakes remained frozen into early 
June. Many smaller wetland habitats, such as beaver ponds, were open 
during the survey and those in northern Alberta and into the Northwest 
Territories were rated as good. Habitat conditions were drier across 
northern Saskatchewan and Manitoba but improved nearer to Hudson Bay. 
The majority of Alaska was rated as good.
Eastern Survey Area
    From Maine through most of the Maritimes, an above average snowfall 
was experienced and average spring temperatures were recorded, 
resulting in fully charged wetlands with little flooding, which is in 
contrast to flooding in 2008. Despite below average snowfall and winter 
temperatures for Newfoundland and Labrador, habitat conditions are 
rated as fair to excellent, with poorer conditions found at higher 
elevation habitat. Through New York and much of Quebec and Ontario, 
generally good to excellent waterfowl habitat exists, but a series of 
major storms during mid-May in southwest Ontario could hamper 
production because of flooding. The Nickel and Clay Belts of east-
central Ontario and points farther west were supporting good habitat at 
the time of the survey following average winter and spring 
precipitation. Good habitat conditions remained moving farther north 
but deteriorated approaching the James and Hudson Bay lowlands due to 
deep snows and a very late spring. Lowland habitats on the Quebec side 
were much drier than normal.

Status of Teal

    The estimate of blue-winged teal from the traditional survey area 
is 7.4 million. This represents an 11.0 percent increase from 2008 and 
is 60 percent above the 1955-2008 average.

Sandhill Cranes

    Compared to increases recorded in the 1970s, annual indices to 
abundance of the Mid-continent Population (MCP) of sandhill cranes have 
been relatively stable since the early 1980s. The spring index for 2009 
in the Central Platte River Valley, Nebraska, uncorrected for 
visibility bias, was 460,000 sandhill cranes. The photo-corrected, 3-
year average for 2006-08 was 382,271, which is within the established 
population-objective range of 349,000-472,000 cranes.
    All Central Flyway States, except Nebraska, allowed crane hunting 
in portions of their States during 2008-09. An estimated 10,293 hunters 
participated in these seasons, which was similar to the number that 
participated in the previous season. Hunters harvested a record-high 
22,989 MCP cranes in the U.S. portion of the Central Flyway during the 
2008-09 seasons, which was 24 percent higher than the estimated harvest 
for the previous year. The retrieved harvest of MCP cranes in hunt 
areas outside of the Central Flyway (Arizona, Pacific Flyway portion of 
New Mexico, Alaska, Canada, and Mexico combined) was 15,024 during 
2008-09. The preliminary estimate for the North American MCP sport 
harvest, including crippling losses, was 42,536 birds, which was a 
record high and is 7 percent higher than the previous year's estimate. 
The long-term (1982-2004) trend for the MCP indicate that harvest has 
been increasing at a higher rate than population growth.
    The fall 2008 pre-migration survey for the Rocky Mountain 
Population (RMP) resulted in a count of 21,156 cranes. The 3-year 
average for 2005, 2007, and 2008 (no survey was conducted in 2006) was 
21,614 sandhill cranes, which is above the established population 
objective of 17,000-21,000 for the RMP. Hunting seasons during 2008-09 
in portions of Arizona, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming 
resulted in a record-high harvest of 936 RMP cranes, a 14 percent 
increase from the harvest of 820 in 2007-08. The Lower Colorado River 
Valley Population (LCRVP) survey results indicate an increase from 
1,900 birds in 1998 to 2,401 birds in 2009. The 3-year average of 2,981 
LCRVP cranes is based on counts from 2006, 2007 and 2009 (survey was 
not complete in 2008)

[[Page 36872]]

and is above the population objective of 2,500.

Woodcock

    Singing-ground and Wing-collection Surveys were conducted to assess 
the population status of the American woodcock (Scolopax minor). The 
Singing-ground Survey is intended to measure long-term changes in 
woodcock population levels. Singing-ground Survey data for 2009 
indicate that the number of displaying woodcock in the Eastern and 
Central Management Regions were unchanged from 2008. There was no 
significant 10-year trend in woodcock heard in both management regions 
during 1999-2009. This represents the sixth consecutive year that the 
10-year trend estimate for the Eastern Region did not indicate a 
significant decline. The 10-year trend in the Central Region returned 
to stability after showing a significant decline last year. There were 
long-term (1968-2009) declines of 1.1 percent per year in both 
management regions.
    Wing-collection Survey data indicate that the 2008 recruitment 
index for the U.S. portion of the Eastern Region (1.8 immatures per 
adult female) was 11 percent higher than the 2007 index, and 8 percent 
higher than the long-term average. The recruitment index for the U.S. 
portion of the Central Region (1.6 immatures per adult female) for last 
year's reproduction season was 6 percent higher than the 2007 index and 
1 percent below the long-term average.

