Migratory Bird Hunting; Supplemental Proposals for Migratory Game Bird Hunting Regulations for the 2019-20 Hunting Season; Notice of Meetings, 47868-47873 [2018-20495]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
47868
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 184 / Friday, September 21, 2018 / Proposed Rules
number of entities requesting to present,
in order to ensure adequate time for
discussion.
Building entry: For each registrant, the
Pentagon Force Protection Agency will
send additional instructions to the email
address provided at the time of
registration. The registrant must follow
the instructions in the email in order to
be approved for entry to the Mark
Center.
One valid government-issued photo
identification card (i.e., driver’s license
or passport) will be required in order to
enter the building.
Attendees are encouraged to arrive at
least 45 minutes early to accommodate
security procedures. Public parking is
not available at the Mark Center.
Presentations: If you wish to make a
presentation, please submit an
electronic copy of your presentation to
osd.dfars@mail.mil by 12 p.m., EST, on
October 4, 2018. When submitting a
presentation, provide the presenter’s
name, organization affiliation, telephone
number, and email address on the cover
page. Please submit presentations only
and cite ‘‘Public Meeting, DFARS Case
2017–D019’’ in all correspondence
related to the public meeting. There will
be no transcription at the meeting. The
submitted presentations will be the only
record of the public meeting and will be
posted to the following website at the
conclusion of the public meeting:
https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/
performance-based_payments_and_
progress_payments.html.
Special accommodations: The public
meeting is physically accessible to
people with disabilities. Requests for
reasonable accommodations, sign
language interpretation or other
auxiliary aids should be directed to
Daniel Weinstein at 571–372–6105, by
no later than October 1, 2018.
The TTY number for further
information is: 1–800–877–8339. When
the operator answers the call, let him or
her know the agency is the Department
of Defense; the point of contact is Daniel
Weinstein at 571–372–6105.
Correspondence and comments:
Please cite ‘‘Public Meeting, DFARS
Case 2017–D019’’ in all correspondence
related to this public meeting. The
submitted presentations will be the only
record of the public meeting. To have a
presentation considered as a public
comment for the formation of the final
rule, the presentation, or pertinent
excerpts, must be submitted separately
as a written comment as instructed in
the paragraph titled ‘‘Submission of
Comments’’ in ADDRESSES.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Sep 20, 2018
Jkt 244001
48 CFR Parts 232, 242, and 252
Government procurement.
Jennifer Lee Hawes,
Regulatory Control Officer, Defense
Acquisition Regulations System.
[FR Doc. 2018–20626 Filed 9–20–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 20
[Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2018–0030;
FF09M21200–189–FXMB1231099BPP0]
RIN 1018–BD10
Migratory Bird Hunting; Supplemental
Proposals for Migratory Game Bird
Hunting Regulations for the 2019–20
Hunting Season; Notice of Meetings
AGENCY:
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
Proposed rule; supplemental.
ACTION:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), proposed in
an earlier document this year to
establish annual hunting regulations for
certain migratory game birds for the
2019–20 hunting season. This
supplement to that proposed rule
provides the regulatory alternatives for
the 2019–20 duck hunting seasons,
announces the Service Migratory Bird
Regulations Committee (SRC) and
Flyway Council meetings, and provides
Flyway Council recommendations
resulting from their March meetings.
DATES:
Comments: We will accept comments
on this proposed rule and any
subsequent proposed rules resulting
from upcoming SRC meetings until
January 15, 2019.
Meetings: The SRC will meet to
consider and develop proposed
regulations for the 2019–20 migratory
game bird hunting seasons on October
16–17, 2018. Meetings on both days are
open to the public and will commence
at approximately 8:30 a.m.
ADDRESSES:
Comments: 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–HQ–MB–2018–
0030.
• U.S. Mail or Hand-Delivery: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–HQ–
MB–2018–0030; Division of Policy,
Performance, and Management
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Programs; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, MS: BPHC; 5275 Leesburg Pike,
Falls Church, VA 22041.
We will not accept emailed or faxed
comments. We will post all comments
on https://www.regulations.gov. This
generally means that your entire
submission—including any personal
identifying information—will be posted
on the website. See the Public
Comments section, below, for more
information.
Meetings: The October 16–17, 2018,
SRC meetings will be at the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, 5600 American
Boulevard, Bloomington, MN 55437.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron
W. Kokel at: Division of Migratory Bird
Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Department of the Interior, MS:
MB, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church,
VA 22041; (703) 358–1714.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
New Process for the Annual Migratory
Game Bird Hunting Regulations
As part of DOI’s retrospective
regulatory review, 3 years ago we
developed a schedule for migratory
game bird hunting regulations that is
more efficient and provides for States’
selection of hunting season dates earlier
than was possible under the old process.
The new process makes planning easier
for the States and all parties interested
in migratory bird hunting. Beginning in
the summer of 2015, with the
development of the 2016–17 hunting
seasons, we started promulgating our
annual migratory game bird hunting
regulations using a new schedule that
combines the previously used early- and
late-season regulatory processes into a
single process. We make decisions for
harvest management based on
predictions derived from long-term
biological information and established
harvest strategies and, therefore, can
establish migratory bird hunting seasons
earlier than the system we used for
many years. Under the new process, we
develop proposed hunting season
frameworks for a given year in the fall
of the prior year. We then finalize those
frameworks a few months later, thereby
enabling the State agencies to select and
publish their season dates in early
summer. We provided a detailed
overview of the new process in the
August 3, 2017, Federal Register (82 FR
36308). This proposed rule is the second
in a series of proposed and final rules
for the establishment of the 2019–20
hunting seasons.
Service Migratory Bird Regulations
Committee Meetings
The SRC will conduct open meetings
on October 16–17, 2018, to review
E:\FR\FM\21SEP1.SGM
21SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 184 / Friday, September 21, 2018 / Proposed Rules
information on the current status of
migratory game birds and develop
2019–20 migratory game bird
regulations recommendations for these
species. In accordance with
Departmental policy, these meetings are
open to public observation. You may
submit written comments to the Service
on the matters discussed. See DATES and
ADDRESSES, above, for information about
these meetings.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Regulatory Schedule for 2019–20
On June 14, 2018, we published a
proposal to amend title 50 of the Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR) at part 20
(83 FR 27836). 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 §§ 20.101 through
20.107, 20.109, and 20.110 of subpart K.
