Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed Frameworks for Late-Season Migratory Bird Hunting Regulations, 52398-52423 [2010-20745]

Agencies

• Fish and Wildlife Service
• DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 164 (Wednesday, August 25, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52398-52423]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-20745]



[[Page 52397]]

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

Part II





Department of the Interior





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



Fish and Wildlife Service



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



50 CFR Part 20



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

Federal Register / Vol. 75 , No. 164 / Wednesday, August 25, 2010 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 52398]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 20

[Docket No. FWS-R9-MB-2010-0040; [91200-1231-9BPP-L2]
RIN 1018-AX06


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

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; supplemental.

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

SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service (hereinafter Service or we) is 
proposing to establish the 2010-11 late-season hunting regulations for 
certain migratory game birds. We annually prescribe frameworks, or 
outer limits, for dates and times when hunting may occur and the number 
of birds that may be taken and possessed in late seasons. These 
frameworks are necessary to allow State selections of seasons and 
limits and to allow recreational harvest at levels compatible with 
population and habitat conditions.

DATES: You must submit comments on the proposed migratory bird hunting 
late-season frameworks on or before September 7, 2010.

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 on Docket No. FWS-R9-
MB-2010-0040.
     U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing, 
Attn: FWS-R9-MB-2010-0040; Division of Policy and Directives 
Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, 
Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203.
    We will not accept e-mail or faxes. We will post all comments on 
https://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any 
personal information you provide us (see the Public Comments section 
below for more information).

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulations Schedule for 2010

    On May 13, 2010, we published in the Federal Register (75 FR 27144) 
a proposal to amend 50 CFR part 20. The proposal provided a background 
and overview of the migratory bird hunting regulations process, and 
addressed 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 2010-11 
regulatory cycle relating to open public meetings and Federal Register 
notifications were also identified in the May 13 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 June 10, 2010, we published in the Federal Register (75 FR 
32872) a second document providing supplemental proposals for early- 
and late-season migratory bird hunting regulations. The June 10 
supplement also provided detailed information on the 2010-11 regulatory 
schedule and announced the Service Regulations Committee (SRC) and 
Flyway Council meetings.
    On June 23 and 24, 2010, we held open meetings with the Flyway 
Council Consultants at which the participants reviewed information on 
the current status of migratory shore and upland game birds and 
developed recommendations for the 2010-11 regulations for these species 
plus regulations for migratory game birds in Alaska, Puerto Rico, and 
the Virgin Islands; special September waterfowl seasons in designated 
States; special sea duck seasons in the Atlantic Flyway; and extended 
falconry seasons. In addition, we reviewed and discussed preliminary 
information on the status of waterfowl as it relates to the development 
and selection of the regulatory packages for the 2010-11 regular 
waterfowl seasons. On July 29, 2010, we published in the Federal 
Register (75 FR 44856) a third document specifically dealing with the 
proposed frameworks for early-season regulations. In late August 2010, 
we will publish a rulemaking establishing final frameworks for early-
season migratory bird hunting regulations for the 2010-11 season.
    On July 28 and 29, 2010, we held open meetings with the Flyway 
Council Consultants, at which the participants reviewed the status of 
waterfowl and developed recommendations for the 2010-11 regulations for 
these species. This document deals specifically with proposed 
frameworks for the late-season migratory bird hunting regulations. It 
will lead to final frameworks from which States may select season 
dates, shooting hours, areas, and limits.
    We have considered all pertinent comments received through July 30, 
2010, on the May 13 and June 10, 2010, rulemaking documents in 
developing this document. In addition, new proposals for certain late-
season regulations are provided for public comment. The comment period 
is specified above under DATES. We will publish final regulatory 
frameworks for late-season migratory game bird hunting in the Federal 
Register on or around September 22, 2010.

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

[[Page 52399]]