Band-Tailed Pigeons and Doves

    Information on the abundance and harvest of band-tailed pigeons is 
collected annually in the western United States and British Columbia. 
Annual counts of Interior band-tailed pigeons seen and heard per route 
have not changed significantly since implementation of the Breeding 
Bird Survey (BBS) in 1966; however, they decreased significantly over 
the last 10 years. The 2008 harvest was estimated to be 4,700 birds. 
For Pacific Coast band-tailed pigeons, annual BBS counts of birds seen 
and heard per route have not changed significantly since 1966, but they 
have increased significantly over the last 10 years. According to the 
Pacific Coast Mineral Site Survey, annual counts of Pacific Coast band-
tailed pigeons seen at each mineral site have increased significantly 
since the survey was experimentally implemented in 2001, but counts 
over the last 5 years appear stable. The 2008 estimate of harvest was 
30,200 birds.
    The status report summarizes information on the abundance and 
harvest of mourning doves collected annually in the United States. The 
focus is on results from the Mourning Dove Call-count Survey, but also 
includes results from the Breeding Bird Survey and Migratory Bird 
Harvest Information Program. According to the Call-count survey, over 
the most recent 10 years (2000-09), there was no significant trend in 
doves heard for either the Eastern or Western Management Units while 
the Central Unit declined significantly. Over the 44-year period (1966-
2009), there was no significant change in doves heard for the Eastern 
Unit while the Central and Western Units declined significantly. Based 
on the mean number of doves seen per route, however, there was no 
significant change for any of the three management units during the 
recent 10-year period. Over 44 years, there was no change in doves seen 
for the Eastern and Central Units while the Western Unit declined 
significantly. The preliminary 2008 harvest estimate for the United 
States was 17,402,400 doves. A banding program is underway to obtain 
current information in order to develop mourning dove population models 
for each management unit to provide guidance for improving our 
decision-making process with respect to harvest management.
    The two key States with a white-winged dove population are Arizona 
and Texas. California and New Mexico have much smaller populations.
    The Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD) has monitored white-
winged dove populations by means of a call-count survey to provide an 
annual index to population size. It runs concurrently with the U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service's Mourning Dove Call-count Survey. The index 
peaked at 52.3 mean number of white-winged doves heard per route in 
1968 but fell precipitously in the late 1970s. The index has stabilized 
to around 25 doves per route in the last few years; in 2009, the mean 
number of doves heard per route was 27.9. AGFD also monitors harvest. 
Harvest during the 15-day season (September 1-15) peaked in the late 
1960s at approximately 740,000 birds (1968 AGFD estimate) and has since 
stabilized at around 100,000 birds; the preliminary 2008 Migratory Bird 
Harvest Information Program (HIP) estimate of harvest was 95,300 birds. 
In 2007, AGFD redesigned their dove harvest survey to sample only from 
hunters registered under HIP so that results from the AGFD survey would 
be comparable to those from HIP. The preliminary 2008 Arizona harvest 
estimate was 79,488 birds.
    In Texas, white-winged doves continue to expand their breeding 
range. Nesting by whitewings has been recorded in most counties, except 
for the northeastern part of the State. Nesting is essentially confined 
to urban areas, but appears to be expanding to exurban areas. 
Concomitant with this range expansion has been a continuing increase in 
white-wing abundance. A new DISTANCE sampling protocol was implemented 
for central and south Texas for 2007, and expanded in 2008 so that 
coverage is almost Statewide. Once fully implemented, biologists should 
have the ability to obtain a good estimate of white-winged dove 
abundance in Texas. While 2008 and 2009 data are not available at this 
time, 2007 surveys indicated an estimated abundance throughout surveyed 
areas (representing about 20 percent of the State) of about 2,300,000 
white-wings. Total Statewide harvest has averaged about 2 million birds 
annually.
    The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department is working to improve 
management of white-winged doves in Texas in the following ways: (1) 
Expanding current surveys of spring populations to encompass areas 
throughout the State that now have breeding populations; (2) completing 
the Tamaulipas-Texas White-winged Dove Strategic Plan so that there are 
consistent and comparable harvest management strategies, surveys, 
research, and data collection across the breeding range of the species; 
(3) expanding operational banding in 2009 that was begun in 2007 to 
derive estimates of survival and harvest rates; (4) implementing a 
wing-collection survey for recruitment rates in lieu of the feeding 
flight and production surveys; (5) estimating probability of detection 
for more accurate estimates of breeding populations within urban 
environments; and (6) evaluating and estimating reproductive success in 
urban areas to better estimate population increases.
    In California, BBS data (although imprecise due to a small sample 
size) indicate that there has been a significant increase in the 
population between 1968 and 2008. According to HIP surveys, the 
preliminary harvest estimate for 2008 was 83,300 birds. In New Mexico, 
BBS data (very imprecise due to a small sample size) also showed a 
significant increase over the long term. In 2008, the estimated harvest 
was 49,100 birds.
    White-tipped doves are believed to be maintaining a relatively 
stable population in the Lower Rio Grande Valley (LRGV) of Texas. 
DISTANCE sampling procedures in the LRGV include whitetips. However, 
until the sampling frame includes rural Rio Grande corridor habitats, 
not many