This document is the second in a series
of proposed, supplemental, and final
rules for migratory game bird hunting
regulations. We will publish additional
supplemental proposals for public
comment in the Federal Register as
population, habitat, harvest, and other
information become available. Major
steps in the 2019–20 regulatory cycle
relating to open public meetings and
Federal Register notifications were
illustrated in the diagram at the end of
the June 14, 2018, proposed rule (83 FR
27836).
All sections of this and subsequent
documents outlining hunting
frameworks and guidelines are
organized under the numbered headings
set forth in the June 14, 2018, proposed
rule (83 FR 27836). Later sections of this
and 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,
thereby making the list appear
incomplete.
The regulatory alternatives for the
2019–20 duck hunting seasons are
shown at the end of this document. We
plan to publish proposed season
frameworks in mid-December 2018. We
plan to publish final season frameworks
in late February 2019.
Review of Public Comments
This proposed rulemaking describes
recommended changes to or specific
preliminary proposals that vary from the
2018–19 regulations and issues
requiring discussion, action, or the
attention of the States or tribes. We will
publish responses to all proposals and
written comments when we develop
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Sep 20, 2018
Jkt 244001
final frameworks for the 2019–20
season. We seek additional information
and comments on 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
identified in the June 14, 2018,
proposed rule (83 FR 27836). Only those
categories requiring attention or for
which we received Flyway Council
recommendations are discussed below.
1. Ducks
Duck harvest management categories
are: (A) General Harvest Strategy; (B)
Regulatory Alternatives, including
specification of framework dates, season
length, and bag limits; (C) Zones and
Split Seasons; and (D) Special Seasons/
Species Management.
A. General Harvest Strategy
Council Recommendations: The
Atlantic Flyway Council recommended
that we adopt and implement a multistock decision framework for the annual
setting of duck hunting seasons in the
Atlantic Flyway starting in the 2019–20
season. Derivation of an annual optimal
policy would consider a weighting
method for each of four species (greenwinged teal (Anas crecca), common
goldeneye (Bucephala clangula), ringnecked duck (Aythya collaris), and
wood duck (Aix sponsa)) utilizing
hunter days and relative harvest of each
of the four species, by regions within
the Flyway. The harvest objective would
be no more than 98 percent of maximum
sustainable long-term yield for any of
the four species.
The Mississippi Flyway Council
recommended that regulation changes
be restricted to one step per year, both
when restricting as well as liberalizing
hunting regulations.
Service Response: As we stated in the
June 14, 2018, proposed rule (83 FR
27836), we intend to continue use of
Adaptive Harvest Management (AHM)
to help determine appropriate duckhunting regulations for the 2019–20
season. AHM is a tool that permits
sound resource decisions in the face of
uncertain regulatory impacts, as well as
providing a mechanism for reducing
that uncertainty over time. We use AHM
to evaluate four alternative regulatory
levels for duck hunting in the
Mississippi, Central, and Pacific
Flyways based on the population status
of mallards (see below). We will use
AHM based on the population status of
a suite of four species in the Atlantic
Flyway (see below). We have specific
hunting strategies for species of special
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
47869
concern, such as black ducks, scaup,
and pintails.
Mississippi, Central, and Pacific
Flyways
The prescribed regulatory alternative
for the Mississippi, Central, and Pacific
Flyways is based on the status of
mallard populations that contribute
primarily to each Flyway. In the Central
and Mississippi Flyways, we set
hunting regulations based on the status
and dynamics of mid-continent
mallards. Mid-continent mallards are
those breeding in central North America
(Federal survey strata 13–18, 20–50, and
75–77, and State surveys in Minnesota,
Wisconsin, and Michigan). In the Pacific
Flyway, we set hunting regulations
based on the status and dynamics of
western mallards. Western mallards are
those breeding in Alaska and the
northern Yukon Territory (as based on
Federal surveys in strata 1–12), and in
California, Oregon, Washington, and
British Columbia (as based on State- or
Province-conducted surveys).
For the 2019–20 season, we will
continue to use independent
optimization to determine the optimal
regulatory choice for each mallard stock.
This means that we would develop
regulations for mid-continent mallards
and western mallards independently,
based upon the breeding stock that
contributes primarily to each Flyway.
We detailed implementation of this
AHM decision framework for western
and mid-continent mallards in the July
24, 2008, Federal Register (73 FR
43290).
Atlantic Flyway
Since 2000, the Service has used an
AHM protocol based on the status of
eastern mallards to establish the annual
framework regulations for duck hunting
seasons in the Atlantic Flyway. This
protocol assumes that the mallard is an
appropriate surrogate for other duck
species in the Atlantic Flyway. By 2010,
it was apparent that the biological
models used in the AHM protocol were
performing poorly in terms of accurately
predicting the following year’s eastern
mallard breeding population, and this
performance problem led to a
comprehensive review of duck harvest
management in the Atlantic Flyway.
Following that review, the Atlantic
Flyway Council (AFC) determined that
eastern mallards do not adequately
represent duck harvest dynamics
throughout the entire Flyway; they do
not represent the breeding ecology and
habitat requirements of other important
Atlantic Flyway duck species because
their breeding range does not overlap
with that of other ducks that breed in
E:\FR\FM\21SEP1.SGM
21SEP1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
47870
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 184 / Friday, September 21, 2018 / Proposed Rules
the flyway; and their breeding and/or
wintering habitat needs differ from
many of the other duck species in the
Flyway. Thus, although mallards
comprise nearly 20 percent of the
Atlantic Flyway’s duck harvest, the
status of eastern mallards does not
necessarily reflect that of other Atlantic
Flyway duck species. For example,
mallards in eastern North America have
declined at an annual rate of 1 percent
since 1998, whereas over the same time
period all other duck species in eastern
North America for which robust
population estimates are available are
stable or increasing.
