Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed 2020-21 Migratory Game Bird Hunting Regulations (Preliminary) With Requests for Indian Tribal Proposals; Notice of Meetings, 55120-55129 [2019-22151]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
55120
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 199 / Tuesday, October 15, 2019 / Proposed Rules
initially arranges with a railroad for
transportation of freight pursuant to the
rail carrier’s tariff; or (2) when a rail
carrier changes the terms of its
demurrage tariff. The modification
sought here makes three changes to the
existing collection, as follows: (1) Onetime adjustments to the Class I railroads’
billing systems to (a) include
information on demurrage invoices, (b)
to take appropriate action to ensure that
the demurrage invoices are accurate and
warranted, and (2) make an annual
adjustment to the Class I carriers’
invoicing practices to invoice the
shipper when the warehouseman and
the shipper reach agreement for the
serving Class I carrier to invoice the
shipper (estimated 60 agreements).
Total Burden Hours (annually
including all respondents): 1,329.7
hours. Consistent with the existing,
approved information collection, Board
staff estimates that: (1) Seven Class I
carriers would each take on 15 new
customers each year (105 hours); (2)
each of the seven Class I carriers would
update its demurrage tariffs annually (7
hours); (3) 677 non-Class I carriers
would each take on one new customer
a year (677 hours); and (4) each of the
non-Class I carriers would update its
demurrage tariffs every three years
(225.7 hours annualized). For the
modification to Class I carriers’
invoicing requirements, Board staff
estimates that, on average, each Class I
rail carrier would have a one-time
burden of 40 hours (280 total hours).
Amortized over three years, this onetime burden equals 93.3 hours per year.
For the modification requiring each
Class I carrier to ensure that the
demurrage charges are accurate and
warranted, Board staff estimates that, on
average, each Class I carrier would have
a one-time burden of 80 hours (560 total
hours) to establish or modify
appropriate protocols and procedures.
Amortized over three years, this onetime burden equals 186.7 hours per
year. For the modification adding a
shipper invoicing requirement when a
warehouseman and shipper have agreed
and notified the Class I carrier, Board
staff estimates that annually seven Class
I carriers would each receive 60 requests
per year for additional shipper invoices
at five minutes per invoice (35 hours).
The total hour burdens are also set
forth in the table below.
TABLE—TOTAL BURDEN HOURS
[per year]
Existing
annual
burden
(hours)
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Respondents
Existing
annual
update burden
(hours)
Estimated
one-time
burden for
additional
data
(hours)
Estimated
one-time
burden for
appropriate
protocols
(hours)
Estimated
annual burden
for invoicing
agreement
(hours)
Total yearly
burden hours
7 Class I Carriers .....................................
677 Non-Class I Carriers .........................
105
677
7
225.7
93.3
........................
186.7
........................
35
........................
427
902.7
Totals ................................................
782
232.7
93.3
186.7
35
1,329.7
Total ‘‘Non-hour Burden’’ Cost: There
are no other costs identified because
filings are submitted electronically to
the Board.
Needs and Uses: Demurrage is a
charge that railroads assess their
customers for detaining rail cars beyond
a specified amount of time. It both
compensates railroads for expenses
incurred for that rail car and serves as
a penalty for undue car detention to
promote efficiency. Demurrage is
subject to the Board’s jurisdiction under
49 U.S.C. 10702 and section 10746.
A railroad and its customers may
enter into demurrage contracts without
providing notice, but, in the absence of
such contracts, demurrage will be
governed by the railroad’s demurrage
tariff. Under 49 CFR 1333.3, a railroad’s
ability to charge demurrage pursuant to
its tariff is conditional on its having
given, prior to rail car placement, actual
notice of the demurrage tariff to the
person receiving rail cars for loading
and unloading. Once a shipper receives
a notice as to a particular tariff,
additional notices are required only
when the tariff changes materially. The
parties rely on the information in the
demurrage tariffs to avoid demurrage
disputes, and the Board uses the tariffs
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Oct 11, 2019
Jkt 250001
to adjudicate demurrage disputes that
come before the agency.