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 north-central 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 during the 2010 Waterfowl Breeding 
Population and Habitat Survey were characterized by average to below-
average moisture and a mild winter and early spring across the entire 
traditional (including the northern locations) and eastern survey 
areas. The total pond estimate (Prairie Canada and U.S. combined) was 
6.7  0.2 million. This was similar to the 2009 estimate and 
34 percent above the long-term average of 5.0  0.03 million 
ponds.
Traditional Survey Area (U.S. and Canadian Prairies and Parklands)
    Conditions across the Canadian prairies were similar to 2009. 
Portions of southern Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba improved, but 
a large area along the Alberta and Saskatchewan border remained dry, 
and moisture levels in portions of Manitoba declined from last year. 
The 2010 estimate of ponds in Prairie Canada was 3.7  0.2 
million. This was similar to last year's estimate (3.6  0.1 
million) and to the 1955-2009 average (3.4  0.03 million). 
Residual water remains in the Parklands and these were classified as 
fair to good. Most of the Prairie-Parkland region of Canada received 
abundant to historically high levels of precipitation during and after 
the survey, which, while possibly flooding some nests, will produce 
excellent brood-rearing habitat for successful nesters and lessen the 
impact of the normal summer drawdown, leading to beneficial wetland 
conditions next spring.
    Wetland numbers and conditions remained fair to good in the eastern 
U.S. prairies, but habitat conditions declined through the western 
Dakotas and Montana. The 2010 pond estimate for the north-central 
United States was 2.9  0.1 million, essentially unchanged 
from last year's estimate (2.9  0.1 million) and 87 percent 
above the long-term average (1.6  0.02 million). Fall and 
winter precipitation in the eastern Dakotas generally improved good 
habitat conditions already present. However, wetlands in the western 
Dakotas and Montana were not recharged, resulting in a deterioration of 
conditions from 2009 at the time the survey was conducted.
Bush (Alaska, Northern Manitoba, Northern Saskatchewan, Northwest 
Territories, Yukon Territory, Western Ontario)
    In the bush regions of the traditional survey area, spring breakup 
was early. Unlike in 2009, the majority of habitats were ice-free for 
arriving waterfowl. Habitat of most of the bush region, with the 
exception of Alaska and the Northwest Territories where conditions were 
normal, was classified as fair due to below-average moisture, but the 
early spring should benefit waterfowl across the entire area.
Eastern Survey Area
    The boreal forest and Canadian Maritimes of the eastern survey area 
experienced an early spring as well. Much of southern Quebec and 
Ontario were classified as poor to fair due to dry conditions, with the 
exception of an area of adequate moisture in west-central Ontario. More 
northern boreal forest locations benefited from near-normal 
precipitation and early ice-free conditions. Although winter 
precipitation from southwestern Ontario along the St. Lawrence River 
Valley and into Maine was below average, waterfowl habitat was 
classified as good to excellent, as in 2009. The James and Hudson Bay 
Lowlands of Ontario (strata 57-59) were not surveyed in 2010, but 
reports indicated an early spring in these locations as well.
Breeding Population Status
    In the traditional survey area, which includes strata 1-18, 20-50, 
and 75-77, the total duck population estimate was 40.9  0.7 
[SE] million birds. This estimate was similar to last year's estimate 
of 42.0  0.7 million birds and was 21 percent above the 
long-term average (1955-2009). Estimated mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) 
abundance was 8.4  0.3 million birds, which was similar to 
the 2009 estimate of 8.5  0.2 million birds and 12 percent 
above the long-term average. Estimated abundance of gadwall (A. 
strepera; 3.0  0.2 million) was similar to the 2009 
estimate and 67 percent above the long-term average. Estimated 
abundance of American wigeon (A. americana; 2.4  0.1 
million) was similar to 2009 and the long-term average. The estimated 
abundance of green-winged teal (A. crecca) was 3.5  0.2 
million, which was similar to the 2009 estimate and 78 percent above 
their long-term average of 1.9  0.02 million. The estimate 
of blue-winged teal abundance (A. discors) was 6.3  0.4 
million, which was 14 percent below the 2009 estimate and 36 percent 
above their long-term average of 4.7  0.04 million. The 
estimate for northern pintails (A. acuta; 3.5  0.2 million) 
was similar to the 2009 estimate, and 13 percent below the long-term 
average of 4.0  0.04 million. Estimates of northern 
shovelers (A. clypeata; 4.1  0.2 million) and redheads 
(Aythya americana; 1.1  0.1 million) were similar to their 
2009 estimates and were 76 percent and 63 percent above their long-term 
averages of 2.3  0.02 million and 0.7  0.01 
million, respectively. The canvasback estimate (A. valisineria; 0.6 
 0.05 million) was similar to the 2009 estimate and to the 
long-term average. The scaup estimate (A. affinis and A. marila 
combined; 4.2  0.2 million) was similar to that of 2009 and 
16 percent below the long-term average of 5.1  0.05 
million.
    The eastern survey area was restratified in 2005 and is now 
composed of strata 51-72. Estimates of mallards, scaup, scoters (black 
[Melanitta nigra], white-winged [M. fusca], and surf [M. 
perspicillata]), green-winged teal, American wigeon, bufflehead 
(Bucephala albeola), ring-necked duck (Aythya collaris), and goldeneyes 
(common [B. clangula] and Barrow's [B. islandica]) all were similar to 
their 2009 estimates and long-term averages. The mergansers (red-
breasted [Mergus serrator], common [M. merganser], and hooded 
[Lophodytes cucullatus]) estimate was 386.4 thousand, which was 15 
percent below the 2009 estimate, and 14 percent below the long-term 
average of 450.8 thousand. The American black duck (Anas rubripes) 
estimate was similar to the 2009 estimate and 7 percent below the long-
term average of 478.9 thousand.
Fall Flight Estimate
    The mid-continent mallard population is composed of mallards from 
the traditional survey area (revised in 2008 to exclude Alaska 
mallards), Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin, and was estimated to be 
10.3  0.9 million in 2010. This was similar to the 2009 
estimate of 10.3  0.9 million.
    See section 1.A. Harvest Strategy Considerations for further 
discussion of the implications of this information for

[[Page 52400]]

this year's selection of the appropriate hunting regulations.

Status of Geese and Swans

    We provide information on the population status and productivity of 
North American Canada geese (Branta canadensis), brant (B. bernicla), 
snow geese (Chen caerulescens), Ross' geese (C. rossii), emperor geese 
(C. canagica), white-fronted geese (Anser albifrons), and tundra swans 
(Cygnus columbianus). Temperatures in much of central and northern 
Canada from January through April were in excess of 5[deg] C warmer 
than average. Substantially above-average temperatures continued into 
May and June in important goose habitats within eastern Canada. The 
resulting accelerated snowmelt contributed to favorable nesting 
conditions for many mid-latitude and arctic nesting goose populations 
in 2010. Persistent snow cover significantly delayed goose nesting 
activities only in the Queen Maud Gulf, Victoria Island, and Wrangel 
Island regions. Well-above or near-average wetland abundance in the 
U.S. and Canadian prairie regions and mild spring temperatures in many 
other temperate regions will likely improve production of Canada geese 
that nest at southern latitudes. Primary abundance indices for both 
populations of tundra swans decreased in 2010 from 2009 levels. Primary 
abundance indices decreased for 15 goose populations and increased for 
12 goose populations in 2010 compared to 2009. The following 
populations displayed significant positive trends during the most 
recent 10-year period (P < 0:05): Mississippi Flyway Giant, Short Grass 
Prairie, Aleutian, and Eastern Prairie Canada geese; Western Arctic/
Wrangel Island, and Western Central Flyway light geese; and Pacific 
white-fronted geese. No population showed a significant negative 10-
year trend. The forecast for the production of geese and swans in North 
America for 2010 is regionally variable, but production for many 
populations will be much improved this year compared to the poor 
production widely experienced in 2009.