The AFC decided that a decision
framework based upon a suite of duck
species that better represents the habitat
needs and harvest distribution of ducks
in the Atlantic Flyway would be
superior to the current eastern mallard
AHM framework, and we concur.
Accordingly, the Service and the AFC
began working in 2013 to develop a
multi-stock AHM protocol for setting
annual duck hunting season frameworks
for the Atlantic Flyway.
The development of multi-stock
protocols has now been completed, and
we adopt multi-stock AHM as a
replacement for eastern mallard AHM.
The protocols are based on a suite of
four species that represents the
dynamics of duck harvest in the
Atlantic Flyway and the various habitat
types used by waterfowl throughout the
Atlantic Flyway: Green-winged teal
(Anas crecca), common goldeneye
(Bucephala clangula), ring-necked duck
(Aythya collaris), and wood duck (Aix
sponsa). These species comprise more
than 40 percent of the Atlantic Flyway’s
total duck harvest, and they reflect
regional variation in harvest
composition. The selected species
represent upland nesters in boreal and
southern Canada (green-winged teal),
over-water nesters in boreal Canada
(ring-necked duck), cavity nesters in the
United States and southern Canada
(wood duck), and cavity nesters in
boreal Canada (goldeneye). The most
important winter waterfowl habitats in
the Atlantic Flyway (salt marsh,
freshwater marsh, tidal waters,
freshwater ponds and lakes, rivers and
streams) are important to at least one of
these four species.
Species selection was also influenced
by our need for sufficient time series of
estimates of annual abundance and
estimates of harvest rate or annual
harvest. The protocol has a harvest
objective of no more than 98 percent of
maximum sustainable long-term yield
for any of the four species. Regulatory
alternatives would be the same as those
used in the eastern mallard AHM,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Sep 20, 2018
Jkt 244001
except that the mallard bag limit would
not be prescribed by the optimal
regulatory alternative as determined by
the multi-stock AHM protocol. Further
details on biological models used in the
protocol, data sources, optimization
methods, and simulation results are
available at https://www.regulations.gov
and on our website at https://
www.fws.gov/birds/index.php.
Although season length in the
Atlantic Flyway would be determined
by the proposed multi-stock protocol,
the daily bag limit for black ducks will
still be determined by the international
black duck AHM harvest strategy. The
mallard bag limit in the Atlantic Flyway
will be based on a separate assessment
of the harvest potential of eastern
mallards.
Regarding the Mississippi Flyway
Council recommendation to limit
regulatory changes to one step per year,
we recognize the longstanding interest
by the Council to impose a one-step
constraint on regulatory changes. We
note that the Central and Mississippi
Flyways have worked with Service staff
during the past 3 years to revisit the
AHM protocol for managing harvest of
mid-continent mallards. This effort has
included a discussion of appropriate
management objectives, regulatory
packages, and management of nonmallard stocks. These discussions are
the appropriate venue to discuss what
role, if any, a one-step constraint might
play in management of waterfowl in the
Central and Mississippi Flyways. Such
discussions should include the potential
impact of a one-step constraint on the
frequency of when the liberal, moderate,
and restrictive packages would be
recommended. On a final note, while
we recognize the Council’s concern
about potentially communicating a large
regulatory change to hunters, we have
concerns about the appropriateness of a
one-step constraint in situations when
the status of the waterfowl resource may
warrant a regulatory change larger than
one-step. Furthermore, it is unclear how
the AHM protocol can accommodate a
one-step constraint in the Mississippi
Flyway if the Central Flyway does not
impose a similar constraint. Technical
work on the double-looping process
tentatively should be completed by
March 2019, with any potential changes
to regulatory packages and harvest
strategy approved in June 2019 for the
2020–21 season. We look forward to
continued work with the Flyway
Councils on this issue.
B. Regulatory Alternatives
Council Recommendations: The
Atlantic Flyway Council recommended
that the AHM regulations packages used
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
in 2018–19 be used in 2019–20, with the
exception that mallards be removed
from the prescribed daily bag limit
(addressed above) and that the ending
framework date be moved from the last
Sunday in January to January 31 for the
‘‘moderate’’ and ‘‘liberal’’ alternatives.
The Mississippi and Central Flyway
Councils recommended that regulatory
alternatives for duck hunting seasons
remain the same as those used in 2017–
18.
Service Response: We support the
Atlantic Flyway’s new multi-stock AHM
protocol, including removal of mallards
from the prescribed daily bag limits.
The multi-stock AHM protocol
incorporated the harvest rate increases
expected to result from extending the
ending framework date to January 31;
therefore, we support that change to the
Atlantic Flyway’s regulatory
alternatives.
Consistent with Flyway
recommendations, the regulatory
alternatives proposed for the
Mississippi, Central, and Pacific
Flyways in the June 14, 2018, Federal
Register (83 FR 27836) will be used for
the 2019–20 hunting season (see
accompanying table at the end of this
document for specific information). In
2005, the AHM regulatory alternatives
were modified to consist only of the
maximum season lengths, framework
dates, and bag limits for total ducks and
mallards. Restrictions for certain species
within these frameworks that are not
covered by existing harvest strategies
will be addressed in the proposed
frameworks rule in early December
2018. For those species with specific
harvest strategies (pintails, black ducks,
scaup, and mallards in the Atlantic
Flyway), those strategies will again be
used for the 2019–20 hunting season.
D. Special Seasons/Species
Management
i. September Teal Seasons
Council Recommendations: The
Atlantic Flyway Council recommended
that Florida be granted operational
status for the 4-day, tealonly season,
beginning with the 2019 season.
The Mississippi Flyway Council
recommended that Tennessee be
granted operational 4-day, teal-only
seasons when 16-day teal seasons are
offered for the 2019–20 season and
beyond.