As described in more detail above in
the NPRM, the Board is amending the
rules that apply to this collection of
demurrage disclosure requirements to
require the inclusion of additional
information in the billing invoices
issued by Class I carriers, to require
Class I carriers to ensure that demurrage
charges are accurate and warranted, and
to require Class I carriers to invoice the
shipper when the warehouseman and
the shipper reach agreement for the
Class I carrier to do so. The collection
by the Board of this information, and
the agency’s use of this information,
enables the Board to meet its statutory
duties.
[FR Doc. 2019–22202 Filed 10–11–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 20
[Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2019–0004;
FF09M21200–189–FXMB1231099BPP0]
RIN 1018–BD89
Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed
2020–21 Migratory Game Bird Hunting
Regulations (Preliminary) With
Requests for Indian Tribal Proposals;
Notice of Meetings
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; availability of
supplemental information.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (hereinafter the Service or we)
proposes to establish annual hunting
regulations for certain migratory game
birds for the 2020–21 hunting season.
We annually prescribe outside limits
(frameworks) within which States may
select hunting seasons. This proposed
rule provides the regulatory schedule,
announces the Service Migratory Bird
Regulations Committee (SRC) meetings,
describes the proposed regulatory
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\15OCP1.SGM
15OCP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 199 / Tuesday, October 15, 2019 / Proposed Rules
alternatives for the 2020–21 duck
hunting seasons, and requests proposals
from Indian tribes that wish to establish
special migratory game bird hunting
regulations on Federal Indian
reservations and ceded lands. Migratory
bird hunting seasons provide
opportunities for recreation and
sustenance; aid Federal, State, and tribal
governments in the management of
migratory game birds; and permit
harvests at levels compatible with
migratory game bird population status
and habitat conditions.
DATES: Comments: You may comment
on the general harvest strategy and the
proposed regulatory alternatives for the
2020–21 season until November 15,
2019. Following subsequent Federal
Register documents, you will be given
an opportunity to submit comments on
the proposed frameworks by January 15,
2020. Tribes must submit proposals and
related comments on or before
December 1, 2019.
Meetings: The SRC will conduct a
meeting on October 8–9, 2019, to
consider and develop proposed
regulations for the 2020–21 migratory
game bird hunting seasons. Meetings on
both days are open to the public and
will commence at approximately 8:00
a.m.
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–HQ–MB–2019–
0004.
• U.S. Mail or Hand-Delivery: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–HQ–
MB–2019–0004; 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 8–9, 2019, SRC
meeting 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:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Oct 11, 2019
Jkt 250001
Process for the Annual Migratory Game
Bird Hunting Regulations
Beginning in the summer of 2015,
with the development of the 2016–17
hunting seasons, we now make
decisions for migratory bird harvest
management based on predictions
derived from long-term biological
information and established harvest
strategies. Under this 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. This proposed rule is the first
in a series of proposed and final
rulemaking documents for the
establishment of the 2020–21 hunting
seasons.
Background and Overview
Migratory game birds are those bird
species so designated in conventions
between the United States and several
foreign nations for the protection and
management of these birds. Under the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C.
703–712), the Secretary of the Interior is
authorized to determine when ‘‘hunting,
taking, capture, killing, possession, sale,
purchase, shipment, transportation,
carriage, or export of any * * * bird, or
any part, nest, or egg’’ of migratory game
birds can take place, and to adopt
regulations for this purpose. These
regulations are written after giving due
regard to ‘‘the zones of temperature and
to the distribution, abundance,
economic value, breeding habits, and
times and lines of migratory flight of
such birds’’ and are updated annually
(16 U.S.C. 704(a)). This responsibility
has been delegated to the Service as the
lead Federal agency for managing and
conserving migratory birds in the
United States. However, migratory game
bird management is a cooperative effort
of State, Tribal, and Federal
governments.
The Service develops migratory game
bird hunting regulations by establishing
the frameworks, or outside limits, for
season lengths, bag limits, and areas for
migratory game bird hunting.