[[Page 36873]]

whitetips will be reported. Sampling frame issues are expected to be 
resolved by next year. However, annual white-tipped dove harvest during 
the special season is only averaging 3,000-4,000 birds.

Review of Public Comments

    The preliminary proposed rulemaking (April 10 Federal Register) 
opened the public comment period for migratory game bird hunting 
regulations and announced the proposed regulatory alternatives for the 
2009-10 duck hunting season. Comments concerning early-season issues 
and the proposed alternatives are summarized below and numbered in the 
order used in the April 10 Federal Register document. Only the numbered 
items pertaining to early-season issues and the proposed regulatory 
alternatives for which written comments were received are included. 
Consequently, the issues do not follow in consecutive 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, 
they are discussed under headings corresponding to the numbered items 
in the April 10 Federal Register document.

1. Ducks

    Categories used to discuss issues related to duck harvest 
management are: (A) General Harvest Strategy; (B) Regulatory 
Alternatives, including specification of framework dates, season 
lengths, and bag limits; (C) Zones and Split Seasons; and (D) Special 
Seasons/Species Management. The categories correspond to previously 
published issues/discussions, and only those containing substantial 
recommendations are discussed below.

A. General Harvest Strategy

    Council Recommendations: The Mississippi Flyway Council recommended 
that regulations changes be restricted to one step per year, both when 
restricting as well as liberalizing hunting regulations.
    Service Response: As we stated in the April 10 Federal Register, we 
intend to continue use of adaptive harvest management (AHM) to help 
determine appropriate duck-hunting regulations for the 2009-10 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 
certain species, such as canvasbacks, scaup, and pintails).
    As we stated last year regarding incorporation of a one-step 
constraint into the AHM process (73 FR 50678), this proposal was 
addressed by the AHM Task Force of the Association of Fish and Wildlife 
Agencies (AFWA) in its report and recommendations. This recommendation 
will be included in considerations of potential changes to the set of 
regulatory alternatives at a yet to be determined later date. 
Currently, there is no consensus on behalf of the Flyway Councils on 
how to modify the regulatory alternatives. We believe that the new 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the migratory bird 
hunting program (see NEPA Consideration section), currently in 
preparation, may be an appropriate venue for considering such changes 
in a more comprehensive manner that involves input from all Flyways.
    We will propose a specific regulatory alternative for each of the 
Flyways during the 2009-10 season after survey information becomes 
available later this summer. More information on AHM is located at 
https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Management/AHM/AHM-intro.htm.

B. Regulatory Alternatives

    Council Recommendations: The Mississippi and Central Flyway 
Councils recommended that regulatory alternatives for duck hunting 
seasons remain the same as those used in 2008.
    Service Response: The regulatory alternatives proposed in the April 
10 Federal Register will be used for the 2009-10 hunting season (see 
accompanying table at the end of this proposed rule for specifics). In 
2005, the AHM regulatory alternatives were modified to consist only of 
the maximum season lengths, framework dates, and bag limits for total 
ducks and mallards. Restrictions for certain species within these 
frameworks that are not covered by existing harvest strategies will be 
addressed during the late-season regulations process. For those species 
with harvest strategies (canvasbacks, pintails, black ducks, and 
scaup), those strategies will be used for the 2009-10 hunting season.

