Migratory Bird Subsistence Harvest in Alaska; Harvest Regulations for Migratory Birds in Alaska During the 2010 Season, 18764-18773 [2010-8382]

Agencies

• Fish and Wildlife Service
• DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 70 (Tuesday, April 13, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18764-18773]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-8382]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 92

[FWS-R7-MB-2009-0082; 91200-1231-9BPP-L2]
RIN 1018-AW67


Migratory Bird Subsistence Harvest in Alaska; Harvest Regulations 
for Migratory Birds in Alaska During the 2010 Season

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service or we) establishes 
migratory bird subsistence harvest regulations in Alaska for the 2010 
season. These regulations enable the continuation of customary and 
traditional subsistence uses of migratory birds in Alaska and prescribe 
regional information on when and where the harvesting of birds may 
occur. These regulations were developed under a co-management process 
involving the Service, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, and 
Alaska Native representatives. This rulemaking is necessary because the 
regulations governing the subsistence harvest of migratory birds in 
Alaska are subject to annual review. This rulemaking establishes 
region-specific regulations that go into effect April 13, 2010 and 
expire August 31, 2010.

DATES: The amendments to subpart D of 50 CFR part 92 are effective 
April 13, 2010, through August 31, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred Armstrong, (907) 786-3887, or 
Donna Dewhurst, (907) 786-3499, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1011 E. 
Tudor Road, Mail Stop 201, Anchorage, AK 99503.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Why Is This Rulemaking Necessary?

    This rulemaking is necessary because, by law, the migratory bird 
harvest season is closed unless opened by the Secretary of the 
Interior, and the regulations governing subsistence harvest of 
migratory birds in Alaska are subject to public review and annual 
approval. This rule establishes regulations for the taking of migratory 
birds for subsistence uses in Alaska during the spring and summer of 
2010. This rule lists migratory bird season openings and closures in 
Alaska by region.

How Do I Find the History of These Regulations?

    Background information, including past events leading to this 
rulemaking, accomplishments since the Migratory Bird Treaties with 
Canada and Mexico were amended, and a history addressing conservation 
issues can be found in the following Federal Register documents:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Date                      Federal Register citation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
August 16, 2002........................  67 FR 53511.
July 21, 2003..........................  68 FR 43010.
April 2, 2004..........................  69 FR 17318.
April 8, 2005..........................  70 FR 18244.
February 28, 2006......................  71 FR 10404.
April 11, 2007.........................  72 FR 18318.
March 14, 2008.........................  73 FR 13788.
May 19, 2009...........................  74 FR 23336.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These documents, which are all final rules setting forth the annual 
harvest regulations, are available at https://alaska.fws.gov/ambcc/regulations.htm.

What Is the Process for Issuing Regulations for the Subsistence Harvest 
of Migratory Birds in Alaska?

    The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service or we) establishes 
migratory bird subsistence harvest regulations in Alaska for the 2010 
season. These regulations enable the continuation of customary and 
traditional subsistence uses of migratory birds in Alaska and prescribe 
regional information on when and where the harvesting of birds may 
occur. These regulations were developed under a co-management process 
involving the Service, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, and 
Alaska Native representatives.
    We opened the process to establish regulations for the 2010 spring 
and summer subsistence harvest of migratory birds in Alaska in a 
proposed rule published in the Federal Register on April 10, 2009 (74 
FR 16339). While that proposed rule dealt primarily with the regulatory 
process for hunting migratory birds for all purposes throughout the 
United States, we also discussed the background and history of Alaska 
subsistence regulations, explained the annual process for their 
establishment, and requested proposals for the 2010 season. The 
rulemaking processes for both types of migratory bird harvest are 
related, and the April 10, 2009, proposed rule explained the connection 
between the two.
    The Alaska Migratory Bird Co-management Council (Co-management 
Council) held a meeting in April 2009 to develop recommendations for 
changes that would take effect during the 2010 harvest season. These 
recommendations were presented first to the Flyway Councils and then to 
the Service Regulations Committee at the committee's meeting on July 29 
and 30, 2009.

Who Is Eligible To Hunt Under These Regulations?

    Eligibility to harvest under the regulations established in 2003 
was limited to permanent residents, regardless of race, in villages 
located within the Alaska Peninsula, Kodiak Archipelago, the Aleutian 
Islands, and in areas north and west of the Alaska Range (50 CFR 92.5). 
These geographical restrictions opened the initial subsistence 
migratory bird harvest to about 13 percent of Alaska residents. High 
populated areas such as Anchorage, the Matanuska-Susitna and Fairbanks 
North Star boroughs, the Kenai Peninsula roaded area, the Gulf of 
Alaska roaded area, and Southeast Alaska were excluded from eligible 
subsistence harvest areas.
    Based on petitions requesting inclusion in the harvest, in 2004, we 
added 13 additional communities based on criteria set forth in 50 CFR 
92.5(c). These communities were Gulkana, Gakona, Tazlina, Copper 
Center,

[[Page 18765]]

Mentasta Lake, Chitina, Chistochina, Tatitlek, Chenega, Port Graham, 
Nanwalek, Tyonek, and Hoonah, with a combined population of 2,766. In 
2005, we added three additional communities for glaucous-winged gull 
egg gathering only, based on petitions requesting inclusion. These 
southeastern communities were Craig, Hydaburg, and Yakutat, with a 
combined population of 2,459.
    In 2007, we enacted the Alaska Department of Fish and Game's 
request to expand the Fairbanks North Star Borough excluded area to 
include the Central Interior area. This action excluded the following 
communities from participation in this harvest: Big Delta/Fort Greely, 
Healy, McKinley Park/Village and Ferry, with a combined population of 
2,812. These removed communities reduced the percentage of the State 
population included in the subsistence harvest to 13 percent.

How Will the Service Ensure That the Subsistence Harvest Will Not Raise 
Overall Migratory Bird Harvest or Threaten the Conservation of 
Endangered and Threatened Species?

    We have monitored subsistence harvest for the past 25 years through 
the use of annual household surveys in the most heavily used 
subsistence harvest areas, such as the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. In recent 
years, more intensive surveys combined with outreach efforts focused on 
species identification have been added to improve the accuracy of 
information gathered from regions still reporting some subsistence 
harvest of listed or candidate species.