Service Response: In 2014, the States
of Florida, Kentucky, and Tennessee
initiated an experimental teal-only
season comprised of 4 additional days
of teal hunting that would follow the
States’ operational September wood
duck/teal seasons. Memorandums of
E:\FR\FM\21SEP1.SGM
21SEP1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 184 / Friday, September 21, 2018 / Proposed Rules
agreement (MOAs) were cooperatively
developed between each State and the
Service to specify criteria for annual and
total sample sizes (number of non-target
shooting opportunities each year for 3
years and overall for the experiment),
non-target attempt rates (must not be
greater than 25 percent [0.25]), and nontarget kill rates (must not be greater than
10 percent [0.10]). Criteria for non-target
attempt rates and kill rates were the
same for all States; however, sample
sizes among States were based on prior
information for each State and thus
could vary among States. Kentucky was
granted operational status in 2017, after
successfully meeting the above criteria.
However, Florida and Tennessee failed
to meet sample size requirements and
requested an additional year of data
collection in 2017.
In Florida, non-target attempt rates
were similar for the pre- and postsunrise periods (average 0.06), as were
non-target kill rates (average 0.03).
However, annual sample size
requirements for non-target
opportunities (n = 25/year) were not met
for the pre-sunrise period in any year
(n = 4, 14, 17, and 12). For the postsunrise period, annual sample size
requirements were met in 3 of the 4
years (n = 12, 44, 34, and 39). Thus,
annual and total sample size
requirements specified in the MOA for
the experiment were met for the postsunrise period, but not for the presunrise period.
In Tennessee, non-target attempt rates
for the pre- and post-sunrise periods
were 0.0 and 0.03, respectively. Nontarget kill rates for pre- and post-sunrise
periods were 0.0 and 0.04, respectively.
Annual sample size requirements for
non-target opportunities (n = 20/year)
were met in only 2 of 4 years during
both the pre-sunrise period (n = 14, 10,
23 and 24) and the post-sunrise period
(n = 21, 4, 14, 30). However, total
sample size requirements specified in
the MOA for the experiment were met
for both the pre- and post-sunrise
periods. As such, and seeing no
biological concerns, we recommend that
Tennessee’s additional 4 days of tealonly hunting be granted operational
status.
In the case of Florida, although no
biological concerns for non-target
species have been raised during these
experiments, the MOAs governing
harvest management experiments have
not been met. Sample sizes outlined in
the MOA have not been met for multiple
years despite an additional
experimental year to attempt to meet
sample size requirements. When years
are pooled, Florida does meet total
sample size requirements for the post-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Sep 20, 2018
Jkt 244001
sunrise period, but not the pre-sunrise
period. We have concerns about the role
of MOAs in the conduct of harvest
management experiments, and
situations in which MOA requirements
are not met. If MOAs are to have any
meaningful role in the conduct of
harvest management experiments, the
consequences of not meeting MOA
requirements need to be upheld.
Further, not adhering to the MOA
criteria has potential ramifications
beyond the issue of teal and beyond the
Atlantic Flyway. Therefore, we do not
grant operational status to the Florida 4day, teal-only season for the pre-sunrise
period.
8. Swans
Council Recommendations: The
Atlantic Flyway Council recommended
that Delaware be allowed to implement
an experimental tundra swan hunt
beginning with the 2019–20 season. The
Council recommends a reallocation of
existing permits to Delaware from
within the wintering zone per the
guidelines included in the Eastern
Population Tundra Swan Hunt Plan. All
other requirements for experimental
seasons (e.g., hunter reporting, harvest
and population monitoring) specified in
the Plan also will be met.
Service Response: We support the
establishment of an experimental tundra
swan season in Delaware beginning
with the 2019–20 season. The proposed
hunt request follows the guidelines
provided in the Eastern Population
Tundra Swan Hunt Plan and is not
expected to increase the overall harvest
of tundra swans. Rather, the existing
allowable harvest will be reallocated
among the States that hunt them.
14. Woodcock
Council Recommendations: The
Atlantic and Mississippi Flyway
Councils recommended that the
Woodcock Harvest Strategy be modified
to allow the liberal harvest package at a
level of 3.0 birds/route (from 3.25 birds/
route) and that the framework opening
date for the Central Management Region
be changed from the Saturday nearest
September 22 to a fixed date of
September 13.
Service Response: Only two of the
three Flyways that are signatories to this
strategy passed recommendations
supporting the changes. The current
Woodcock Harvest Strategy was first
implemented in 2011. Although we
have gained experience with the
strategy, we have not adequately
evaluated how the proposed changes
may impact woodcock populations and
hunting opportunities in the future.
Therefore, we recommend that the
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
47871
Woodcock Harvest Strategy Working
Group, who developed this strategy, be
re-convened to discuss a comprehensive
review of the harvest strategy and
evaluate any proposed changes. The
Working Group should involve the
Service and all three Flyway Councils
that are current signatories to the
existing harvest strategy.
Public Comments
The Department of the Interior’s
policy is, whenever practicable, to
afford the public an opportunity to
participate in the rulemaking process.
Accordingly, we invite interested
persons to submit written comments,
suggestions, or recommendations
regarding the proposed regulations.
Before promulgation of final migratory
game bird hunting regulations, we will
take into consideration all comments we
receive. Such 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 the proposed rule
by one of the methods listed in
ADDRESSES. We will not accept
comments sent by email or fax or to an
address not listed in ADDRESSES.
Finally, we will not consider handdelivered comments that we do not
receive, or mailed comments that are
not postmarked, by the date specified in
DATES. We will post all comments in
their entirety—including your personal
identifying information—on https://
www.regulations.gov. Before including
your address, phone number, email
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 the
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, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls
Church, VA.
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 any final rules.
E:\FR\FM\21SEP1.SGM
21SEP1
47872
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 184 / Friday, September 21, 2018 / Proposed Rules
Required Determinations
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Based on our most current data, we
are affirming our required
determinations made in the June 14,
2018, proposed rule (83 FR 27836); see
that document for descriptions of our
actions to ensure compliance with the
following statutes and Executive Orders:
• National Environmental Policy Act;
• Endangered Species Act;
• Regulatory Flexibility Act;
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Sep 20, 2018
Jkt 244001
• Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act;
• Paperwork Reduction Act;
• Unfunded Mandates Reform Act;
and
• Executive Orders 12630, 12866,
12988, 13132, 13175, 13211, 13563, and
13771.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 20
Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation, Wildlife.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Authority
The rules that eventually will be
promulgated for the 2019–20 hunting
season are authorized under 16 U.S.C.