D. Special Seasons/Species Management

i. September Teal Seasons
    Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended 
that the number of hunting days during the special September teal 
season in the Atlantic Flyway be increased from 9 consecutive days to 
16 consecutive days whenever the blue-winged teal breeding population 
exceeds 4.7 million birds.
    Service Response: We concur with the Atlantic Flyway Council's 
recommendation to increase the number of hunting days during the 
special September teal season from 9 consecutive hunting days to 16 
consecutive hunting days in the Atlantic Flyway whenever the blue-
winged teal breeding population estimate for the traditional survey 
area exceeds 4.7 million birds. While the Mississippi and Central 
Flyways have had operational 16-day September teal seasons (whenever 
the blue-winged teal breeding population estimate for the traditional 
survey area exceeds 4.7 million birds) since 1998, the Atlantic 
Flyway's existing 9-day September teal seasons were first implemented 
in 1998 and made operational in 2003. We estimate that the additional 7 
hunting days will result in an increased harvest of about 7,700 blue-
winged teal, or about a 10 percent increase in the Atlantic Flyway's 
overall blue-winged teal harvest of about 75,000 (average of 75,290 
since 1998). In 2007, blue-winged teal harvest in the Mississippi and 
Central Flyways was about 532,000 in the special September season, and 
over 973,000 overall.
    In providing the Atlantic Flyway this expanded opportunity for 
teal, we offer several notes to the Atlantic, Central, and Mississippi 
Flyway Councils regarding teal. First, the Atlantic Flyway Council 
should prepare a report that evaluates pertinent teal population and 
harvest information after the 16-day season has been conducted for 3 
years. Second, we note that an assessment of the cumulative effects of 
all teal harvest, including harvest during special September seasons, 
has never been conducted. Therefore, we will not agree to any further 
modifications of special September teal seasons or other special 
September duck seasons until a thorough assessment of the harvest 
potential has been completed for both blue-winged and green-winged 
teal, as

[[Page 36874]]

well as an assessment of the impacts of current special September 
seasons on these two species. We request that the Atlantic, 
Mississippi, and Central Flyway Councils designate representatives who 
will assist Service staff with the technical aspects of these 
assessments. Our goal is to complete this important assessment work 
within 3 years.
    Finally, utilizing the criteria developed for the teal season 
harvest strategy, this year's estimate of 7.4 million blue-winged teal 
from the traditional survey area indicates that a 16-day September teal 
season in the Atlantic, Central, and Mississippi Flyways is appropriate 
for 2009.
vi. Scaup
    Council Recommendations: The Mississippi Flyway Council recommended 
that the ``restrictive'' regulatory alternative for scaup in the 
Mississippi Flyway be a 45-day season with a 2-bird daily bag limit and 
a 15-day season with 1-bird daily bag limit.
    The Central Flyway Council recommended modifying the 
``restrictive'' regulatory alternative for scaup in the Central Flyway 
to an option of a 74-day season with a 1-bird daily bag limit, or a 39-
day season with a 3-bird daily bag limit, or a 39-day season with a 2-
bird daily bag limit and a 35-day season with 1-bird daily bag limit. 
The Council further recommended that the ``moderate'' and the 
``liberal'' alternatives remain unchanged from last year. Subsequent to 
this March 2009 recommendation, the Council amended the recommendation 
at the June SRC meeting to a ``restrictive'' regulatory alternative for 
scaup in the Central Flyway of a 39-day season with a 2-bird daily bag 
limit and a 35-day season with 1-bird daily bag limit.
    Service Response: We support the Mississippi Flyway Council's 
recommendation to modify their ``restrictive'' regulatory alternative 
for scaup to a season consisting of 45 days with a 2-bird daily bag 
limit and 15 days with a 1-bird daily bag limit. The projected harvest 
from this regulatory alternative falls within the guidelines we 
provided the Flyway Councils in April (74 FR 16339).
    We do not support the Central Flyway Council's original 
recommendation that includes an option for the ``restrictive'' 
regulatory alternative. While we understand that, on their own, each 
option would likely conform to the established harvest guidelines, 
providing for options among States would result in different 
regulations within the Flyway, which would preclude proper evaluation.
    The use of State ``options'' (i.e., two or more combinations of 
daily bag limit and season length from which each State could 
periodically select) in harvest management is problematic. Such 
differential regulations within a Flyway (or within designated 
management units, such as the High Plains Mallard Management Unit in 
the Central Flyway), confound our ability to adequately assess the 
impacts of regulations on duck harvest, and hence the ability to 
appropriately adjust regulations in response to changes in population 
status. The potential of these differential regulations changing 
annually adds further complications to any evaluations of potential 
impacts or development of appropriate regulatory responses. Therefore, 
we will not approve the use of options in developing harvest management 
approaches for scaup or other ducks.
    We do, however, support the Council's amended recommendation of a 
``restrictive'' regulatory alternative for scaup in the Central Flyway, 
consisting of a 39-day season with a 2-bird daily bag limit and a 35-
day season with a 1-bird daily bag limit. Like the Mississippi Flyway 
Council's recommended regulatory alternative, the projected harvest 
from this regulatory alternative falls within the guidelines we 
provided the Flyway Councils in April (74 FR 16339).
    Hybrid seasons (seasons with differential daily bag limits) may be 
applied to each duck zone within a State; however, the portion of the 
season in which the daily bag limit for scaup is higher must be placed 
in a continuous segment (i.e., segments of lower daily bag limits 
cannot be inserted between segments with higher daily bag limits). If 
the number of days with the higher daily bag limit is interrupted by a 
season split, the remaining days for that segment must be utilized at 
the beginning of the next split. Construction of ``restrictive,'' 
``moderate,'' and ``liberal'' scaup packages have been made under the 
assumption of a liberal AHM framework as determined by the status of 
mallards. To date, we have not addressed how changes in the AHM 
frameworks would affect the scaup decision-making framework. The suite 
of scaup regulatory packages shall remain in place for the next 3 years 
in all four Flyways and will be evaluated at the end of that period.