Spectacled and Steller's Eiders

    Spectacled eiders (Somateria fischeri) and the Alaska-breeding 
population of Steller's eiders (Polysticta stelleri) are listed as 
threatened species; their migration and breeding distribution overlap 
with where the spring and summer subsistence migratory bird hunt is 
open in Alaska. Both species are closed to hunting, although harvest 
surveys and Service documentation indicate both species have been taken 
in several regions of Alaska.
    The Service has dual goals and responsibilities for authorizing a 
subsistence harvest while protecting migratory birds and threatened 
species. Although these goals continue to be challenging, they are not 
irreconcilable, providing sufficient recognition is given to the need 
to protect threatened species, measures to remedy documented threats 
are implemented, and the subsistence community and other conservation 
partners commit to working together. With these dual goals in mind, the 
Service, working with partners, developed measures in 2009 to further 
reduce the potential for shooting mortality or injury of closed 
species. These conservation measures included: (1) Increased waterfowl 
hunter outreach and community awareness partnering with the Migratory 
Bird Task Force; (2) continued enforcement of the migratory bird 
regulations that are protective of listed eiders; and (3) in-season 
Service verification of the harvest to detect Steller's eider 
mortality.
    This rule is focused on the North Slope from Barrow through Point 
Hope because listed spectacled and Steller's eiders from the listed 
Alaska breeding population, are known to breed and migrate there. These 
regulations address several eider management needs by restricting 
hunting to times of day with sufficient daylight to improve a hunter's 
ability to distinguish between species and minimize shooting species 
closed for harvest; clarifying for subsistence users that Service law 
enforcement personnel have authority to verify species of birds 
possessed by hunters; clarifying that it is illegal to possess any bird 
closed to harvest; and describing how the Service's existing authority 
of emergency closure would be implemented, if necessary, to protect 
Steller's eiders. These regulations, implemented in accordance with 
conservation measures, are considered the principal means by which the 
threat from shooting mortality of threatened eiders will be reduced. In 
addition, the emergency closure authority provides another level of 
assurance if an unexpected amount of Steller's eider shooting mortality 
occurs.
    In-season, real-time harvest survey information obtained by the 
local community is desirable at Point Hope, Point Lay, Wainwright, and 
Barrow. The North Slope Borough has offered to assist with collection 
of this information, including traveling to hunters in the field and 
providing photo documentation of some portion of the harvest. In-season 
harvest monitoring information will be used to independently evaluate 
harvest survey reports, as well as evaluate the efficacy of 
regulations, conservation measures, and outreach efforts.
    On the North Slope in 2009, no Steller's eider harvest was 
reported, and no Steller's eiders were found shot during in-season 
verification of the subsistence harvest. Based on these successes, the 
Service will continue the same regulations for the 2010 season. The 
2009 conservation measures will also be continued, although there will 
be some modification of the amount of effort and emphasis each will 
receive. Specifically, as local communities develop greater 
responsibility for taking actions to ensure Steller's and spectacled 
eider conservation and recovery, and hunters demonstrate greater 
compliance with hunting regulations, the Service's Office of Law 
Enforcement plans to decrease its presence in Barrow.
    The longstanding general emergency closure provision at 50 CFR 
92.21 specifies that the harvest may be closed or temporarily suspended 
upon finding that a continuation of the regulation allowing the harvest 
would pose an imminent threat to the conservation of any migratory bird 
population. With regard to Steller's eiders, the regulation at 50 CFR 
92.32, carried over from last year, clarifies that we will take action 
under 50 CFR 92.21 as is necessary to prevent further take of Steller's 
eiders, and that action could include temporary or long-term closures 
of the harvest in all or a portion of the geographic area open to 
harvest. If mortality of threatened eiders occurs, we will evaluate 
each mortality event by criteria such as cause, quantity, sex, age, 
location, and date. We will consult with the Co-management Council when 
we are considering an emergency closure. If we determine that an 
emergency closure is necessary, we will design it to minimize its 
impact on the subsistence harvest.

Yellow-billed Loon and Kittlitz's Murrelet

    Yellow-billed loon (Gavia adamsii) and Kittlitz's murrelet 
(Brachyramphus brevirostris) are listed as candidate species for 
Endangered Species Act Listing. Their migration and breeding 
distribution overlaps with where the spring and summer migratory bird 
hunt is open in Alaska. Both species are closed to hunting, and there 
is no evidence Kittlitz's murrelets are harvested. On the other hand, 
harvest surveys have indicated harvest of yellow-billed loons on the 
North Slope and St. Lawrence Island. Some or all of the yellow-billed 
loons reported harvested on the North Slope were found to be entangled 
loons salvaged from subsistence fishing nets as described below. The 
Service will continue outreach efforts in both areas in 2010, engaging 
partners to improve harvest estimates and decrease take of yellow-
billed loons.
    Consistent with the request of the North Slope Borough Fish and 
Game Management Committee and the recommendation of the Co-management 
Council, this rule continues into 2010 the provisions originally 
established in 2005 to allow subsistence use of yellow-

[[Page 18766]]

billed loons (Gavia adamsii) inadvertently entangled in subsistence 
fishing (gill) nets on the North Slope. Yellow-billed loons are 
culturally important for the Inupiat Eskimo of the North Slope for use 
in traditional dance regalia. A maximum of 20 yellow-billed loons may 
be caught in 2010 under this provision. This provision does not 
authorize intentional harvest of yellow-billed loons, but allows use of 
those loons inadvertently entangled during normal subsistence fishing 
activities. Individual reporting to the North Slope Borough Department 
of Wildlife is required by the end of each season. However, the North 
Slope Borough has asked fishermen, through announcements on the radio 
and through personal contact, to report inadvertent entanglements of 
loons as they occur, to better estimate the level of mortality caused 
by gill nets. In 2008, the North Slope Borough reported that one 
yellow-billed loon was found dead in a fishing net; one severely 
injured yellow-billed loon was observed by Borough staff; and two were 
released uninjured from fishing nets by Borough staff.

Endangered Species Act Consideration

    Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1536) requires 
the Secretary of the Interior to ``review other programs administered 
by him and utilize such programs in furtherance of the purposes of the 
Act'' and to ``insure that any action authorized, funded, or carried 
out * * * is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any 
endangered species or threatened species or result in the destruction 
or adverse modification of [critical] habitat * * *.'' We conducted an 
intra-agency consultation with the Service's Fairbanks Field Office on 
this harvest as it will be managed in accordance with this final rule 
and the conservation measures. The consultation was completed with an 
April 2, 2010, biological opinion that concluded the final rule and 
conservation measures are not likely to jeopardize the continued 
existence of Steller's eider, spectacled eider, yellow-billed loon, or 
Kittlitz's murrelet, or result in the destruction or adverse 
modification of designated critical habitat for Steller's eider or 
spectacled eider.

What Is Different in the Region-Specific Regulations for 2010?