703–711, 712, and 742 a–j.
Dated: September 6, 2018.
Andrea Travnicek,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary—Water
and Science, Exercising the Authority of the
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and
Parks.
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
E:\FR\FM\21SEP1.SGM
21SEP1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
RES
Beginning
Shooting
Time
1/2 hr
before
sunnse
1/2 hr.
before
sunnse
1/2 hr
before
sunnse
1/2 hr
before
sunnse
1/2 hr
before
sunnse
1/2 hr
before
sunnse
1/2 hr
before
sunnse
1/2 hr
before
sunnse
1/2 hr
before
sunnse
1/2 hr
before
sunnse
1/2 hr
before
sunnse
1/2 hr
before
sunnse
Ending
Shooting
Time
Sunset
Sunset
Sunset
Sunset
Sunset
Sunset
Sunset
Sunset
Sunset
Sunset
Sunset
Sunset
Opening
Date
Oct 1
Sat nearest
Sept 24
Sat nearest
Sept 24
Sat nearest
Oct 1
Sat nearest
Sept 24
Sat nearest
Sept 24
Sat nearest
Oct 1
Sat nearest
Sept 24
Sat nearest
Sept 24
Sat nearest
Oct 1
Sat nearest
Sept 24
Sat nearest
Sept 24
Closing
Date
Jan. 20
Jan. 31
Jan. 31
Sun. nearest Last Sunday
Jan. 20
in Jan
Last Sunday
in Jan
Sfmt 9990
Season
Length (in days)
30
45
60
30
45
60
39
60
74
60
86
107
Daily Bag
3
6
6
3
6
6
3
6
6
4
7
7
E:\FR\FM\21SEP1.SGM
Species/Sex Limits within the Overall Daily Bag Limit
(d)
2/1
4/1
4/2
3/1
5/1
5/2
3/1
5/2
7/2
PO 00000
LIB
Fmt 4702
PACIFIC FLYWAY (b)(c)
RES
MOD
LIB
I
I
ATLANTIC FLYWAY
MOD
I
I
Frm 00026
Mallard (Total/Female)
(a)
(d)
(d)
MISSISSIPPI FLYWAY
MOD
LIB
I
I
CENTRAL FLYWAY (a)
MOD
LIB
I
I
RES
Sun. nearest Last Sunday Last Sunday
Jan. 20
in Jan
in Jan
RES
Sun. nearest Last Sunday Last Sunday
Jan. 20
in Jan
in Jan
21SEP1
In the High Plains Mallard Management Unit, all regulations would be the same as the remainder of the Central Flyway, with the exception of season length. Additional days would
be allowed under the various alternatives as follows: restrictive- 12, moderate and liberal- 23. Under all alternatives, additional days must be on or after the Saturday nearest
December 10.
(b) In the Columbia Basin Mallard Management Unit, all regulations would be the same as the remainder of the Pacific Flyway, with the exception of season length. Under all alternatives
except the liberal alternative, an additional 7 days would be allowed.
(c) In Alaska, framework dates, bag limits, and season length would be different from the remainder of the Pacific Flyway. The bag limit (depending on the area) would be 5-8 under the restrictive
alternative, and 7-10 under the moderate and liberal alternatives. Under all alternatives, season length would be 107 days and framework dates would be Sep. 1- Jan. 26.
(d) Under the proposed multi-stock AHM protocol for the Atlantic Flyway, the mallard bag limit would not be prescribed by the regulatory alternative.
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 184 / Friday, September 21, 2018 / Proposed Rules
Jkt 244001
[FR Doc. 2018–20495 Filed 9–20–18; 8:45 am]
16:30 Sep 20, 2018
BILLING CODE 4333–15–C
VerDate Sep<11>2014
FINAL REGULATORY ALTERNATIVES FOR DUCK HUNTING DURING THE 2019-20 SEASON
47873
EP21SE18.226</GPH>
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 184 (Friday, September 21, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 47868-47873]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-20495]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 20
[Docket No. FWS-HQ-MB-2018-0030; FF09M21200-189-FXMB1231099BPP0]
RIN 1018-BD10
Migratory Bird Hunting; Supplemental Proposals for Migratory Game
Bird Hunting Regulations for the 2019-20 Hunting Season; Notice of
Meetings
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; supplemental.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), proposed in
an earlier document this year to establish annual hunting regulations
for certain migratory game birds for the 2019-20 hunting season. This
supplement to that proposed rule provides the regulatory alternatives
for the 2019-20 duck hunting seasons, announces the Service Migratory
Bird Regulations Committee (SRC) and Flyway Council meetings, and
provides Flyway Council recommendations resulting from their March
meetings.
DATES:
Comments: We will accept comments on this proposed rule and any
subsequent proposed rules resulting from upcoming SRC meetings until
January 15, 2019.
Meetings: The SRC will meet to consider and develop proposed
regulations for the 2019-20 migratory game bird hunting seasons on
October 16-17, 2018. Meetings on both days are open to the public and
will commence at approximately 8:30 a.m.
ADDRESSES:
Comments: 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-HQ-
MB-2018-0030.
U.S. Mail or Hand-Delivery: Public Comments Processing,
Attn: FWS-HQ-MB-2018-0030; Division of Policy, Performance, and
Management Programs; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, MS: BPHC; 5275
Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041.
We will not accept emailed or faxed comments. We will post all
comments on https://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that your
entire submission--including any personal identifying information--will
be posted on the website. See the Public Comments section, below, for
more information.