4. Canada Geese

B. Regular Seasons

    Council Recommendations: The Upper- and Lower-Region Regulations 
Committees of the Mississippi Flyway Council recommended that the 
framework opening date for all species of geese for the regular goose 
seasons in Michigan and Wisconsin be September 16, 2009.
    Service Response: We concur. As we stated last year (73 FR 50678), 
we agree with the objective to increase harvest pressure on resident 
Canada geese in the Mississippi Flyway and will continue to consider 
the opening dates in both States as exceptions to the general Flyway 
opening date, to be reconsidered annually.

9. Sandhill Cranes

    Council Recommendations: The Mississippi, Central, and Pacific 
Flyway Councils recommended expanding the area open to Mid-continent 
Population (MCP) sandhill crane hunting in Wyoming to include Johnson 
and Sheridan Counties.
    The Central and Pacific Flyway Councils recommended using the 2009 
Rocky Mountain Population (RMP) sandhill crane harvest allocation of 
1,939 birds as proposed in the allocation formula using the 3-year 
running average.
    The Pacific Flyway Council recommended extending the experimental, 
limited hunt for Lower Colorado River sandhill cranes in Arizona for an 
additional 3 years. The extension is necessary due to difficulties 
initiating the new hunt, which was approved by the Service in 2007.
    Service Response: We agree with the Councils' recommendations on 
the RMP sandhill crane harvest allocation of 1,939 birds for the 2009-
10 season as outlined in the RMP sandhill crane management plan's 
harvest allocation formula. Regarding the modification of the MCP 
sandhill crane hunt area in Wyoming to include portions of Johnson and 
Sheridan Counties, we agree. Both of these areas are within existing 
MCP hunt plans.
    In 2007, the Pacific Flyway Council recommended, and we approved, 
the establishment of a limited hunt for the Lower Colorado River Valley 
Population (LCRVP) of sandhill cranes in Arizona (72 FR 49622). 
However, the population inventory on which the LCRVP hunt plan is based 
was not completed that year. Thus, the Arizona Game and Fish Department 
chose to not conduct the hunt in 2007 and sought approval from the 
Service again last year to begin conducting the hunt. We again

[[Page 36875]]

approved the limited hunt (73 FR 50678). However, due to complications 
encountered with the proposed onset of this new season falling within 
ongoing efforts to open new hunting seasons on Federal wildlife 
refuges, the experimental limited hunt season was not opened last year. 
As such, the State of Arizona has requested that the next 3 years 
(2009-12) be designated as the new experimental season and has 
designated an area under State control where the experimental hunt will 
be conducted. Given that the LCRVP survey results indicate an increase 
from 1,900 birds in 1998 to 2,401 birds in 2009, and that the 3-year 
average of 2,981 LCRVP cranes is above the population objective of 
2,500, we continue to support the establishment of the 3-year 
experimental framework for this hunt, conditional on successful 
monitoring being conducted as called for in the Flyway hunt plan for 
this population.
    Our final environmental assessment (FEA) on this new hunt 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, OR 97232-4181, or it may be viewed via the 
Service's home page at https://www.regulations.gov or at https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Management/BirdManagement.html.