Aleutian and Arctic Terns

    We are removing the provision that opened a season from May 15 to 
June 30 for harvesting Aleutian (Onychoprion aleutica) and arctic tern 
(Sterna paradisaea) eggs in the Yakutat Harvest area, from Icy Bay (Icy 
Cape to Point Riou) and the coastal islands bordering the Gulf of 
Alaska from Point Manby southeast to and including Dry Bay. The Yakutat 
Tlingit Tribe requested that we remove this regulation at the April 
2009 Co-Management Council meeting, stating that they will not be able 
to adequately monitor the tern subsistence take as requested by the 
Service, so they would prefer to withdraw the regulation at this time.

Summary of Public Involvement

    On November 20, 2009, we published in the Federal Register a 
proposed rule (74 FR 60228) to establish spring and summer migratory 
bird subsistence harvest regulations in Alaska for the 2010 subsistence 
season. The proposed rule provided for a public comment period of 60 
days. We posted an announcement of the comment period dates for the 
proposed rule, as well as the rule itself and related historical 
documents, on the Co-management Council's Internet homepage. We issued 
a press release announcing our request for public comments and the 
pertinent deadlines for such comments, which was faxed to the media 
Statewide. Additionally, all documents were available on https://www.regulations.gov.
    In mid-December 2009, we received a request to extend the public 
comment period and hold a public hearing in Barrow, Alaska. Based on 
this request, we held a public meeting to record public comments on the 
proposed regulations on January 12, 2010, at the Inupiat Heritage 
Center, 5421 North Star St., Barrow. We also reopened the public 
comment period until February 18, 2010, by publishing a document in the 
January 25, 2010, Federal Register (75 FR 3888). The public was 
informed that if they had submitted comments previously, they did not 
need to resubmit because we had already incorporated those comments 
into the public record and would consider them in preparation of our 
final determination. By the close of the second public comment period 
on February 18, 2010, we received responses from 20 individuals and 2 
organizations.

Response to Public Comments

General Comments

    Comment: We received two general comments on the overall 
regulations that expressed strong opposition to the concept of allowing 
any harvest of migratory birds in Alaska.
    Service Response: For centuries, indigenous inhabitants of Alaska 
have harvested migratory birds for subsistence purposes during the 
spring and summer months. The Canada and Mexico migratory bird treaties 
were recently amended for the express purpose of allowing subsistence 
hunting for migratory birds during the spring and summer. The 
amendments indicate that the Service should issue regulations allowing 
such hunting as provided in the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 16 U.S.C. 
712(1), expressly allows the Service to issue regulations allowing such 
hunting. See Statutory Authority section for more details.
    One of the goals of the Protocol amending the Canada Treaty is to 
allow a traditional subsistence hunt while also improving conservation 
of migratory birds through effective regulation of this hunt. Although 
the Protocol sanctions a traditional subsistence hunt, the Parties did 
not intend to cause significant increases in the take of migratory 
birds, relative to their continental population sizes. If at some point 
the subsistence harvest regulations result in significantly increased 
harvest, management strategies would be implemented to ensure 
maintenance of continental populations.
    Comment: Fourteen commenters explained the true value of 
subsistence to their way of life on the North Slope --it includes both 
providing essential food that is shared and preserves the age-old 
customs and traditions associated with it.
    Service Response: We respectfully acknowledge the importance of the 
customs and traditions that go along with the subsistence way of life 
in rural Alaska. The amendments to the Migratory Bird Treaties with 
Canada and Mexico recognize the importance of maintaining the cultural 
and traditional lifestyle of the indigenous inhabitants of Alaska.
    Comment: One commenter requested that the public comment period be 
extended.
    Service Response: We reopened the public comment period until 
February 18, 2010, by publishing a document in the January 25, 2010, 
Federal Register (75 FR 3888). The public was informed that if they had 
submitted comments previously, they did not need to resubmit those 
comments because we had already incorporated them into the public 
record and would consider them in preparation of our final 
determination.
    Comment: Twelve commenters expressed continued disappointment with 
the duck stamp and license issue and that these requirements were 
pushed upon them and were not cultural and traditional. One commenter

[[Page 18767]]