Waterfowl Harvest and Hunter Activity

    National surveys of migratory bird hunters were conducted during 
the 2008 and 2009 hunting seasons. About 1.2 million waterfowl hunters 
harvested 13,635,700 ( 4 percent) ducks and 3,792,600 
( 5 percent) geese in 2008, and about 1.1 million waterfowl 
hunters harvested 13,139,800 ( 4 percent) ducks and 
3,327,000 ( 5 percent) geese in 2009. Mallard, green-winged 
teal, gadwall, blue-winged/cinnamon teal, and wood duck (Aix sponsa) 
were the 5 most-harvested duck species in the United States, and Canada 
goose was the predominant goose species in the goose harvest. Coot 
hunters (about 31,100 in 2008 and 2009) harvested 275,900 ( 
43 percent) coots in 2008 and 219,000 ( 34 percent) in 
2009.

Review of Public Comments and Flyway Council Recommendations

    The preliminary proposed rulemaking, which appeared in the May 13, 
2010, Federal Register, opened the public comment period for migratory 
game bird hunting regulations. The supplemental proposed rule, which 
appeared in the June 10, 2010, Federal Register, discussed the 
regulatory alternatives for the 2010-11 duck hunting season. Late-
season comments are summarized below and numbered in the order used in 
the May 13 and June 10 Federal Register documents. We have included 
only the numbered items pertaining to late-season issues for which we 
received written comments. Consequently, the issues do not follow in 
successive numerical or alphabetical order.
    We received recommendations from all four Flyway Councils. Some 
recommendations supported continuation of last year's frameworks. Due 
to the comprehensive nature of the annual review of the frameworks 
performed by the Councils, support for continuation of last year's 
frameworks is assumed for items for which no recommendations were 
received. Council recommendations for changes in the frameworks are 
summarized below.
    We seek additional information and comments on the recommendations 
in this supplemental proposed rule. New proposals and modifications to 
previously described proposals are discussed below. Wherever possible, 
they are discussed under headings corresponding to the numbered items 
in the May 13 and June 10, 2010, Federal Register documents.

General

    Council Recommendations: The Central Flyway Council recommended 
increasing the possession limit for all migratory birds from twice the 
daily bag limit to three times the daily bag limit for the 2011-12 
hunting seasons.
    The Pacific Flyway Council recommended increasing the possession 
limit for ducks and geese from twice the daily bag limit to three times 
the daily bag limit, beginning with the 2010-11 season.
    Service Response: We are generally supportive of the Flyways' 
interest in increasing the possession limits for migratory game birds 
and appreciate the recent discussions to frame this important issue. 
However, we believe that there are many unanswered questions regarding 
how this interest can be fully articulated in a proposal that satisfies 
the harvest management community, while fostering the support of the 
law enforcement community and informing the general hunting public. 
Further, because of the current schedule and processes for establishing 
migratory bird hunting seasons (i.e., early and late season processes), 
any changes to current possession limits would not be available for the 
2010-11 seasons. Consequently, we are proposing the creation of a 
cross-agency working group, chaired by the Service, and comprised of 
staff from the Service's Migratory Bird Program, State Wildlife Agency 
representatives, and Federal and State law enforcement staff, to begin 
to frame a recommendation that fully articulates a potential change in 
possession limits. This effort would include a description of the 
current status and use of possession limits, which populations and/or 
species/species groups should not be included in any proposed 
modification of possession limits, potential law enforcement issues, 
and a reasonable timeline for the implementation of any such proposed 
changes. Results of the working group efforts would be reported at the 
January SRC meeting in 2011, and then forwarded to Flyway Technical 
Committee and Council meetings next winter for further review and 
refinement. We would present any resulting proposal next spring, with 
possible implementation during the 2011-12 hunting seasons.

1. Ducks

    Categories used to discuss issues related to duck harvest 
management are: (A) Harvest Strategy Considerations, (B) Regulatory 
Alternatives, (C) Zones and Split Seasons, and (D) Special Seasons/
Species Management. The categories correspond to previously published 
issues/discussion, and only those containing substantial 
recommendations are discussed below.
A. Harvest Strategy Considerations
    Council Recommendations: The Atlantic, Central, and Pacific Flyway 
Councils and the Upper- and Lower-Region Regulations Committees of the 
Mississippi Flyway Council recommended the adoption of the ``liberal'' 
regulatory alternative.
    Service Response: We are continuing development of an Adaptive 
Harvest Management (AHM) protocol that

[[Page 52401]]