16. Mourning Doves

    Council Recommendations: The Atlantic and Mississippi Flyway 
Councils recommended use of the ``moderate'' season framework for 
States within the Eastern Management Unit population of mourning doves, 
resulting in a 70-day season and 15-bird daily bag limit. The daily bag 
limit could be composed of mourning doves and white-winged doves, 
singly or in combination.
    The Mississippi and Central Flyway Councils recommend the use of 
the standard (or ``moderate'') season package of a 15-bird daily bag 
limit and a 70-day season for the 2009-10 mourning dove season in the 
States within the Central Management Unit. The daily bag limit could be 
composed of mourning doves and white-winged doves, singly or in 
combination. The Councils also recommended changing the opening date 
for dove hunting in the South Zone in Texas to the Friday nearest 
September 20, but not earlier than September 17.
    The Pacific Flyway Council recommended use of the ``moderate'' 
season framework for States in the Western Management Unit (WMU) 
population of mourning doves, which represents no change from last 
year's frameworks.
    Service Response: Last year, we accepted and endorsed the interim 
harvest strategies for the Central, Eastern, and Western Management 
Units (73 FR 50678). As we stated then, the interim mourning dove 
harvest strategies are a step towards implementing the Mourning Dove 
National Strategic Harvest Plan (Plan) that was approved by all four 
Flyway Councils in 2003. The Plan represents a new, more informed means 
of decision-making for dove harvest management besides relying solely 
on traditional roadside counts of mourning doves as indicators of 
population trend. However, recognizing that a more comprehensive, 
national approach would take time to develop, we requested the 
development of interim harvest strategies, by management unit, until 
the elements of the Plan can be fully implemented. In 2004, each 
management unit submitted its respective strategy, but the strategies 
used different datasets and different approaches or methods. After 
initial submittal and review in 2006, we requested that the strategies 
be revised, using similar, existing datasets among the management units 
along with similar decision-making criteria. In January 2008, we 
recommended that, following approval by the respective Flyway Councils 
in March, they be submitted in 2008 for endorsement by the Service, 
with implementation for the 2009-10 hunting season.
    Thus, based on the new interim harvest strategies and current 
population status, we agree with the recommended selection of the 
``moderate'' season frameworks for doves in the Eastern, Central, and 
Western Management Units.
    Regarding the recommended change in the opening date for dove 
hunting in the South Zone in Texas, we agree. Allowing Texas to use a 
``floating'' framework opening date for the South Zone is a relatively 
minor change that would allow Texas additional flexibility in 
establishing its season.

17. White-Winged and White-Tipped Doves

    Council Recommendations: The Mississippi and Central Flyway 
Councils recommend modifying the boundary for the Special White-winged 
Dove Area (SWWDA) in Texas by removing portions of Jim Hogg and 
northern Starr Counties, and modifying the daily bag limit in the SWWDA 
in Texas to 15 doves per day in the aggregate to be consistent with 
mourning dove frameworks.
    Service Response: We agree with the Councils' recommendation to 
remove portions of the SWWDA area in Texas. Removal of the areas with 
poorer quality white-winged dove habitat from the SWWDA hunt area will 
allow Texas to more appropriately manage the overall dove harvest. We 
also agree with the Councils' recommendation to modify the daily bag 
limit in the SWWDA from 12 to 15 birds per day. Increasing the overall 
aggregate daily bag limit on doves, while maintaining the internal bag 
limit restrictions on mourning and white-tipped doves, will provide 
hunters more consistent and easily understood dove hunting regulations.