added that some of the elders in Barrows are afraid to go out bird 
hunting because of the threat of getting a ticket for no license or 
duck stamp. One commenter explained the difficulty of buying a State 
hunting license, Federal duck stamp, and State duck stamp for 
subsistence hunters on a limited income. Several commenters stated that 
purchasing a license and stamps is a burden for a family on a fixed, 
low income.
    Service Response: The only way the requirement to possess a Federal 
Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp could be changed is 
through a congressional modification of the Migratory Bird Hunting and 
Conservation Stamp Act (16 U.S.C. 718 et seq.). Similarly, the 
requirement for an Alaska hunting license and Waterfowl Conservation 
Tag (duck stamp) is codified in Alaska's statutes and regulations and 
can be changed only by the State legislature. There are a few 
exemptions. Hunters under the age of 16 or 60 years or older and 
qualified disabled veterans are not required to purchase licenses and 
duck stamps to hunt. Residents who qualify for a $5.00 low income 
license are not required to purchase a duck stamp.
    The Subsistence Division (AS 16.05.340(17)(B)) of the Alaska 
Department of Fish and Game (Department) has the responsibility to 
evaluate the impact of State and Federal laws and regulations on 
subsistence hunting and, when corrective action is indicated, make 
recommendations to the Department, who in turn make recommendations to 
the Alaska Board of Game regarding amendment and repeal of regulations 
affecting subsistence hunting.
    The Alaska Board of Game (AS 16.05.130(b)(2)-(4)) can establish 
regulations to exempt the requirement to purchase a waterfowl 
conservation tag (duck stamp) for waterfowl hunting in areas of the 
State not likely to benefit from the following programs: (1) The 
acquisition of wetlands important for waterfowl and public use of 
waterfowl, (2) waterfowl related projects approved by the State 
commissioner, and (3) the administration of the waterfowl conservation 
program.
    Comment: Two commenters noted that the Federal Register document 
did not address Executive Order 13175, Government-to-Government 
Relations, and should have.
    Service Response: We did discuss Executive Order 13175 in the 
November 20, 2009, proposed rule; see 74 FR 60232-60233. In that 
discussion, we stated that because eligibility to hunt under these 
regulations is not limited to tribal members, but rather extends to all 
indigenous inhabitants of the subsistence harvest areas, we are not 
required to engage in formal consultation with tribes. However, in 
keeping with the spirit of the President's memorandum of April 29, 
1994, ``Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal 
Governments'' (59 FR 22951), and Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249; 
November 6, 2000) and Memorandum on Tribal Consultations dated November 
5, 2009, concerning consultation and coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments, we conducted a public hearing in Barrow, Alaska, for the 
express purpose of gathering public comments on our November 20, 2009, 
proposed rule (74 FR 60228). We also conducted local meetings with the 
Migratory Bird Task Force, which is comprised of Alaska Native Tribes, 
Alaska Native corporations, and Alaska Native nonprofit organizations, 
to develop an outreach strategy for the coming spring and summer 
season. The Service's Alaska Regional Director also traveled to Barrow 
to meet with local leaders on the 2010 migratory bird regulations and 
discuss how the local community could be involved in the conservation 
of listed eiders.
    Comment: One commenter requested the Service to consider, under 
Executive Order 12898 on environmental justice, the impacts of the 
regulations on the Inupiat subsistence lifestyle, because neither the 
proposed November 20, 2009, proposed rule (74 FR 60228) nor the 
environmental assessment on which they are based cite the order.
    Service Response: The Service, working with the Co-management 
Council, already complies with Section 4-401 of this Executive Order, 
by annually collecting and publishing subsistence harvest data; 
however, the Service does not have the responsibility to evaluate any 
potential health risks associated with the consumption of 
environmentally contaminated wild foods. We have notified the public in 
our regulations of the risks associated with the potential presence of 
highly pathogenic H5N1 bird flu in the migratory birds being taken and 
consumed. The implication from the question appears to be more focused 
on the additional 2009 regulations imposed on 4 North Slope Inupiat 
communities within the North Coastal Zone. Our regulations at 50 CFR 
92.31(g)(5)(i), which establish shooting hours, have the potential to 
safeguard human health and safety by preventing the use of firearms 
when light levels are inadequate to ensure safe practices. The other 
two regulations under this section pertain more to law enforcement with 
no applicability to human health.
    Comment: One commenter expressed concern that the growing numbers 
of bird watchers in the Barrow area causing disturbance and affecting 
bird movement, and that the birdwatchers are there for pleasure, while 
subsistence is a lifestyle.
    Service Response: The Gasline/Cakeeater and Freshwater Lake roads 
are primarily located on Native owned or privately owned lands and use 
is managed by the Ukpeagvik Inupiat Corporation, which does restrict 
use by commercial birdwatching tours and professional photographers by 
requiring permits.
    Comment: One commenter expressed that we should remove spectacled 
eiders from the list of threatened species, because the population 
surveys the commenter had read stated that there were plenty of these 
birds worldwide, and that only a small percentage migrate along the 
North Slope. The commenter stated that any subsistence take should be 
allowed.
    Service Response: We intend to re-evaluate the species' status 
rangewide this year during a ``5-year review'' that we are conducting 
on spectacled eiders. One result of this review will be to consider 
whether recent changes in the species' status warrant reconsideration 
of its protection under the Endangered Species Act. It should be noted, 
however, that standardized aerial surveys indicate a decline in the 
number of spectacled eiders nesting on the North Slope.
    Comment: One commenter brought up that, under the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, the proposed rule stated that this 
action will not have an annual effect on the economy, but the commenter 
felt the North Slope regulations would negatively affect their 
subsistence economy.
    Service Response: The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act, 5 U.S.C. 804(2), addresses potential annual effects on 
the economy of $100 million or more, which is well beyond the scope of 
the action contained in this Federal Register document.
    Comment: One commenter was concerned that under the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act, participation on regional management bodies and 
the Co-management Council requires travel expenses for some Alaska 
Native organizations and local governments, but that the local tribal 
governments have not been paid to participate.
    Service Response: As part of the Co-management Council, regional 
groups were formed to provide for local village

[[Page 18768]]

and tribal representation. Grants are annually provided by the Service 
for each regional representative and their sponsoring organization to 
fund travel for village representatives to attend regional meetings 
twice a year.

Law Enforcement

    Comment: Six commenters said that the extra law enforcement 
presence in Barrow created extra tension in the community. Several 
commenters stated that subsistence hunters in Barrow have been impacted 
because of the presence of law enforcement. Another commenter said that 
the additional law enforcement intimidated some people from going 
hunting. Another commenter suggested we use local people, the city 
council, and the local Native government to enforce regulations.
    Service Response: For several years, the Service's Office of Law 
Enforcement and Divisions of Endangered Species and Migratory Bird 
Management have worked with many groups and individuals in the greater 
North Slope area and Barrow specifically to provide information on the 
regulatory requirements and enforcement of the regulations. Our 
approach has focused on significant outreach efforts, including public 
meetings, radio talk show opportunities, posted fliers, and brochures 
followed by a phased-in, increased reliance on enforcement actions. The 
Service and its partners have conducted outreach over the past couple 
of years to increase hunter awareness. We expect hunter compliance with 
the regulations and thus do not plan on having a continuous presence in 
Barrow this season.

Who Is Eligible To Hunt Under These Regulations?

    Comment: One commenter questioned what the purpose was of adding 
the communities of Gulkana, Tazlina, Copper Center, Mentasta Lake, and 
the rest. The commenter questioned whether or not they hunt birds 
there.
    Service Response: In 2003, the interior Alaska communities in 
question submitted petitions for inclusion in the subsistence migratory 
bird. Part of the petitioning process is to show evidence of customary 
and traditional use of the migratory bird resource. Upon review of 
these petitions, the Co-management Council at its April and May 2003 
meetings recommended that 13 additional communities be included, 
starting in 2004, based on the five criteria set forth in 50 CFR 
92.5(c). The Upper Copper River region included the communities of 
Gulkana, Gakona, Tazlina, Copper Center, Mentasta Lake, Chitina, and 
Chistochina, totaling 1,172 people.