Acknowledging regional differences in
hunting conditions, the Service has
administratively divided the Nation into
four Flyways for the primary purpose of
managing migratory game birds. Each
Flyway (Atlantic, Mississippi, Central,
and Pacific) has a Flyway Council, a
formal organization generally composed
of one member from each State and
Province in that Flyway. The Flyway
Councils, established through the
Association of Fish and Wildlife
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
55121
Agencies, also assist in researching and
providing migratory game bird
management information for Federal,
State, and Provincial governments, as
well as private conservation entities and
the general public.
The process for adopting migratory
game bird hunting regulations, located
in title 50 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) at part 20, is
constrained by three primary factors.
Legal and administrative considerations
dictate how long the rulemaking process
will last. Most importantly, however,
the biological cycle of migratory game
birds controls the timing of datagathering activities and thus the dates
on which these results are available for
consideration and deliberation. For the
regulatory cycle, Service biologists
gather, analyze, and interpret biological
survey data and provide this
information to all those involved in the
process through a series of published
status reports and presentations to
Flyway Councils and other interested
parties. Because the Service is required
to take abundance of migratory game
birds and other factors into
consideration, the Service undertakes a
number of surveys throughout the year
in conjunction with Service Regional
Offices, the Canadian Wildlife Service,
and State and Provincial wildlifemanagement agencies. To determine the
appropriate frameworks for each
species, we consider factors such as
population size and trend, geographical
distribution, annual breeding effort,
condition of breeding and wintering
habitat, number of hunters, and
anticipated harvest. After frameworks
are established for season lengths, bag
limits, and areas for migratory game bird
hunting, States may select season dates,
bag limits, and other regulatory options
for the hunting seasons. States may
always be more conservative in their
selections than the Federal frameworks,
but never more liberal.
Service Migratory Bird Regulations
Committee Meetings
The SRC conducted an open meeting
on April 23, 2019, to discuss
preliminary issues for the 2020–21
regulations, and will conduct another
meeting on October 8–9, 2019 to review
information on the current status of
migratory game birds and develop
2020–21 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 for information about these
meetings.
E:\FR\FM\15OCP1.SGM
15OCP1
55122
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 199 / Tuesday, October 15, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Notice of Intent To Establish Open
Seasons
This document announces our intent
to establish open hunting seasons and
daily bag and possession limits for
certain designated groups or species of
migratory game birds for 2020–21 in the
contiguous United States, Alaska,
Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin
Islands, under §§ 20.101 through 20.107,
20.109, and 20.110 of subpart K of 50
CFR part 20. For the 2020–21 migratory
game bird hunting season, we will
propose regulations for certain
designated members of the avian
families Anatidae (ducks, geese, and
swans); Columbidae (doves and
pigeons); Gruidae (cranes); Rallidae
(rails, coots, moorhens, and gallinules);
and Scolopacidae (woodcock and
snipe). We describe these proposals
under Proposed 2020–21 Migratory
Game Bird Hunting Regulations
(Preliminary) in this document. We
annually publish definitions of flyways
and management units, and a
description of the data used in and the
factors affecting the regulatory process
(see June 4, 2018, Federal Register (83
FR 25738) for the latest definitions and
descriptions).
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Regulatory Schedule for 2020–21
This document is the first in a series
of proposed, supplemental, and final
rulemaking documents 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 2020–21
regulatory cycle relating to open public
meetings and Federal Register
notifications are illustrated in the
diagram at the end of this proposed rule.
All publication dates of Federal
Register documents are target dates. All
sections of this and subsequent
documents outlining hunting
frameworks and guidelines are
organized under numbered headings.
These headings are:
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. Eastern Mallards
iv. Black Ducks
v. Canvasbacks
vi. Pintails
vii. Scaup
viii. Mottled Ducks
ix. Wood Ducks
x. Youth Hunt
xi. Mallard Management Units
xii. Other
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Oct 11, 2019
Jkt 250001
2. Sea Ducks
3. Mergansers
4. Canada Geese
A. Special Early 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. Doves
17. Alaska
18. Hawaii
19. Puerto Rico
20. Virgin Islands
21. Falconry
22. Other
contact: Tina Chouinard, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, 606 Browns Church
Road, Jackson, TN 38305; 731–432–
0981; tina_chouinard@fws.gov.