would allow hunting regulations to vary among Flyways in a manner that 
recognizes each Flyway's unique breeding-ground derivation of mallards. 
In 2008, we described and adopted a protocol for regulatory decision-
making for the newly defined stock of western mallards (73 FR 43290). 
For the 2010 hunting season, we continue to believe that the prescribed 
regulatory choice for the Pacific Flyway should be based on the status 
of this western mallard breeding stock, while the regulatory choice for 
the Mississippi and Central Flyways should depend on the status of the 
recently redefined mid-continent mallard stock. We also recommend that 
the regulatory choice for the Atlantic Flyway continue to depend on the 
status of eastern mallards.
    For the 2010 hunting season, we are continuing to consider the same 
regulatory alternatives as those used last year. The nature of the 
``restrictive,'' ``moderate,'' and ``liberal'' alternatives has 
remained essentially unchanged since 1997, except that extended 
framework dates have been offered in the ``moderate'' and ``liberal'' 
regulatory alternatives since 2002. Also, in 2003, we agreed to place a 
constraint on closed seasons in the western three Flyways whenever the 
midcontinent mallard breeding-population size (as defined prior to 
2008; traditional survey area plus Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin) 
was >= 5.5 million.
    Optimal AHM strategies for the 2010-11 hunting season were 
calculated using: (1) Harvest-management objectives specific to each 
mallard stock; (2) the 2010 regulatory alternatives; and (3) current 
population models and associated weights for midcontinent, western, and 
eastern mallards. Based on this year's survey results of 8.60 million 
midcontinent mallards (traditional survey area minus Alaska plus 
Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan), 3.73 million ponds in Prairie 
Canada, 1,049,000 western mallards (443,000 and 606,000 respectively in 
California-Oregon and Alaska), and 763,000 eastern mallards, the 
prescribed regulatory choice for all four Flyways is the ``liberal'' 
alternative.
    Therefore, we concur with the recommendations of the Atlantic, 
Mississippi, Central, and Pacific Flyway Councils regarding selection 
of the ``liberal'' regulatory alternative and propose to adopt the 
``liberal'' regulatory alternative, as described in the July 29, 2010, 
Federal Register.
C. Zones and Split Seasons
    Council Recommendations: The Atlantic, Central, and Pacific Flyway 
Councils recommended that the Service allow 3 zones, with 2-way splits 
in each zone, and 4 zones with no splits as additional zone/split-
season options for duck seasons during 2011-15.
    The Upper- and Lower-Region Regulations Committees of the 
Mississippi Flyway Council recommended that the Service allow 3 zones 
with the season split into 2 segments in each zone, 4 zones with no 
splits, and 2 zones with the season split into 3 segments in each zone 
as additional zone/split-season options for duck seasons during 2011-
15.
    In addition, all four Flyway Councils recommended that States with 
existing grandfathered status be allowed to retain that status.
    Service Response: In 1990, because of concerns about the 
proliferation of zones and split seasons for duck hunting, we conducted 
a cooperative review and evaluation of the historical use of zone/split 
options. This review did not show that the proliferation of these 
options had increased harvest pressure; however, the ability to detect 
the impact of zone/split configurations was poor because of unreliable 
response variables, the lack of statistical tests to differentiate 
between real and perceived changes, and the absence of adequate 
experimental controls. Consequently, we established guidelines to 
provide a framework for controlling the proliferation of changes in 
zone/split options. The guidelines identified a limited number of zone/
split configurations that could be used for duck hunting and restricted 
the frequency of changes in these configurations to 5-year intervals.
    In 1996, we revised the guidelines to provide States greater 
flexibility in using their zone/split arrangements. In 2005, in further 
response to recommendations from the Flyway Councils, we considered 
changes to the zone/split guidelines. After our review, however, we 
concluded that the current guidelines need not be changed. We further 
stated that the guidelines would be used for future open seasons (70 FR 
55667).
    However, while we continue to support the use of guidelines for 
providing a stable framework for controlling the number of changes to 
zone/split options, we note the consensus position among all the Flyway 
Councils on their proposal and are sensitive to the States' desires for 
flexibility in addressing concerns of the hunting public which, in 
part, provided the motivation for this recommendation. Furthermore, we 
remain supportive of the recommendations from the 2008 Future of 
Waterfowl Management Workshop that called for a greater emphasis on the 
effects of management actions on the hunting public. Thus, later this 
fall in a subsequent Federal Register, we plan to propose that two 
specific additional options be added to the existing zone and split 
season criteria governing State selection of waterfowl zones and 
splits. The additional options would include four zones with no splits 
and three zones with the option for 2-way (2-segment) split seasons in 
one or both zones. Otherwise, the criteria and rules governing the 
application of those criteria would remain unchanged.
    While we are announcing our intention to propose adding the Flyway 
Councils' recommended two options to the existing zone and split season 
guidelines, we are not providing all the specifics of our proposal here 
for several reasons. First, because of the sensitive timing of the 
annual regulations process, and the necessary abbreviated public 
comment periods, we want to allow sufficient time for the Flyway 
Councils, the States, and the public to review and comment on our 
proposal. Second, because any new zone and split season criteria would 
not be used until the 2011-12 hunting season, we believe there is no 
pressing reason to finalize them in the next several months. However, 
we are also sensitive to providing the States sufficient time to 
interact with their affected hunting publics on any possible changes to 
existing zone and split season configurations they may wish to explore 
and to conduct any public processes needed to implement such changes. 
Finally, we need additional time to explore all the possible 
implications and impacts of such changes in the zone and split season 
guidelines in order to provide the public with all the necessary 
information for their consideration and comment.
    We also note that existing human dimensions data on the 
relationship of harvest regulations, and specifically zones and splits, 
to hunter recruitment, retention, and/or satisfaction are equivocal or 
lacking. In the face of uncertainty over the effects of management 
actions, the waterfowl management community has broadly endorsed 
adaptive management and the principles of informed decision-making as a 
means of accounting for and reducing that uncertainty. The necessary 
elements of informed decision-making include: Clearly articulated 
objectives, explicit measurable attributes for objectives, 
identification of a suite of potential management actions, some means 
of predicting the consequences of management actions with respect to

[[Page 52402]]