Comments on Original Region-Specific Regulations

    Comment: One commenter expressed concern about global warming and 
how it is changing the timing of birds' departure, which causes 
problems with having fixed dates in the regulations, specifically on 
the North Slope.
    Service Response: The Service has accommodated concerns about fixed 
regulatory dates in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta region by allowing the 
Regional Director or his designee to consult with field biologists and 
the regional Native Representative group to announce different closure 
dates each year. A similar request could be made for the North Slope 
during the open proposal period of November 1 through December 15 of 
each year.
    Comment: Two commenters asked that the Service continue using the 
provisions proposed in 50 CFR 92.31(g)(4) (originally established in 
2005) to allow subsistence use of yellow-billed loons inadvertently 
entangled in subsistence fishing nets on the North Slope.
    Yellow-billed loons remain an important part of the Inupiaq 
culture.
    Service Response: We are retaining the yellow-billed loon provision 
for the North Slope for 2010.
    Comment: Two commenters expressed concerns regarding the special 
brant harvest for the community of Wainwright. The commenter said that 
the hunt should be extended from 16 days to a full month to allow for 
variables in weather and brant migration patterns. Another commenter 
requested that the Service consider the extent to which climate change 
is already limiting this harvest and attempt to accommodate 
Wainwright's request to change the special brant season.
    Service Response: Proposals to change regional regulations are 
accepted from November 1 through December 15 of each year. The Service 
encourages the commenters to submit a proposal, working with their 
regional representative, to address their concerns during the next open 
proposal season.
    Comment: Three commenters were concerned that the Service has not 
defined criteria that would trigger emergency regulations (50 CFR 
92.32). A definition of what constitutes an ``imminent threat'' to 
Steller's eider conservation is not provided, nor is there any 
indication of the geographic scale to which this imminent threat 
applies. One commenter added that critical thresholds or imminent 
threats should be determined in advance through consultation with the 
Recovery Team and affected Co-management Council partner organizations. 
One commenter added that there is no reliable way presented for 
estimating how small numbers of inadvertently shot eiders would affect 
the sustainability of the listed population.
    Service Response: The Service has intentionally avoided identifying 
specific thresholds for management actions, including possible closure 
of the hunt, in order to preserve flexibility for decision makers. 
Although the number of Steller's eiders known to be taken is one 
indication of the actual threat, other information will be used to help 
assess the threat and determine whether further management actions are 
warranted. Information on the proportion of the hunters checked; degree 
of cooperation with conservation measures by the hunting community as a 
whole, circumstances surrounding the birds being shot; breeding status 
of the species; and the individuals taken, date of take, and other 
factors may all contribute to the assessment of the situation and 
identification of appropriate measures in response. We believe 
identifying specific thresholds would compromise the desire to balance 
the dual objectives of supporting the hunt while adequately providing 
for the conservation of Steller's eiders.

What Is Different in the Region-Specific Regulations for 2010?

    Comment: One commenter stated that the final rule should note that 
North Coastal Zone regulations did not originate from the Co-management 
Council nor were they endorsed by the Co-management Council.
    Service Response: The North Slope Borough requested that the 
regulations go back to the published regulations for the 2008 season, 
eliminating the three Steller's eider regulations instituted for the 
2009 season. The Co-management Council recommended that we revert back 
to the 2008 regulations because the MOU between the Service and the 
North Slope partners was only enacted for 2009, and did not address 
what to do for the 2010 subsistence season.
    Comment: Three commenters requested that we remove the regulations 
added to protect Steller's eiders for the North Slope in 2009. The 
commenter explained that Steller's eiders are not a targeted species. 
The commenter added a recommendation to remove the shooting hours and 
any other provision that is not a customary and traditional practice. 
Another commenter added a concern that the proposed regulations may not 
be based on the best science, do not adequately

[[Page 18769]]

consider the health and customs of the Inupiat people, and may increase 
(rather than reduce) the mortality rates of threatened eider species.
    Service Response: The Service has dual goals and responsibilities 
of authorizing a subsistence harvest while protecting migratory birds 
and threatened species. Although these goals were and continue to be 
challenging, they are not irreconcilable with sufficient recognition of 
the need to protect threatened species, measures to remedy documented 
threats, and commitment from the subsistence community and other 
conservation partners to work together toward these dual goals. With 
these dual goals in mind, the Service Regulations Committee decided to 
continue the 2009 provisions that were designed to help protect 
Steller's eiders during their summer presence on the North Slope.
    Comment: One commenter challenged that there is little scientific 
information on which the proposed regulations are based. Little is 
known regarding the migratory route, winter habitat, and nesting range 
of Steller's eiders, such that it is difficult to assess their actual 
population status. As FWS stated during the January 12, 2010, hearing, 
the recovery goal in terms of an ideal population number for Steller's 
eiders has yet to be set. The regulations proposed for four villages on 
the North Slope differ significantly from those proposed for the rest 
of Alaska. Without science to justify this difference, the regulations 
appear arbitrary.
    Service Response: The Service's Migratory Bird Division has 
conducted aerial surveys of the Arctic Coastal Plain annually since 
1993 to monitor Steller's and spectacled eider populations. These 
surveys, in addition to aerial surveys by Alaska Biological Research, 
Inc. and ground searches by Service personnel near Barrow, provide an 
index of population size and nesting range on the North Slope. 
Furthermore, telemetry data from Steller's eider fitted with 
transmitters in Barrow in 2000 and 2001 revealed migration corridors, 
molting areas, and movements between wintering areas, which are also 
surveyed aerially each spring by Service personnel. Given the best 
available scientific information, the nesting range and migratory route 
of Alaska breeding Steller's eider support the position that listed 
Steller's eiders are vulnerable to harvest by subsistence hunters at 
Point Hope, Point Lay, Wainwright, and Barrow.
    Comment: One commenter said that it is difficult to understand why 
the North Slope villages are subject to hunting hours, while Kivalina, 
just 72 miles south of Point Hope, is not. The commenter added that at 
the January 12, 2010, hearing, the Service explained that it assumed 
that once the migratory birds move farther south, they mingle with the 
Russian population. What study has the Service done showing that the 
American and Russian populations mingle in the 72 miles between Point 
Hope and Kivalina?
    Service Response: The Service is implementing regulations to 
protect the North American breeding population of Steller's eiders. The 
mixing of North American and Russian/Siberian-breeding birds likely 
changes in latitude and longitude as seasonal weather and land and sea 
conditions change each year. We do not know exactly where this will 
occur in 2010, as no definitive biological information on mixing rates 
and locations exists at this time. To obtain that information with 
current biological investigative techniques would require handling a 
significant percentage of the fewer than 600 estimated North American 
breeding birds, which in our estimation could negatively impact the 
population and delay recovery. In balancing our dual goals of recovery 
while providing hunting opportunities for the other species that are 
open to harvest, we are attempting to minimize the impact of the 
regulations to those areas in which we are confident the majority of 
Steller's eiders encountered are North American breeding birds. We 
believe the Steller's eiders around the four affected villages are 
comprised of North American breeding birds, and therefore we are 
applying and limiting the regulations specific to Steller's eider 
conservation to those areas.
    Comment: Two commenters oppose the North Slope regulation that 
requires hunters to present any birds taken upon request by a Service 
law enforcement officer. One commenter said they thought this activity 
should require a search warrant. Another commenter opined that this 
regulation has caused some hunters to reduce their activity because of 
perceived intrusion.
    Service Response: Our ability to monitor and verify the ongoing 
harvest is an important component of the conservation strategy that we 
developed in 2009 to enable us to issue the annual regulations to open 
the subsistence harvest. This requirement enables our officers to 
effectively verify harvest composition while contacting hunters in the 
field.
    Comment: One commenter stated 50 CFR 92.31(g)(5)(ii) would prohibit 
hunters (and even non-Service biologists) from touching Steller's 
eiders (whether dead or injured) under any circumstances. The commenter 
further pointed out that aside from contravening Inupiaq culture, this 
rule is detrimental to the Service's ability to monitor and investigate 
eider deaths.
    Service Response: The Service encourages those that find a dead 
Steller's or Spectacled eider to immediately report the finding to 
either Federal or State law enforcement. This regulation does not 
prohibit the finder from covering the carcass to protect it from 
scavengers, mark the location, or rescue an injured eider.
    Comment: Ten commenters specifically opposed the prohibition 
against hunting after sunset. One commenter said that brant fly lower 
after sunset and are then easier for people in Wainwright to shoot. 
Another commenter said that during the day it is harder to hunt and in 
the evenings it is cooler, and that ducks fly more in the cooler hours. 
Another commenter explained that shooting hours are not customary and 
traditional and suggested that the Service look into traditional 
knowledge relating to weather conditions and flight patterns before 
imposing hunting hours. Two commenters also questioned the science 
behind justifying the shooting hours restrictions.
    Service Response: The Service is always receptive to the use of 
traditional and ecological knowledge in addressing environmental 
issues, and welcomes any local input that would aid in finding a 
solution for Steller's eiders being mistakenly shot. We designed the 
shooting hours restriction to eliminate hunting under poor visibility, 
to improve species' identification, and to reduce the probability of 
mistakenly shooting and crippling Steller's eiders. The Service 
believes that bird identification prior to shooting is key to 
preventing protected species from being accidentally taken during the 
harvest.
    The determination of shooting hours for the individual communities 
used data provided by the Naval Meteorology and Oceanography Command 
(NMOC). Tables illustrating civil twilight times by date and location 
were used to determine the dates when shooting hour restrictions would 
begin in August. These restrictions were initiated on the dates when 
periods of ``complete darkness'' begin to occur. For consistency in 
managing bird hunting, the beginning and ending times of shooting hours 
in these subsistence regulations parallel those found in 50 CFR 20.102, 
which applies for all migratory bird hunting on the North Slope after 
September 1st of each year. These times are based on NMOC tables for 
sunrise and sunset. The Service