Meetings: The October 16-17, 2018, SRC meetings will be at the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 5600 American Boulevard, Bloomington, MN
55437.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron W. Kokel at: Division of Migratory
Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the
Interior, MS: MB, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041; (703)
358-1714.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
New Process for the Annual Migratory Game Bird Hunting Regulations
As part of DOI's retrospective regulatory review, 3 years ago we
developed a schedule for migratory game bird hunting regulations that
is more efficient and provides for States' selection of hunting season
dates earlier than was possible under the old process. The new process
makes planning easier for the States and all parties interested in
migratory bird hunting. Beginning in the summer of 2015, with the
development of the 2016-17 hunting seasons, we started promulgating our
annual migratory game bird hunting regulations using a new schedule
that combines the previously used early- and late-season regulatory
processes into a single process. We make decisions for harvest
management based on predictions derived from long-term biological
information and established harvest strategies and, therefore, can
establish migratory bird hunting seasons earlier than the system we
used for many years. Under the new process, we develop proposed hunting
season frameworks for a given year in the fall of the prior year. We
then finalize those frameworks a few months later, thereby enabling the
State agencies to select and publish their season dates in early
summer. We provided a detailed overview of the new process in the
August 3, 2017, Federal Register (82 FR 36308). This proposed rule is
the second in a series of proposed and final rules for the
establishment of the 2019-20 hunting seasons.
Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee Meetings
The SRC will conduct open meetings on October 16-17, 2018, to
review
[[Page 47869]]
information on the current status of migratory game birds and develop
2019-20 migratory game bird regulations recommendations for these
species. In accordance with Departmental policy, these meetings are
open to public observation. You may submit written comments to the
Service on the matters discussed. See DATES and ADDRESSES, above, for
information about these meetings.
Regulatory Schedule for 2019-20
On June 14, 2018, we published a proposal to amend title 50 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at part 20 (83 FR 27836). 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. This document is the second in a series of proposed, supplemental,
and final rules for migratory game bird hunting regulations. We will
publish additional supplemental proposals for public comment in the
Federal Register as population, habitat, harvest, and other information
become available. Major steps in the 2019-20 regulatory cycle relating
to open public meetings and Federal Register notifications were
illustrated in the diagram at the end of the June 14, 2018, proposed
rule (83 FR 27836).
All sections of this and subsequent documents outlining hunting
frameworks and guidelines are organized under the numbered headings set
forth in the June 14, 2018, proposed rule (83 FR 27836). Later sections
of this and 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, thereby making the list appear incomplete.
The regulatory alternatives for the 2019-20 duck hunting seasons
are shown at the end of this document. We plan to publish proposed
season frameworks in mid-December 2018. We plan to publish final season
frameworks in late February 2019.
Review of Public Comments
This proposed rulemaking describes recommended changes to or
specific preliminary proposals that vary from the 2018-19 regulations
and issues requiring discussion, action, or the attention of the States
or tribes. We will publish responses to all proposals and written
comments when we develop final frameworks for the 2019-20 season. We
seek additional information and comments on 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 identified in the June 14,
2018, proposed rule (83 FR 27836). Only those categories requiring
attention or for which we received Flyway Council recommendations are
discussed below.
1. Ducks
Duck harvest management categories are: (A) General Harvest
Strategy; (B) Regulatory Alternatives, including specification of
framework dates, season length, and bag limits; (C) Zones and Split
Seasons; and (D) Special Seasons/Species Management.
A. General Harvest Strategy
Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended
that we adopt and implement a multi-stock decision framework for the
annual setting of duck hunting seasons in the Atlantic Flyway starting
in the 2019-20 season. Derivation of an annual optimal policy would
consider a weighting method for each of four species (green-winged teal
(Anas crecca), common goldeneye (Bucephala clangula), ring-necked duck
(Aythya collaris), and wood duck (Aix sponsa)) utilizing hunter days
and relative harvest of each of the four species, by regions within the
Flyway. The harvest objective would be no more than 98 percent of
maximum sustainable long-term yield for any of the four species.
The Mississippi Flyway Council recommended that regulation changes
be restricted to one step per year, both when restricting as well as
liberalizing hunting regulations.
Service Response: As we stated in the June 14, 2018, proposed rule
(83 FR 27836), we intend to continue use of Adaptive Harvest Management
(AHM) to help determine appropriate duck-hunting regulations for the
2019-20 season. AHM is a tool that permits sound resource decisions in
the face of uncertain regulatory impacts, as well as providing a
mechanism for reducing that uncertainty over time. We use AHM to
evaluate four alternative regulatory levels for duck hunting in the
Mississippi, Central, and Pacific Flyways based on the population
status of mallards (see below). We will use AHM based on the population
status of a suite of four species in the Atlantic Flyway (see below).
We have specific hunting strategies for species of special concern,
such as black ducks, scaup, and pintails.
Mississippi, Central, and Pacific Flyways
The prescribed regulatory alternative for the Mississippi, Central,
and Pacific Flyways is based on the status of mallard populations that
contribute primarily to each Flyway. In the Central and Mississippi
Flyways, we set hunting regulations based on the status and dynamics of
mid-continent mallards. Mid-continent mallards are those breeding in
central North America (Federal survey strata 13-18, 20-50, and 75-77,
and State surveys in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan). In the
Pacific Flyway, we set hunting regulations based on the status and
dynamics of western mallards. Western mallards are those breeding in
Alaska and the northern Yukon Territory (as based on Federal surveys in
strata 1-12), and in California, Oregon, Washington, and British
Columbia (as based on State- or Province-conducted surveys).
For the 2019-20 season, we will continue to use independent
optimization to determine the optimal regulatory choice for each
mallard stock. This means that we would develop regulations for mid-
continent mallards and western mallards independently, based upon the
breeding stock that contributes primarily to each Flyway. We detailed
implementation of this AHM decision framework for western and mid-
continent mallards in the July 24, 2008, Federal Register (73 FR
43290).
Atlantic Flyway
Since 2000, the Service has used an AHM protocol based on the
status of eastern mallards to establish the annual framework
regulations for duck hunting seasons in the Atlantic Flyway. This
protocol assumes that the mallard is an appropriate surrogate for other
duck species in the Atlantic Flyway. By 2010, it was apparent that the
biological models used in the AHM protocol were performing poorly in
terms of accurately predicting the following year's eastern mallard
breeding population, and this performance problem led to a
comprehensive review of duck harvest management in the Atlantic Flyway.