stated objectives, and, finally, a monitoring program to compare 
observations with predictions as a basis for learning, policy 
adaptation, and more informed decision-making. Currently, none of these 
elements are used to support decision-making that involves human 
dimensions considerations. Accordingly, we see this as an opportunity 
to advance an informed decision-making framework that explicitly 
considers human dimensions issues.
    To that end, we will request that the National Flyway Council 
marshal the expertise and resources of the Human Dimensions Working 
Group to develop explicit human dimensions objectives related to 
expanding zone and split options and a study plan to evaluate the 
effect of the proposed action in achieving those objectives. It is our 
hope that the study plan would include hypotheses and specific 
predictions about the effect of changing zone/split criteria on stated 
human dimensions objectives, and monitoring and evaluation methods that 
would be used to test those predictions.
    We believe that insights gained through such an evaluation would be 
invaluable in furthering the ongoing dialogue regarding fundamental 
objectives of waterfowl management and an integrated and coherent 
decision framework for advancing those objectives. We will review the 
objectives and study plan at our January 2011 SRC meeting. We will 
consider this plan, along with public and Flyway comments on the 
proposed change to the zones and splits criteria, along with any 
required National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et 
seq.) analysis, in making a final decision on a course of action next 
year. We anticipate our final decision sometime this winter.
D. Special Seasons/Species Management
iii. Black Ducks
    In 2008, U.S. and Canadian waterfowl managers developed an interim 
harvest strategy that will be employed by both countries until a formal 
strategy based on the principles of AHM is completed. We detailed this 
interim strategy in the July 24, 2008, Federal Register (73 FR 43290). 
The interim harvest strategy is prescriptive, in that it calls for no 
substantive changes in hunting regulations unless the black duck 
breeding population, averaged over the most recent 3 years, exceeds or 
falls below the long-term average breeding population by 15 percent or 
more. The strategy is designed to share the black duck harvest equally 
between the two countries; however, recognizing incomplete control of 
harvest through regulations, it will allow realized harvest in either 
country to vary between 40 and 60 percent.
    Each year in November, Canada publishes its proposed migratory bird 
hunting regulations for the upcoming hunting season. Thus, last fall 
the Canadian Wildlife Service (CWS) used the interim strategy to 
establish its proposed black duck regulations for the 2010-11 season, 
based on the most current data available at that time: Breeding 
population estimates for 2007, 2008, and 2009, and an assessment of 
parity based on harvest estimates for the 2004-08 hunting seasons. 
Although updates of both breeding population estimates and harvest 
estimates are now available, the United States will base its 2010-11 
black duck regulations on the same data CWS used, to ensure comparable 
application of the strategy. The long-term (1998-2007) breeding 
population mean estimate is 717,450 and the 2007-09 3-year running mean 
estimate is 719,133. Based on these estimates, no restriction or 
liberalization of black duck harvest is warranted. The average 
proportion of the harvest during the 5-year period, 2004-08, was 0.56 
in the United States and 0.44 in Canada, and this falls within the 
established parity bounds of 40 and 60 percent.
iv. Canvasbacks
    Council Recommendations: The Atlantic, Central, and Pacific Flyway 
Councils and the Upper- and Lower-Region Regulations Committees of the 
Mississippi Flyway Council recommended a full season for canvasbacks 
with a 1-bird daily bag limit. Season lengths would be 60 days in the 
Atlantic and Mississippi Flyways, 74 days in the Central Flyway, and 
107 days in the Pacific Flyway.
    The Upper- and Lower-Region Regulations Committees of the 
Mississippi Flyway Council also recommended that we update the harvest 
estimates used to predict the canvasback harvest under the ``liberal'' 
AHM regulatory alternative, as used in the existing canvasback harvest 
strategy, and utilize the most recent 5-year average U.S. canvasback 
harvest plus a constant accounting for the most recent available 
Canadian harvest estimates. They further recommended our updates 
include canvasback harvest estimates for both full (1-bird bag limit) 
and partial seasons.
    Service Response: Since 1994, we have followed a canvasback harvest 
strategy that if canvasback population status and production are 
sufficient to permit a harvest of one canvasback per day nationwide for 
the entire length of the regular duck season, while still attaining a 
projected spring population objective of 500,000 birds, the season on 
canvasbacks should be opened. A partial season would be permitted if 
the estimated allowable harvest was within the projected harvest for a 
shortened season. If neither of these conditions can be met, the 
harvest strategy calls for a closed season on canvasbacks nationwide. 
In 2008 (73 FR 43290), we announced our decision to modify the 
Canvasback Harvest Strategy to incorporate the option for a 2-bird 
daily bag limit for canvasbacks when the predicted breeding population 
the subsequent year exceeds 725,000 birds.
    This year's spring survey resulted in an estimate of 585,000 
canvasbacks. This was 12 percent below the 2009 estimate of 662,000 
canvasbacks and 3 percent above the 1955-2009 average.
    The estimate of ponds in Prairie Canada was 3.7 million, which was 
5 percent above last year and 9 percent above the long-term average. 
The canvasback harvest strategy predicts a 2011 canvasback population 
of 521,000 birds under a ``liberal'' duck season with a 1-bird daily 
bag limit and 485,000 with a 2-bird daily bag limit. Because the 
predicted 2011 population under the 1-bird daily bag limit is greater 
than 500,000, while the prediction under the 2-bird daily bag limit is 
less than 725,000, the canvasback harvest strategy stipulates a full 
canvasback season with a 1-bird daily bag limit for the upcoming 
season.
    With regard to the Mississippi Flyway Council's request to update 
estimates used to predict canvasback harvest in the Service's harvest 
strategy, we agree that this feature of the canvasback strategy should 
be updated. Canvasback harvest estimates from recent hunting seasons 
are now available to be used in an update of the strategy. We hope to 
complete the update of the canvasback strategy in time for use in the 
2011-12 hunting season, and will provide an update on this work at the 
next SRC meeting in January.
v. Pintails
    Council Recommendations: The Atlantic, Central, and Pacific Flyway 
Councils and the Upper- and Lower-Region Regulations Committees of the 
Mississippi Flyway Council recommended a full season for pintails, 
consisting of a 2-bird daily bag limit and a 60-day season in the 
Atlantic and Mississippi Flyways, a 74-day season in the Central 
Flyway, and a 107-day season in the Pacific Flyway.
    Service Response: The current derived pintail harvest strategy was 
adopted by

[[Page 52403]]

the Service and Flyway Councils in 2010 (75 FR 44856). For this year, 
optimal regulatory strategies were calculated with: (1) An objective of 
maximizing long-term cumulative harvest, including a closed-season 
constraint of 1.75 million birds, (2) the regulatory alternatives and 
associated predicted harvest, and (3) current population models and 
their relative weights. Based on this year's survey results of 3.5 
million pintails and a mean latitude of 54.4 degrees (latitude 
corrected breeding population of 4.30 million pintails), the optimal 
regulatory choice for all four Flyways is the ``liberal'' alternative 
with a 2-bird daily bag limit.
vi. Scaup
    Council Recommendations: The Atlantic, Central, and Pacific Flyway 
Councils and the Upper- and Lower-Region Regulations Committees of the 
Mississippi Flyway Council recommended use of the ``moderate'' 
regulation package, consisting of a 60-day season with a 2-bird daily 
bag in the Atlantic and Mississippi Flyways, a 74-day season with a 2-
bird daily bag limit in the Central Flyway, and an 86-day season with a 
3-bird daily bag limit in the Pacific Flyway.
    Service Response: In 2008, we adopted and implemented a new scaup 
harvest strategy (73 FR 43290 and 73 FR 51124) with initial 
``restrictive,'' ``moderate,'' and ``liberal'' regulatory packages 
adopted for each Flyway. Further opportunity to revise these packages 
was afforded prior to the 2009-10 season and modifications by the 
Mississippi and Central Flyway Councils were endorsed by the Service in 
June 2009 (74 FR 36870). These packages will remain in effect for at 
least 3 years prior to their re-evaluation.
    The 2010 breeding population estimate for scaup is 4.24 million, up 
2 percent from, but similar to, the 2009 estimate of 4.17 million. 
Total estimated scaup harvest for the 2009-10 season was 277,000 birds. 
Based on updated model parameter estimates, the optimal regulatory 
choice for scaup is the ``moderate'' package recommended by the 
Councils in all four Flyways.