[[Page 18770]]

acknowledges that weather conditions also add a degree of variability 
in light conditions for shooting, but did not want to address this in 
the spirit of keeping the regulation as simple as possible.
    Comment: One commenter brought up the 5-mile boundary used in 
delineating the North Coastal Zone. The commenter thought that it meant 
no hunting within the zone and complained about that.
    Service Response: The 5-mile boundary for the North Coastal Zone 
applies only to the three regulations added in 2009, including 
presentation of birds upon request; possession prohibition of any 
illegally taken bird; and daylight-related shooting hours. Migratory 
bird hunting is not otherwise restricted within that 5-mile zone.
    Comment: One commenter opined that targeting the North Slope with 
the special 2009 eider regulations was prejudiced, since those 
regulations were not equally applied throughout the birds' flyway 
range.
    Service Response: We do consider and review the regulations 
Statewide regarding species protected under the Endangered Species Act, 
and all other federally authorized or funded activities. In the case of 
the Steller's eider, the regulations apply during the subsistence 
harvest, when the listed population of Steller's eiders are migrating 
and breeding on the North Slope.
    Comment: One commenter explained that they did not like how 
Steller's eiders were shot in Barrow in 2008, but that the outlying 
communities of Point Lay, Wainwright, and Point Hope should not have 
been punished with additional regulations for what happened in Barrow.
    Service Response: We have limited the Steller's eider specific 
regulations to the villages in the geographic area used by migrating, 
and possibly nesting, Alaska-breeding Steller's eiders (the listed 
population). Although approximately 60% of the listed population is 
thought to nest within 60 kilometers of Barrow, the four coastal 
villages are included because the listed population migrates past all 
those villages twice during the subsistence harvest. We would like to 
know more about the actual risk to listed eiders from shooting in the 
villages of Point Lay, Point Hope, and Wainwright and would welcome 
collection of village-specific subsistence harvest information to 
assist in setting future regulations.

Statutory Authority

    We derive our authority to issue these regulations from the 
Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, 16 U.S.C. 712(1), which authorizes 
the Secretary of the Interior, in accordance with the treaties with 
Canada, Mexico, Japan, and Russia, to ``issue such regulations as may 
be necessary to assure that the taking of migratory birds and the 
collection of their eggs, by the indigenous inhabitants of the State of 
Alaska, shall be permitted for their own nutritional and other 
essential needs, as determined by the Secretary of the Interior, during 
seasons established so as to provide for the preservation and 
maintenance of stocks of migratory birds.''

Required Determinations

Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Order 12866)

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that this 
rule is not significant and has not reviewed this rule under Executive 
Order 12866 (E.O. 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.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Department of the Interior certifies that this rule will not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities as defined under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 
et seq.). An initial regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. 
Accordingly, a Small Entity Compliance Guide is not required. The rule 
legalizes a pre-existing subsistence activity, and the resources 
harvested will be consumed by the harvesters or persons within their 
local community.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule:
    (a) Will not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million 
or more. It will legalize and regulate a traditional subsistence 
activity. It will not result in a substantial increase in subsistence 
harvest or a significant change in harvesting patterns. The commodities 
being regulated under this rule are migratory birds. This rule deals 
with legalizing the subsistence harvest of migratory birds and, as 
such, does not involve commodities traded in the marketplace. A small 
economic benefit from this rule derives from the sale of equipment and 
ammunition to carry out subsistence hunting. Most, if not all, 
businesses that sell hunting equipment in rural Alaska would qualify as 
small businesses. We have no reason to believe that this rule will lead 
to a disproportionate distribution of benefits.
    (b) Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for 
consumers; individual industries; Federal, State, or local government 
agencies; or geographic regions. This rule does not deal with traded 
commodities and, therefore, does not have an impact on prices for 
consumers.
    (c) Does not have significant adverse effects on competition, 
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of 
U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. This 
rule deals with the harvesting of wildlife for personal consumption. It 
does not regulate the marketplace in any way to generate effects on the 
economy or the ability of businesses to compete.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    We have determined and certified under the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) that this rule will not impose a cost of 
$100 million or more in any given year on local, State, or tribal 
governments or private entities. The rule does not have a significant 
or unique effect on State, local, or tribal governments or the private 
sector. A statement containing the information required by the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act is not required. Participation on regional 
management bodies and the Co-management Council will require travel 
expenses for some Alaska Native organizations and local governments. In 
addition, they will assume some expenses related to coordinating 
involvement of village councils in the regulatory process. Total 
coordination and travel expenses for all Alaska Native organizations 
are estimated to be less than $300,000 per year. In the Notice of 
Decision (65 FR 16405; March 28, 2000), we identified 12 partner 
organizations (Alaska Native nonprofits and local governments) to 
administer the regional programs. The Alaska Department of Fish and 
Game will also incur expenses for travel to Co-management Council and 
regional management body meetings. In