Requests for Tribal Proposals
Background
Later sections of this and subsequent
documents will refer only to numbered
items requiring your attention.
Therefore, it is important to note that we
will omit those items requiring no
attention, so remaining numbered items
will be discontinuous, making the list
appear incomplete.
The proposed regulatory alternatives
for the 2020–21 duck hunting seasons
are contained at the end of this
document. We plan to publish final
duck regulatory alternatives and
proposed season frameworks in midDecember 2019. We plan to publish
final season frameworks in late February
2020.
Review of Public Comments
This proposed rulemaking contains
the proposed regulatory alternatives for
the 2020–21 duck hunting seasons. This
proposed rulemaking also describes
other recommended changes or specific
preliminary proposals that vary from the
2019–20 regulations and issues
requiring early 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 2020–21
season. We seek additional information
and comments on this proposed rule.
Consolidation of Rulemaking
Documents
For administrative purposes, this
document consolidates the notice of our
intent to establish open migratory game
bird hunting seasons and the request for
tribal proposals with the preliminary
proposals for the annual hunting
regulations-development process. We
will publish the remaining proposed
and final rulemaking documents
separately. For inquiries on tribal
guidelines and proposals, tribes should
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Beginning with the 1985–86 hunting
season, we have employed guidelines
described in the June 4, 1985, Federal
Register (50 FR 23467) to establish
special migratory game bird hunting
regulations on Federal Indian
reservations (including off-reservation
trust lands) and ceded lands. We
developed these guidelines in response
to tribal requests for our recognition of
their reserved hunting rights, and for
some tribes, recognition of their
authority to regulate hunting by both
tribal and nontribal members
throughout their reservations. The
guidelines include possibilities for:
(1) On-reservation hunting by both
tribal and nontribal members, with
hunting by nontribal members on some
reservations to take place within Federal
frameworks, but on dates different from
those selected by the surrounding
State(s);
(2) On-reservation hunting by tribal
members only, outside of usual Federal
frameworks for season dates, season
length, and daily bag and possession
limits; and
(3) Off-reservation hunting by tribal
members on ceded lands, outside of
usual framework dates and season
length, with some added flexibility in
daily bag and possession limits.
In all cases, tribal regulations
established under the guidelines must
be consistent with the annual March 11
to August 31 closed season mandated by
the 1916 Convention Between the
United States and Great Britain (for
Canada) for the Protection of Migratory
Birds (Convention). The guidelines are
applicable to those tribes that have
reserved hunting rights on Federal
Indian reservations (including offreservation trust lands) and ceded lands.
They also may be applied to the
establishment of migratory game bird
hunting regulations for nontribal
members on all lands within the
exterior boundaries of reservations
where tribes have full wildlifemanagement authority over such
hunting, or where the tribes and affected
States otherwise have reached
agreement over hunting by nontribal
members on non-Indian lands.
Tribes usually have the authority to
regulate migratory game bird hunting by
nonmembers on Indian-owned
reservation lands, subject to our
approval. The question of jurisdiction is
E:\FR\FM\15OCP1.SGM
15OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 199 / Tuesday, October 15, 2019 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
more complex on reservations that
include lands owned by non-Indians,
especially when the surrounding States
have established or intend to establish
regulations governing migratory bird
hunting by non-Indians on these lands.
In such cases, we encourage the tribes
and States to reach agreement on
regulations that would apply throughout
the reservations. When appropriate, we
will consult with a tribe and State with
the aim of facilitating an accord. We
also will consult jointly with tribal and
State officials in the affected States
where tribes may wish to establish
special hunting regulations for tribal
members on ceded lands. It is
incumbent upon the tribe and/or the
State to request consultation as a result
of the proposal being published in the
Federal Register. We will not presume
to make a determination, without being
advised by either a tribe or a State, that
any issue is or is not worthy of formal
consultation.