18. Alaska

    Council Recommendations: The Pacific Flyway Council recommended 
reducing the daily bag limits for brant in Alaska from 3 per day with 6 
in possession to 2 per day with 4 in possession. The Council also 
subsequently recommended at the June SRC meeting several goose season 
modifications to address new survey information regarding estimates of 
dusky Canada geese. They recommended delaying the opening of goose 
hunting in the affected areas by one week, implementing an education 
and outreach program to notify hunters of the need for further harvest 
restrictions, initiation of a voluntary check station for dusky Canada 
geese in those areas, and implementation of actions identified in the 
Pacific Flyway Management Plan for dusky Canada geese in 2010.
    Service Response: The dusky Canada goose survey this year estimated 
a record low number of dusky Canada geese nesting on the Copper River 
Delta in Alaska. These results increase our longstanding concern for 
this subspecies of Canada goose. Further, we appreciate the fact that 
the Pacific Flyway had planned for this possible situation when the 
Flyway management plan for this population was revised in 2008, and we 
strongly support the development and use of these cooperatively-
developed management plans. Therefore, we propose to enact the harvest 
management program called for in the Flyway management plan at this 
population level. More specifically:
    1. A mandatory State-issued permit is required to hunt Canada geese 
in Alaska GMU 6-C, and on Middleton, Hinchinbrook and Hawkins Islands 
in the Gulf of Alaska adjacent to GMU 6-C;
    2. All geese harvested from these areas must be taken to a State-
operated

[[Page 36876]]

check station where the subspecies will be determined;
    3. The season for all Canada geese will be closed if a total of 40 
dusky Canada geese are harvested; and
    4. The State of Alaska will conduct an effort to educate the 
hunting public about the conservation concerns surrounding the dusky 
Canada goose in the area of Cordova, Alaska.
    We recognize the fact that implementation of the permit hunt in a 
relatively short time will prove challenging, but we strongly believe 
that the actions outlined in the management plan constitute the best 
course of action for harvest management of the dusky Canada goose.
    We recognize the work involved crafting the amended recommendation 
from the Pacific Flyway Council on behalf of the State of Alaska. 
However, this recommendation consists of harvest management actions not 
addressed in the Flyway management plan and their impact on dusky 
Canada goose harvest is unknown. Further, the Council's amended 
proposal does not establish a limit on the number of dusky Canada geese 
that could be taken, nor would they provide any information regarding 
the harvest of dusky Canada geese in the Copper River Delta area.
    We concur with the Pacific Flyway Council's recommendation to 
decrease the daily bag and possession limit for brant.

20. Puerto Rico

    Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended 
that Puerto Rico be permitted to adopt a 20-bird bag limit for doves in 
the aggregate for the next three hunting seasons, 2009-2011. Legally 
hunted dove species in Puerto Rico are the Zenaida dove, the white-
winged dove, and the mourning dove. They also recommended that the 20-
bird aggregate bag limit should include no more than 10 Zenaida doves 
and no more than 3 mourning doves.
    Service Response: As we stated last year when we approved Puerto 
Rico's proposal (73 FR 50678), we concur with the intent of the 3-year 
experimental season to increase harvest pressure on a rapidly growing 
population of white-winged doves while decreasing hunting pressure on 
Zenaida and mourning doves.

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. 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 B including your personal identifying information B 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.
    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 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 2009-10 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 the 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. 
A regulatory cost-benefit analysis has been prepared and is available 
at https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/NewReportsPublications/SpecialTopics/SpecialTopics.html#HuntingRegs or at https://www.regulations.gov. OMB bases its determination of regulatory 
significance 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,

[[Page 36877]]

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. 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 ADDRESSES or from our Web site at https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/NewReportsPublications/SpecialTopics/SpecialTopics.html#HuntingRegs 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.

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 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 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

    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.

Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes

    In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994, 
``Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal 
Governments'' (59 FR 22951), Executive Order 13175, and 512 DM 2, we 
have evaluated possible effects on Federally-recognized Indian Tribes 
and have determined that there are no effects on Indian trust 
resources. However, in the April 10 Federal Register, we solicited 
proposals for special migratory bird hunting regulations for certain 
Tribes on Federal Indian reservations, off-reservation trust lands, and 
ceded lands for the 2009-10 migratory bird hunting season. The 
resulting proposals will be contained in a separate proposed rule. By 
virtue of these actions, we have consulted with Tribes affected by this 
rule.

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

[[Page 36878]]

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 2009-10 
hunting season are authorized under 16 U.S.C. 703-712 and 16 U.S.C. 742 
a-j.

    Dated: July 16, 2009.
Jane Lyder,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.

Proposed Regulations Frameworks for 2009-10 Early Hunting Seasons on 
Certain Migratory Game Birds

    Pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and delegated 
authorities, the Department of the Interior approved the following 
proposed frameworks, which prescribe season lengths, bag limits, 
shooting hours, and outside dates within which States may select 
hunting seasons for certain migratory game birds between September 1, 
2009 and March 10, 2010.