[[Page 18771]]

addition, the State of Alaska will be required to provide technical 
staff support to each of the regional management bodies and to the Co-
management Council. Expenses for the State's involvement may exceed 
$100,000 per year, but should not exceed $150,000 per year. When 
funding permits, we make annual grant agreements available to the 
partner organizations and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game to 
help offset their expenses.

Takings (Executive Order 12630)

    Under the criteria in Executive Order 12630, this rule does not 
have significant takings implications. This rule is not specific to 
particular land ownership, but applies to the harvesting of migratory 
bird resources throughout Alaska. A takings implication assessment is 
not required.

Federalism (Executive Order 13132)

    Under the criteria in Executive Order 13132, this rule does not 
have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a 
Federalism Assessment. We discuss effects of this rule on the State of 
Alaska in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act section above. We worked 
with the State of Alaska to develop these regulations. Therefore, a 
Federalism Assessment is not required.

Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order 12988)

    The Department, in promulgating this rule, has determined that it 
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.

Government-to-Government Relations With Native American Tribal 
Governments

    Because eligibility to hunt under these regulations is not limited 
to tribal members, but rather extends to all indigenous inhabitants of 
the subsistence harvest areas, we are not required to engage in formal 
consultation with tribes. However, in keeping with the spirit of the 
President's memorandum of April 29, 1994, ``Government-to-Government 
Relations With Native American Tribal Governments'' (59 FR 22951), and 
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249; November 6, 2000), concerning 
consultation and coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, we 
conducted meetings with the affected tribes and tribal nonprofit 
organizations to discuss the changes in the regulations and determine 
possible effects on tribes or trust resources, and have determined that 
there are no significant effects. The rule will legally recognize the 
subsistence harvest of migratory birds and their eggs for indigenous 
inhabitants including tribal members. In 1998, we began a public 
involvement process to determine how to structure management bodies in 
order to provide the most effective and efficient involvement of 
subsistence users. We began by publishing in the Federal Register 
stating that we intended to establish management bodies to implement 
the spring and summer subsistence harvest (63 FR 49707, September 17, 
1998). We held meetings with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and 
the Native Migratory Bird Working Group to provide information 
regarding the amended treaties and to listen to the needs of 
subsistence users. The Native Migratory Bird Working Group was a 
consortium of Alaska Natives formed by the Rural Alaska Community 
Action Program to represent Alaska Native subsistence hunters of 
migratory birds during the treaty negotiations. We held forums in Nome, 
Kotzebue, Fort Yukon, Allakaket, Naknek, Bethel, Dillingham, Barrow, 
and Copper Center. We led additional briefings and discussions at the 
annual meeting of the Association of Village Council Presidents in 
Hooper Bay and for the Central Council of Tlingit & Haida Indian Tribes 
in Juneau.
    On March 28, 2000, we published in the Federal Register (65 FR 
16405) the Notice of Decision entitled, ``Establishment of Management 
Bodies in Alaska To Develop Recommendations Related to the Spring/
Summer Subsistence Harvest of Migratory Birds.'' This notice described 
the way in which management bodies would be established and organized. 
Based on the wide range of views expressed on the options document, the 
decision incorporated key aspects of two of the modules. The decision 
established one statewide management body consisting of 1 Federal 
member, 1 State member, and 7-12 Alaska Native members, with all 
components serving as equals.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule has been examined under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 
1995 and does not contain any new collections of information that 
require Office of Management and Budget approval. OMB has approved our 
collection of information associated with the voluntary annual 
household surveys used to determine levels of subsistence take. The OMB 
control number is 1018-0124, which expires March 31, 2010. An 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.

National Environmental Policy Act Consideration

    The annual regulations and options were considered in the 
environmental assessment, ``Managing Migratory Bird Subsistence Hunting 
in Alaska: Hunting Regulations for the 2010 Spring/Summer Harvest,'' 
October 9, 2009. Copies are available from the person listed under FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or at https://www.regulations.gov.

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (Executive Order 13211)

    Executive Order 13211 requires agencies to prepare Statements of 
Energy Effects when undertaking certain actions. This is not a 
significant regulatory action under this Executive Order; it would 
allow only for traditional subsistence harvest and would improve 
conservation of migratory birds by allowing effective regulation of 
this harvest. Further, this rule is not expected to significantly 
affect energy supplies, distribution, or use. Therefore, this action is 
not a significant energy action under Executive Order 13211, and no 
Statement of Energy Effects is required.

Administrative Procedure Act

    The Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553(d)) requires an 
agency to publish a final rule in most cases at least 30 days before 
the rule is to become effective. The Act also allows publication less 
than 30 days before the effective date if the agency finds that there 
is a good cause for doing so. (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3)) The Department of 
the Interior finds that good cause exists for making this rule 
effective upon publication because:

--This rule is necessary to allow continuation of customary and 
traditional subsistence uses of migratory birds in Alaska; and
--Delaying publication of this rule would impose hardship upon those 
who harvest migratory birds for subsistence use.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 92

    Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Subsistence, Treaties, Wildlife.

0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, we amend title 50, chapter I, 
subchapter G, of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

[[Page 18772]]

PART 92--MIGRATORY BIRD SUBSISTENCE HARVEST IN ALASKA

0
1. The authority citation for part 92 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 703-712.

Subpart D--Annual Regulations Governing Subsistence Harvest

0
2. In subpart D, add Sec.  92.31 to read as follows:


Sec.  92.31  Region-specific regulations.