Following that review, the Atlantic Flyway Council (AFC) determined
that eastern mallards do not adequately represent duck harvest dynamics
throughout the entire Flyway; they do not represent the breeding
ecology and habitat requirements of other important Atlantic Flyway
duck species because their breeding range does not overlap with that of
other ducks that breed in
[[Page 47870]]
the flyway; and their breeding and/or wintering habitat needs differ
from many of the other duck species in the Flyway. Thus, although
mallards comprise nearly 20 percent of the Atlantic Flyway's duck
harvest, the status of eastern mallards does not necessarily reflect
that of other Atlantic Flyway duck species. For example, mallards in
eastern North America have declined at an annual rate of 1 percent
since 1998, whereas over the same time period all other duck species in
eastern North America for which robust population estimates are
available are stable or increasing.
The AFC decided that a decision framework based upon a suite of
duck species that better represents the habitat needs and harvest
distribution of ducks in the Atlantic Flyway would be superior to the
current eastern mallard AHM framework, and we concur. Accordingly, the
Service and the AFC began working in 2013 to develop a multi-stock AHM
protocol for setting annual duck hunting season frameworks for the
Atlantic Flyway.
The development of multi-stock protocols has now been completed,
and we adopt multi-stock AHM as a replacement for eastern mallard AHM.
The protocols are based on a suite of four species that represents the
dynamics of duck harvest in the Atlantic Flyway and the various habitat
types used by waterfowl throughout the Atlantic Flyway: Green-winged
teal (Anas crecca), common goldeneye (Bucephala clangula), ring-necked
duck (Aythya collaris), and wood duck (Aix sponsa). These species
comprise more than 40 percent of the Atlantic Flyway's total duck
harvest, and they reflect regional variation in harvest composition.
The selected species represent upland nesters in boreal and southern
Canada (green-winged teal), over-water nesters in boreal Canada (ring-
necked duck), cavity nesters in the United States and southern Canada
(wood duck), and cavity nesters in boreal Canada (goldeneye). The most
important winter waterfowl habitats in the Atlantic Flyway (salt marsh,
freshwater marsh, tidal waters, freshwater ponds and lakes, rivers and
streams) are important to at least one of these four species.
Species selection was also influenced by our need for sufficient
time series of estimates of annual abundance and estimates of harvest
rate or annual harvest. The protocol has a harvest objective of no more
than 98 percent of maximum sustainable long-term yield for any of the
four species. Regulatory alternatives would be the same as those used
in the eastern mallard AHM, except that the mallard bag limit would not
be prescribed by the optimal regulatory alternative as determined by
the multi-stock AHM protocol. Further details on biological models used
in the protocol, data sources, optimization methods, and simulation
results are available at https://www.regulations.gov and on our website
at https://www.fws.gov/birds/index.php.
Although season length in the Atlantic Flyway would be determined
by the proposed multi-stock protocol, the daily bag limit for black
ducks will still be determined by the international black duck AHM
harvest strategy. The mallard bag limit in the Atlantic Flyway will be
based on a separate assessment of the harvest potential of eastern
mallards.
Regarding the Mississippi Flyway Council recommendation to limit
regulatory changes to one step per year, we recognize the longstanding
interest by the Council to impose a one-step constraint on regulatory
changes. We note that the Central and Mississippi Flyways have worked
with Service staff during the past 3 years to revisit the AHM protocol
for managing harvest of mid-continent mallards. This effort has
included a discussion of appropriate management objectives, regulatory
packages, and management of non-mallard stocks. These discussions are
the appropriate venue to discuss what role, if any, a one-step
constraint might play in management of waterfowl in the Central and
Mississippi Flyways. Such discussions should include the potential
impact of a one-step constraint on the frequency of when the liberal,
moderate, and restrictive packages would be recommended. On a final
note, while we recognize the Council's concern about potentially
communicating a large regulatory change to hunters, we have concerns
about the appropriateness of a one-step constraint in situations when
the status of the waterfowl resource may warrant a regulatory change
larger than one-step. Furthermore, it is unclear how the AHM protocol
can accommodate a one-step constraint in the Mississippi Flyway if the
Central Flyway does not impose a similar constraint. Technical work on
the double-looping process tentatively should be completed by March
2019, with any potential changes to regulatory packages and harvest
strategy approved in June 2019 for the 2020-21 season. We look forward
to continued work with the Flyway Councils on this issue.
B. Regulatory Alternatives
Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended
that the AHM regulations packages used in 2018-19 be used in 2019-20,
with the exception that mallards be removed from the prescribed daily
bag limit (addressed above) and that the ending framework date be moved
from the last Sunday in January to January 31 for the ``moderate'' and
``liberal'' alternatives.
The Mississippi and Central Flyway Councils recommended that
regulatory alternatives for duck hunting seasons remain the same as
those used in 2017-18.
Service Response: We support the Atlantic Flyway's new multi-stock
AHM protocol, including removal of mallards from the prescribed daily
bag limits. The multi-stock AHM protocol incorporated the harvest rate
increases expected to result from extending the ending framework date
to January 31; therefore, we support that change to the Atlantic
Flyway's regulatory alternatives.
Consistent with Flyway recommendations, the regulatory alternatives
proposed for the Mississippi, Central, and Pacific Flyways in the June
14, 2018, Federal Register (83 FR 27836) will be used for the 2019-20
hunting season (see accompanying table at the end of this document for
specific information). In 2005, the AHM regulatory alternatives were
modified to consist only of the maximum season lengths, framework
dates, and bag limits for total ducks and mallards. Restrictions for
certain species within these frameworks that are not covered by
existing harvest strategies will be addressed in the proposed
frameworks rule in early December 2018. For those species with specific
harvest strategies (pintails, black ducks, scaup, and mallards in the
Atlantic Flyway), those strategies will again be used for the 2019-20
hunting season.
D. Special Seasons/Species Management
i. September Teal Seasons
Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended
that Florida be granted operational status for the 4-day, tealonly
season, beginning with the 2019 season.
The Mississippi Flyway Council recommended that Tennessee be
granted operational 4-day, teal-only seasons when 16-day teal seasons
are offered for the 2019-20 season and beyond.