General

    Dates: All outside dates noted below are inclusive.
    Shooting and Hawking (Taking by Falconry) Hours: Unless otherwise 
specified, from one-half hour before sunrise to sunset daily.
    Possession Limits: Unless otherwise specified, possession limits 
are twice the daily bag limit.

Flyways and Management Units

Waterfowl Flyways

    Atlantic Flyway--Includes Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, 
Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, 
North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Vermont, 
Virginia, and West Virginia.
    Mississippi Flyway--Includes Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, 
Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, 
Ohio, Tennessee, and Wisconsin.
    Central Flyway--Includes Colorado (east of the Continental Divide), 
Kansas, Montana (Counties of Blaine, Carbon, Fergus, Judith Basin, 
Stillwater, Sweetgrass, Wheatland, and all counties east thereof), 
Nebraska, New Mexico (east of the Continental Divide except the 
Jicarilla Apache Indian Reservation), North Dakota, Oklahoma, South 
Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming (east of the Continental Divide).
    Pacific Flyway--Includes Alaska, Arizona, California, Idaho, 
Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and those portions of Colorado, 
Montana, New Mexico, and Wyoming not included in the Central Flyway.

Management Units

Mourning Dove Management Units

    Eastern Management Unit--All States east of the Mississippi River, 
and Louisiana.
    Central Management Unit--Arkansas, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, 
Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, 
Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming.
    Western Management Unit--Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, 
Oregon, Utah, and Washington.

Woodcock Management Regions

    Eastern Management Region--Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, 
Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, 
North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Vermont, 
Virginia, and West Virginia.
    Central Management Region--Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, 
Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, 
Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, 
Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin.
    Other geographic descriptions are contained in a later portion of 
this document.

Definitions

    Dark geese: Canada geese, white-fronted geese, brant (except in 
Alaska, California, Oregon, Washington, and the Atlantic Flyway), and 
all other goose species, except light geese.
    Light geese: Snow (including blue) geese and Ross's geese.

Waterfowl Seasons in the Atlantic Flyway

    In the Atlantic Flyway States of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, 
Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and 
Virginia, where Sunday hunting is prohibited Statewide by State law, 
all Sundays are closed to all take of migratory waterfowl (including 
mergansers and coots).

Special September Teal Season

    Outside Dates: Between September 1 and September 30, an open season 
on all species of teal may be selected by the following States in areas 
delineated by State regulations:
    Atlantic Flyway--Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North 
Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia.
    Mississippi Flyway--Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, 
Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Ohio, and Tennessee.
    Central Flyway--Colorado (part), Kansas, Nebraska (part), New 
Mexico (part), Oklahoma, and Texas.
    Hunting Seasons and Daily Bag Limits: Not to exceed 16 consecutive 
hunting days in the Atlantic, Mississippi and Central Flyways. The 
daily bag limit is 4 teal.

Shooting Hours

    Atlantic Flyway--One-half hour before sunrise to sunset, except in 
Maryland, where the hours are from sunrise to sunset.
    Mississippi and Central Flyways--One-half hour before sunrise, to 
sunset, except in the States of Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, 
and Ohio, where the hours are from sunrise to sunset.

Special September Duck Seasons

    Florida, Kentucky and Tennessee: In lieu of a special September 
teal season, a 5-consecutive-day season may be selected in September. 
The daily bag limit may not exceed 4 teal and wood ducks in the 
aggregate, of which no more than 2 may be wood ducks.
    Iowa: Iowa may hold up to 5 days of its regular duck hunting season 
in September. All ducks that are legal during the regular duck season 
may be taken during the September segment of the season. The September 
season segment may commence no earlier than the Saturday nearest 
September 20 (September 19). The daily bag and possession limits will 
be the same as those in effect last year but are subject to change 
during the late-season regulations process. The remainder of the 
regular duck season may not begin before October 10.

Special Youth Waterfowl Hunting Days

    Outside Dates: States may select 2 consecutive days (hunting days 
in Atlantic Flyway States with compensatory days) per duck-hunting 
zone, designated as ``Youth Waterfowl Hunting Days,'' in addition to 
their regular duck seasons. The days must be

[[Page 36879]]

held outside any regular duck season on a weekend, holidays, or other 
non-school days when youth hunters would have the maximum opportunity 
to participate. The days may be held up to 14 days before or after any 
regular duck-season frameworks or within any split of a regular duck 
season, or within any other open season on migratory bir