    The 2010 season dates for the eligible subsistence harvest areas 
are as follows:
    (a) Aleutian/Pribilof Islands Region.
    (1) Northern Unit (Pribilof Islands):
    (i) Season: April 2-June 30.
    (ii) Closure: July 1-August 31.
    (2) Central Unit (Aleut Region's eastern boundary on the Alaska 
Peninsula westward to and including Unalaska Island):
    (i) Season: April 2-June 15 and July 16-August 31.
    (ii) Closure: June 16-July 15.
    (iii) Special Black Brant Season Closure: August 16-August 31, only 
in Izembek and Moffet lagoons.
    (iv) Special Tundra Swan Closure: All hunting and egg gathering 
closed in units 9(D) and 10.
    (3) Western Unit (Umnak Island west to and including Attu Island):
    (i) Season: April 2-July 15 and August 16-August 31.
    (ii) Closure: July 16-August 15.
    (b) Yukon/Kuskokwim Delta Region.
    (1) Season: April 2-August 31.
    (2) Closure: 30-day closure dates to be announced by the Service's 
Alaska Regional Director or his designee, after consultation with local 
subsistence users, field biologists, and the Association of Village 
Council President's Waterfowl Conservation Committee. This 30-day 
period will occur between June 1 and August 15 of each year. A press 
release announcing the actual closure dates will be forwarded to 
regional newspapers and radio and television stations and posted in 
village post offices and stores.
    (3) Special Black Brant and Cackling Goose Season Hunting Closure: 
From the period when egg laying begins until young birds are fledged. 
Closure dates to be announced by the Service's Alaska Regional Director 
or his designee, after consultation with field biologists and the 
Association of Village Council President's Waterfowl Conservation 
Committee. A press release announcing the actual closure dates will be 
forwarded to regional newspapers and radio and television stations and 
posted in village post offices and stores.
    (c) Bristol Bay Region.
    (1) Season: April 2-June 14 and July 16-August 31 (general season); 
April 2-July 15 for seabird egg gathering only.
    (2) Closure: June 15-July 15 (general season); July 16-August 31 
(seabird egg gathering).
    (d) Bering Strait/Norton Sound Region.
    (1) Stebbins/St. Michael Area (Point Romanof to Canal Point):
    (i) Season: April 15-June 14 and July 16-August 31.
    (ii) Closure: June 15-July 15.
    (2) Remainder of the region:
    (i) Season: April 2-June 14 and July 16-August 31 for waterfowl; 
April 2-July 19 and August 21-August 31 for all other birds.
    (ii) Closure: June 15-July 15 for waterfowl; July 20-August 20 for 
all other birds.
    (e) Kodiak Archipelago Region, except for the Kodiak Island roaded 
area, which is closed to the harvesting of migratory birds and their 
eggs. The closed area consists of all lands and waters (including 
exposed tidelands) east of a line extending from Crag Point in the 
north to the west end of Saltery Cove in the south and all lands and 
water south of a line extending from Termination Point along the north 
side of Cascade Lake extending to Anton Larson Bay. Waters adjacent to 
the closed area are closed to harvest within 500 feet from the water's 
edge. The offshore islands are open to harvest.
    (1) Season: April 2-June 30 and July 31-August 31 for seabirds; 
April 2-June 20 and July 22-August 31 for all other birds.
    (2) Closure: July 1-July 30 for seabirds; June 21-July 21 for all 
other birds.
    (f) Northwest Arctic Region.
    (1) Season: April 2-June 9 and August 15-August 31 (hunting in 
general); waterfowl egg gathering May 20-June 9 only; seabird egg 
gathering May 20-July 12 only; hunting molting/non-nesting waterfowl 
July 1-July 31 only.
    (2) Closure: June 10-August 14, except for the taking of seabird 
eggs and molting/non-nesting waterfowl as provided in paragraph (f)(1) 
of this section.
    (g) North Slope Region.
    (1) Southern Unit (Southwestern North Slope regional boundary east 
to Peard Bay, everything west of the longitude line 158[deg]30' W and 
south of the latitude line 70[deg]45' N to the west bank of the 
Ikpikpuk River, and everything south of the latitude line 
69[deg]45[min] N between the west bank of the Ikpikpuk River to the 
east bank of Sagavinirktok River):
    (i) Season: April 2-June 29 and July 30-August 31 for seabirds; 
April 2-June 19 and July 20-August 31 for all other birds.
    (ii) Closure: June 30-July 29 for seabirds; June 20-July 19 for all 
other birds.
    (iii) Special Black Brant Hunting Opening: From June 20-July 5. The 
open area would consist of the coastline, from mean high water line 
outward to include open water, from Nokotlek Point east to longitude 
line 158[deg]30[min] W. This includes Peard Bay, Kugrua Bay, and 
Wainwright Inlet, but not the Kuk and Kugrua river drainages.
    (2) Northern Unit (At Peard Bay, everything east of the longitude 
line 158[deg]30[min] W and north of the latitude line 70[deg]45[min] N 
to west bank of the Ikpikpuk River, and everything north of the 
latitude line 69[deg]45[min] N between the west bank of the Ikpikpuk 
River to the east bank of Sagavinirktok River):
    (i) Season: April 6-June 6 and July 7-August 31 for king and common 
eiders; April 2-June 15 and July 16-August 31 for all other birds.
    (ii) Closure: June 7-July 6 for king and common eiders; June 16-
July 15 for all other birds.
    (3) Eastern Unit (East of eastern bank of the Sagavanirktok River):
    (i) Season: April 2-June 19 and July 20-August 31.
    (ii) Closure: June 20-July 19.
    (4) All Units: Yellow-billed loons. Annually, up to 20 yellow-
billed loons total for the region may be inadvertently entangled in 
subsistence fishing nets in the North Slope Region and kept for 
subsistence use. Individuals must report each yellow-billed loon 
inadvertently entangled while subsistence gill net fishing to the North 
Slope Borough Department of Wildlife Management by the end of the 
season.
    (5) North Coastal Zone (Cape Thompson north to Point Hope and east 
along the Arctic Ocean coastline around Point Barrow to Ross Point, 
including Iko Bay, and 5 miles inland).
    (i) Migratory bird hunting is permitted from one-half hour before 
sunrise until sunset, during August.
    (ii) No person may at any time, by any means, or in any manner, 
possess or have in custody any migratory bird or part thereof, taken in 
violation of subpart C and D of this part.
    (iii) Upon request from a Service law enforcement officer, hunters 
taking, attempting to take, or transporting migratory birds taken 
during the subsistence harvest season must present them to the officer 
for species identification.
    (h) Interior Region.
    (1) Season: April 2-June 14 and July 16-August 31; egg gathering 
May 1-June 14 only.

[[Page 18773]]

    (2) Closure: June 15-July 15.
    (i) Upper Copper River Region (Harvest Area: Units 11 and 13) 
(Eligible communities: Gulkana, Chitina, Tazlina, Copper Center, 
Gakona, Mentasta Lake, Chistochina and C