4. Canada Geese

B. Regular Seasons
    Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended a 
107-day regular Canada goose hunting season, between the Saturday 
nearest September 24 and March 10, with a daily bag limit of 8 geese, 
in the Western Long Island Resident Population (RP) area of New York. 
The season could be split into three segments. The Council recommends 
this framework in lieu of the current 30-day September season and 80-
day regular season (between October 1 and February 15) offered for that 
area.
    The Upper- and Lower-Region Regulations Committees of the 
Mississippi Flyway Council recommended several changes in goose 
frameworks. In Minnesota and Missouri, the Committees recommended an 
85-day Canada goose season with a daily bag limit of 3 geese. In Iowa, 
they recommend a 107-day Canada goose season with a daily bag limit of 
3 geese. In Arkansas, they recommended an 82-day Canada goose season in 
the Northwest Zone, and a 72-day season in the remainder of the State. 
The daily bag limit would be 2 Canada geese. All the recommended 
changes in Canada goose season lengths and bag limits, except in 
Arkansas, were made in response to changes in the Eastern Prairie 
Population (EPP) harvest strategy, which the Council approved this 
summer.
    The Central Flyway Council recommended two changes to Canada goose 
frameworks. In the east-tier States, the Council recommended increasing 
the Canada goose daily bag limit from 3 to 5 geese. In the west-tier 
States of Colorado and Texas, the Council recommended raising the dark 
goose daily bag limit from 4 to 5 geese in the aggregate, with the 
exception of the Western Goose Zone of Texas, where no more than 1 
could be a white-fronted goose (no change).
    The Pacific Flyway Council recommended several changes to dark 
goose season frameworks. In Oregon's Northwest (NW) Permit Goose Zone, 
the Council recommended extending the framework ending date for dark 
geese from the Sunday nearest March 1 to March 10. In the Tillamook 
County Management Area of Oregon's NW Permit Goose Zone, they 
recommended increasing the dark goose daily bag limit from 2 to 3, with 
not more than 2 cackling or Aleutian geese per day. In California's 
Balance of State Zone, they recommended increasing the dark goose 
season framework from 100 to 107 days.
    Service Response: We support the Atlantic Flyway's recommendation 
regarding season framework changes to the Western Long Island RP area 
of New York. We recognize that resident Canada geese are causing 
serious conflicts with human interests and activities in western Long 
Island, including threats to public health and safety (including 
airport safety) and property damage concerns. Currently, the State of 
New York (New York) employs a variety of control methods in this area, 
but resident Canada geese numbers remain abundant in that area. 
Further, the Council notes that negligible harvest of geese has 
occurred during September seasons in western Long Island, primarily due 
to most of the birds remaining in areas where hunting is not allowed or 
not feasible, and hunters wanting to avoid conflicts with other outdoor 
activities at that time of year. However, New York believes, and we 
agree, that opportunities and interest in hunting for resident geese in 
this area are greatest in mid to late winter, when geese are most 
likely to be forced out of inland ponds and lakes to more hunter-
accessible coastal areas, and potential conflicts with other outdoor 
activities would be lowest. Hunting and harvest of RP geese in late 
winter would help provide some relief and control of geese that are 
most likely to nest and contribute to local population problems and 
conflicts. Since this area is already classified as an RP area, we 
believe that the potential harvest of Atlantic Population (AP) or North 
Atlantic Population (NAP) geese would be negligible.
    In the Mississippi Flyway, we support the recommended changes to 
season frameworks in Minnesota, Missouri, Iowa, and Arkansas. The 
proposed changes in Canada goose season lengths and bag limits, except 
in Arkansas, were made in response to changes in the EPP harvest 
strategy recently approved by the Council.
    Regarding the Central Flyway Council's recommendation to increase 
the dark goose daily bag limit in the west-tier States of Colorado and 
Texas from 4 to 5 geese, we concur. Currently, all other west-tier 
States have a 5 dark goose daily bag limit and the Council's proposed 
modification is in the relevant goose management plans. Further, the 
2008-10 averages of midwinter counts for Hi-Line Population Canada 
geese (244,107) and Short Grass Prairie Population (SGP) Canada geese 
(241,132), found mainly in the west tier, remain well above population 
objective levels (>80,000 and 150,000-200,000, respectively).
    However, we do not support the Central Flyway's request to increase 
the dark goose daily bag limit in the east-tier States from 3 to 5 
geese. While we agree that the Flyway's proposed bag limit increase 
would likely result in an increased harvest of resident Canada geese 
(Great Plains Population), there are other Canada goose populations 
that would also be subjected to additional harvest pressure, including 
the Tall Grass Prairie (TGP), Western Prairie (WP), the EPP 
populations. One of our