Service Response: In 2014, the States of Florida, Kentucky, and
Tennessee initiated an experimental teal-only season comprised of 4
additional days of teal hunting that would follow the States'
operational September wood duck/teal seasons. Memorandums of
[[Page 47871]]
agreement (MOAs) were cooperatively developed between each State and
the Service to specify criteria for annual and total sample sizes
(number of non-target shooting opportunities each year for 3 years and
overall for the experiment), non-target attempt rates (must not be
greater than 25 percent [0.25]), and non-target kill rates (must not be
greater than 10 percent [0.10]). Criteria for non-target attempt rates
and kill rates were the same for all States; however, sample sizes
among States were based on prior information for each State and thus
could vary among States. Kentucky was granted operational status in
2017, after successfully meeting the above criteria. However, Florida
and Tennessee failed to meet sample size requirements and requested an
additional year of data collection in 2017.
In Florida, non-target attempt rates were similar for the pre- and
post-sunrise periods (average 0.06), as were non-target kill rates
(average 0.03). However, annual sample size requirements for non-target
opportunities (n = 25/year) were not met for the pre-sunrise period in
any year (n = 4, 14, 17, and 12). For the post-sunrise period, annual
sample size requirements were met in 3 of the 4 years (n = 12, 44, 34,
and 39). Thus, annual and total sample size requirements specified in
the MOA for the experiment were met for the post-sunrise period, but
not for the pre-sunrise period.
In Tennessee, non-target attempt rates for the pre- and post-
sunrise periods were 0.0 and 0.03, respectively. Non-target kill rates
for pre- and post-sunrise periods were 0.0 and 0.04, respectively.
Annual sample size requirements for non-target opportunities (n = 20/
year) were met in only 2 of 4 years during both the pre-sunrise period
(n = 14, 10, 23 and 24) and the post-sunrise period (n = 21, 4, 14,
30). However, total sample size requirements specified in the MOA for
the experiment were met for both the pre- and post-sunrise periods. As
such, and seeing no biological concerns, we recommend that Tennessee's
additional 4 days of teal-only hunting be granted operational status.
In the case of Florida, although no biological concerns for non-
target species have been raised during these experiments, the MOAs
governing harvest management experiments have not been met. Sample
sizes outlined in the MOA have not been met for multiple years despite
an additional experimental year to attempt to meet sample size
requirements. When years are pooled, Florida does meet total sample
size requirements for the post-sunrise period, but not the pre-sunrise
period. We have concerns about the role of MOAs in the conduct of
harvest management experiments, and situations in which MOA
requirements are not met. If MOAs are to have any meaningful role in
the conduct of harvest management experiments, the consequences of not
meeting MOA requirements need to be upheld. Further, not adhering to
the MOA criteria has potential ramifications beyond the issue of teal
and beyond the Atlantic Flyway. Therefore, we do not grant operational
status to the Florida 4-day, teal-only season for the pre-sunrise
period.
8. Swans
Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended
that Delaware be allowed to implement an experimental tundra swan hunt
beginning with the 2019-20 season. The Council recommends a
reallocation of existing permits to Delaware from within the wintering
zone per the guidelines included in the Eastern Population Tundra Swan
Hunt Plan. All other requirements for experimental seasons (e.g.,
hunter reporting, harvest and population monitoring) specified in the
Plan also will be met.
Service Response: We support the establishment of an experimental
tundra swan season in Delaware beginning with the 2019-20 season. The
proposed hunt request follows the guidelines provided in the Eastern
Population Tundra Swan Hunt Plan and is not expected to increase the
overall harvest of tundra swans. Rather, the existing allowable harvest
will be reallocated among the States that hunt them.
14. Woodcock
Council Recommendations: The Atlantic and Mississippi Flyway
Councils recommended that the Woodcock Harvest Strategy be modified to
allow the liberal harvest package at a level of 3.0 birds/route (from
3.25 birds/route) and that the framework opening date for the Central
Management Region be changed from the Saturday nearest September 22 to
a fixed date of September 13.
Service Response: Only two of the three Flyways that are
signatories to this strategy passed recommendations supporting the
changes. The current Woodcock Harvest Strategy was first implemented in
2011. Although we have gained experience with the strategy, we have not
adequately evaluated how the proposed changes may impact woodcock
populations and hunting opportunities in the future. Therefore, we
recommend that the Woodcock Harvest Strategy Working Group, who
developed this strategy, be re-convened to discuss a comprehensive
review of the harvest strategy and evaluate any proposed changes. The
Working Group should involve the Service and all three Flyway Councils
that are current signatories to the existing harvest strategy.
Public Comments
The Department of the Interior's policy is, whenever practicable,
to afford the public an opportunity to participate in the rulemaking
process. Accordingly, we invite interested persons to submit written
comments, suggestions, or recommendations regarding the proposed
regulations. Before promulgation of final migratory game bird hunting
regulations, we will take into consideration all comments we receive.
Such 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 the proposed
rule by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. We will not accept
comments sent by email or fax or to an address not listed in ADDRESSES.
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 DATES. We will post all comments in their entirety--
including your personal identifying information--on https://www.regulations.gov. Before including your address, phone number, email
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 the 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, 5275 Leesburg
Pike, Falls Church, VA.
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
any final rules.
[[Page 47872]]
Required Determinations
Based on our most current data, we are affirming our required
determinations made in the June 14, 2018, proposed rule (83 FR 27836);
see that document for descriptions of our actions to ensure compliance
with the following statutes and Executive Orders:
National Environmental Policy Act;
Endangered Species Act;
Regulatory Flexibility Act;
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act;
Paperwork Reduction Act;
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act; and
Executive Orders 12630, 12866, 12988, 13132, 13175, 13211,
13563, and 13771.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 20
Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Transportation, Wildlife.
Authority
The rules that eventually will be promulgated for the 2019-20
hunting season are authorized under 16 U.S.C. 703-711, 712, and 742 a-
j.
Dated: September 6, 2018.
Andrea Travnicek,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary--Water and Science, Exercising the
Authority of the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
[[Page 47873]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP21SE18.226
[FR Doc. 2018-20495 Filed 9-20-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-C