[[Page 52404]]

primary concerns with the proposed increase relates to our current 
collective inability to adequately monitor the population status and 
harvest of all these various populations. We currently have no surveys 
that provide reliable estimates of population abundance for Great 
Plains resident geese in Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, or Texas. 
Population abundance indices for the TGP (Richardson's Canada geese) 
are based on midwinter surveys that include unknown proportions of 
other Canada goose populations and yield highly variable estimates. 
Additionally, there is little information available about the abundance 
or harvest of WP geese. Without having this important information, we 
cannot reliably determine appropriate harvest levels or harvest 
regulations for the resident Canada goose population and meet 
management objectives for all the populations likely affected by the 
proposal. Furthermore, this liberalization would result in markedly 
disparate harvest regulations between the Central and Mississippi 
Flyways, which share the TGP and EPP populations. We believe that more 
coordination with the Mississippi Flyway, which shares the TGP with the 
Central Flyway, should be pursued prior to the proposed regulatory 
change. This coordination should include work toward a revision of the 
management plan for the TGP population, and improved abundance and 
harvest monitoring for all populations of Canada geese that would be 
impacted by this proposal. Lastly, we encourage the States in the 
Central Flyway to fully utilize available tools provided to manage 
resident Canada geese, including special Canada goose hunting seasons, 
take of geese in August using management take, other control and 
depredation orders specifically relevant to resident Canada geese, and 
Statewide special Canada goose permits, to reduce the growth of 
resident Canada goose populations.
    We do agree with the Pacific Flyway Council's recommendation to 
extend the framework closing date in Oregon's NW Permit Goose Zone to 
March 10. This proposed change would allow Oregon's NW Permit Goose 
season to close 7-14 days later than currently allowed and is intended 
to help alleviate agricultural depredations caused by wintering geese 
in this area during this slightly later period when the Council 
believes that grazing by geese may be especially detrimental to crops. 
The Council does not expect the proposed change to measurably increase 
harvest since goose harvest per week, as measured at the mandatory 
check stations in this zone, remains relatively constant during the 
season. We agree.
    Similarly, we also agree with the Council's recommendation to 
increase the dark goose daily bag limit in the Tillamook County 
Management Area of Oregon's NW Permit Goose Zone from 2 to 3, with not 
more than 2 cackling or Aleutian Canada geese per day. This proposed 
change is expected to have only a negligible impact on the harvest 
level of migrant Canada geese and an even smaller affect on the harvest 
of cackling and Aleutian Canada geese since it maintains the current NW 
Permit Zone restriction regarding cackling and Aleutian Canada geese. 
Harvest data collected during the first 3 seasons in which goose 
hunting was allowed in Tillamook County since 1982 indicates that the 
overall goose harvest has remained moderate, with 238, 297, and 285 
geese taken during the during the last three seasons, respectively. The 
vast majority of these birds have been classified as either western 
Canada geese (52 percent) or lesser Canada geese (25 percent). It is 
the Council's and our belief that agricultural depredations in this 
area will likely be reduced due to the direct removal of some 
additional geese and the increased hazing effect of additional hunting.
    Lastly, we agree with the minor increase in the dark season 
framework in California's Balance of State Zone, from 100 to 107 days. 
While most of California's Balance of State zone is outside the 
historic nesting range of Canada geese, Canada goose breeding 
populations there have grown significantly in the last 20 years, 
causing increasing conflicts with humans. Since 1984, daily bag limits 
for large Canada geese have increased from 2 to 6, and season lengths 
have increased from 79 days to 100 days. The Council states that 
increasing the framework season length in this zone will allow for 
California to use up to 5 days in an early October Canada goose 
season--an option preferred over a September season because of 
typically hot September weather in the Central Valley.
C. Special Late Seasons
    Council Recommendations: The Upper- and Lower-Region Regulations 
Committees of the Mississippi Flyway Council recommended changing 
Indiana's experimental late Canada goose season (February 1-15) from 
experimental to operational in the following 30 counties: Adams, Allen, 
Boone, Clay, De Kalb, Elkhart, Greene, Hamilton, Hancock, Hendricks, 
Huntington, Johnson, Kosciusko, La Porte, Lagrange, Madison, Marion, 
Marshall, Morgan, Noble, Parke, St. Joseph, Shelby, Steuben, Starke, 
Sullivan, Vermillion, Vigo, Wells, and Whitley.
    Service Response: In large part, we concur with the Mississippi 
Flyway Council's recommendation to grant operational status for 
Indiana's late Canada goose season. However, results from the 
experiment indicate that the percentage of migrant geese harvested in 
the 6-county region surrounding Terre Haute exceeds the 20 percent 
threshold identified in the criteria for special late Canada goose 
seasons. When we developed the criteria for special late Canada goose 
seasons, we indicated that States must agree to close any areas to 
hunting where evidence from band recoveries or other sources indicates 
unacceptable harvest of non-target populations during the special 
season (60 FR 45020). Because the Terre Haute region does not meet 
established criteria, we cannot grant operational status for these 6 
counties (Clay, Greene, Parke, Sullivan, Vermillion, and Vigo 
Counties). For the remaining 24 of the 30 counties involved in the 
experiment, we do agree with the Mississippi Flyway Council's 
recommendation and grant them operational status.
    We recognize that the recently-published Supplemental Environmental 
Impact Statement (SEIS) on migratory bird hunting contains a proposal 
to remove evaluation criteria for special Canada goose seasons (75 FR 
39577). In light of this proposal, we would be amenable to allowing the 
special late season to continue in the Terre Haute region on an 
experimental basis until the status of evaluation criteria for such 
seasons has been resolved. In the interim, we will require the same 
intensity of data collection in the Terre Haute region with regard to 
morphometric measurements on harvested birds, and analysis of band-
recovery and harvest data.

5. White-fronted Geese

    Council Recommendations: The Pacific Flyway Council recommended 
increasing the daily bag limit for white-fronted geese from 2 to 4 for 
hunting days occurring after the last Sunday in January in the Klamath 
County Zone of Oregon. They also made several other dark goose 
recommendations affecting white-fronted geese (see 4. Canada Geese, B. 
Regular Seasons for further discussion).
    Service Response: Specific to white-fronted geese, we concur with 
the Pacific Flyway Council's recommended changes in the Klamath County 
Zone of Oregon. The Pacific Population of

[[Page 52405]]

greater white-fronted geese is currently above population goal and the 
index for the population increased substantially this year. The 3-year 
average is now greater than twice the management goal and we expect 
excellent production this summer. The Council notes that agricultural 
depredations caused by spring staging geese in the Klamath Basin 
continue to be a serious issue and believes that increasing the daily 
bag limits in Oregon's Klamath Zone will help contribute to addressing 
this conflict. We note that potential concerns over Tule geese were 
addressed by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and California 
Department of Fish and Game, in cooperation with the Service, 
completing three seasons of harvest monitoring and flock distribution 
monitoring during the late-winter in Oregon's Klamath County Zone. 
Monitoring indicated that very few harvested white-fronted geese (as 
measured by biologists) were determined to be Tule geese from 
morphological measurements (4 of 329 geese). Additionally, monitoring 
of radio-marked Tule geese has shown their preference for habitats in 
the California portion of the Klamath Basin where they are unavailable 
for harvest in Oregon. The harvest of Canada geese after the last 
Sunday in January would continue to be prohibited under the proposal.

6. Brant

    Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended 
continuation of a 50-day season with a 2-bird daily bag limit for 
Atlantic brant.
    Service Response: We concur with the Atlantic Flyway Council's 
recommendation. The 2010 Mid-Winter Index (MWI) for Atlantic brant was 
139,400, about 8 percent lower than the 2009 estimate of 151,300. 
However, conditions appeared to be favorable in most of the breeding 
range this spring; thus, average to above average brant production is 
expected this year. The Atlantic Flyway Management Plan calls for a 50-
day season and a 2-bird daily bag limit at the current mid-winter 
index, and we support the season length and bag limit prescribed by the 
management plan.

7. Snow and Ross's (Light) Geese

    Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended a 
107-day regular season with a 25-bird daily bag limit and no possession 
limit for light geese in the Atlantic Flyway.
    The Pacific Flyway Council made several recommendations concerning 
light geese. In the Klamath County Zone of Oregon, the Council 
recommended increasing the daily bag limit for light geese from 4 to 6 
for hunting days occurring after the last Sunday in January. The 
Council also recommended in Oregon's newly created Malheur County Zone, 
increasing the daily bag limit for light geese from 6 to 10 and 
specifying that all hunt days occurring after the last Sunday in 
January should be concurrent with Idaho's Zone 2.
    Service Response: We support the Atlantic Flyway Council's 
recommendation to increase the daily bag limit for light geese from 15 
to 25. Greater snow geese are above both the Atlantic Flyway and North 
American Waterfowl Management Plan desired population objectives. 
Additionally, we have declared light geese (including greater snow 
geese) an overabundant species and implemented special Conservation 
Order measures to increase the take of light geese (73 FR 65926 and 73 
FR 65954). Given their current population status and our desire to 
reduce populations, we believe that there is no reason to constrain the 
daily bag limit to 15 birds and believe that this proposed change may 
help contribute to higher light goose harvest during regular hunting 
seasons.
    In Oregon, we agree with the Pacific Flyway Council's light goose 
proposals intended to assist landowners with depredation issues, reduce 
goose numbers, and enhance goose hazing effects. Taken together, these 
proposals would allow Oregon the flexibility to hold differential 
seasons for light geese in the newly proposed Malheur County Zone and 
the modified Harney and Lake County Zone, and institute a late-winter 
light goose season in the Malheur County Zone to help address 
agricultural depredations caused by light geese. By requiring that the 
proposed Oregon hunt coincide with the current late-winter light goose 
season in adjacent areas of Idaho, the Council believes that this 
should help alleviate agricultural depredations caused by staging light 
geese in adjacent areas of Oregon and Idaho by not allowing geese to 
simply move into closed areas. We agree. While past light goose harvest 
has historically been minimal in this area, the Council expects their 
proposals to significantly increase light goose harvest in Malheur 
County. They note that during the late winter and early spring, light 
geese are abundant in portions of Malheur County, especially near 
agricultural lands in proximity to the Snake River, as the geese stage 
during migration en route to breeding areas in the Arctic. We note that 
all 3 populations of light geese in the Pacific Flyway are currently 
above their respective population goals.

Public Comments

    The Department of the Interior's policy is, whenever possible, 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 promulgating final migratory game bird hunting 
regulations, we will consider all comments we receive. These comments, 
and any additional information we receive, 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 accept 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 all comments in their entirety--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--including your personal identifying information--may be 
made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your 
comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public 
review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. 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 
we receive during the comment period and respond to them after the 
closing date in the preambles of 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

[[Page 52406]]

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 (SEIS) 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 
released the draft SEIS on July 9, 2010 (75 FR 39577). The draft SEIS 
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

    Before issuance of the 2010-11 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 
proposed rulemaking documents.

Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget has determined that this rule 
is significant and has reviewed this rule under Executive Order 12866. 
OMB bases its determination 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, loan programs, or the rights and obligations of their 
recipients.
    (d) Whether the rule raises novel legal or policy issues.
    An economic analysis was prepared for the 2008-09 season. This 
analysis was based on data from the 2006 National Hunting and Fishing 
Survey, the most recent year for which data are available (see 
discussion in Regulatory Flexibility Act section below). This analysis 
estimated consumer surplus for three alternatives for duck hunting 
(estimates for other species are not quantified due to lack of data). 
The alternatives are (1) Issue restrictive regulations allowing fewer 
days than those issued during the 2007-08 season, (2) Issue moderate 
regulations allowing more days than those in alternative 1, and (3) 
Issue liberal regulations identical to the regulations in the 2007-08 
season. For the 2008-09 season, we chose alternative 3, with an 
estimated consumer surplus across all flyways of $205-$270 million. At 
this time, we are proposing no changes to the season frameworks for the 
2010-11 season, and as such, we will again consider these three 
alternatives. However, final frameworks will depend on population 
status information available later this year. For these reasons, we 
have not conducted a new economic analysis, but the 2008-09 analysis is 
part of the record for this rule and is available at https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/NewReportsPublications/SpecialTopics/SpecialTopics.html#HuntingRegs or at https://www.regulations.gov.

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 Division of Migratory Bird Management 
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) or from our Web site at 
                    

                        This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
                        Privacy Policy and
                        Terms of Service apply.