One of the guidelines provides for the
continuation of tribal members’ harvest
of migratory game birds on reservations
where such harvest is a customary
practice. We do not oppose this harvest,
provided it does not take place during
the closed season required by the
Convention, and it is not so large as to
adversely affect the status of the
migratory game bird resource. Since the
inception of these guidelines, we have
reached annual agreement with tribes
for migratory game bird hunting by
tribal members on their lands or on
lands where they have reserved hunting
rights. We will continue to consult with
tribes that wish to reach a mutual
agreement on hunting regulations for
on-reservation hunting by tribal
members. Tribes should not view the
guidelines as inflexible. These
guidelines provide appropriate
opportunity to accommodate the
reserved hunting rights and
management authority of Indian tribes
while also ensuring that the migratory
game bird resource receives necessary
protection. The conservation of this
important international resource is
paramount. Use of the guidelines is not
required if a tribe wishes to observe the
hunting regulations established by the
State(s) in which the reservation is
located.
Details Needed in Tribal Proposals
Tribes that wish to use the guidelines
to establish special hunting regulations
for the 2020–21 migratory game bird
hunting season should submit a
proposal that includes: (1) The
requested migratory game bird hunting
season dates and other details regarding
the proposed regulations; (2) harvest
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Oct 11, 2019
Jkt 250001
anticipated under the proposed
regulations; and (3) tribal capabilities to
enforce migratory game bird hunting
regulations. For those situations where
it could be shown that failure to limit
tribal harvest could seriously impact the
migratory game bird resource, we also
request information on the methods
employed to monitor harvest and any
potential steps taken to limit level of
harvest. A tribe that desires the earliest
possible opening of the migratory game
bird season for nontribal members
should specify this request in its
proposal, rather than request a date that
might not be within the final Federal
frameworks. Similarly, unless a tribe
wishes to set more restrictive
regulations than Federal regulations will
permit for nontribal members, the
proposal should request the same daily
bag and possession limits and season
length for migratory game birds that
Federal regulations are likely to permit
the States in the Flyway in which the
reservation is located.
Tribal Proposal Procedures
We will publish details of tribal
proposals for public review in later
Federal Register documents. Because of
the time required for review by us and
the public, Indian tribes that desire
special migratory game bird hunting
regulations for the 2020–21 hunting
season should submit their proposals no
later than December 1, 2019. Tribes
should direct inquiries regarding the
guidelines and proposals to the person
listed above under the caption
Consolidation of Rulemaking
Documents. Tribes that request special
migratory game bird hunting regulations
for tribal members on ceded lands
should send a courtesy copy of the
proposal to officials in the affected
State(s).
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 this proposed rule
by one of the methods listed in
ADDRESSES. We will not accept
comments sent by email or fax or to an
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
55123
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
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, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls
Church, VA 22041.
For each series of proposed
rulemakings, we will establish specific
comment periods. We will consider, but
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.
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) Consideration
The programmatic document,
‘‘Second Final Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement:
Issuance of Annual Regulations
Permitting the Sport Hunting of
Migratory Birds (EIS 20130139),’’ filed
with the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) on May 24, 2013,
addresses NEPA compliance by the
Service for issuance of the annual
framework regulations for hunting of
migratory game bird species. We
published a notice of availability in the
Federal Register on May 31, 2013 (78
FR 32686), and our Record of Decision
on July 26, 2013 (78 FR 45376). We also
address NEPA compliance for waterfowl
hunting frameworks through the annual
preparation of separate environmental
assessments, the most recent being
‘‘Duck Hunting Regulations for 2019–
20,’’ with its corresponding April 2019
finding of no significant impact. In
addition, an August 1985 environmental
assessment entitled ‘‘Guidelines for
Migratory Bird Hunting Regulations on
E:\FR\FM\15OCP1.SGM
15OCP1
55124
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 199 / Tuesday, October 15, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Federal Indian Reservations and Ceded
Lands’’ is available from the address
indicated under the caption FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Endangered Species Act Consideration
Before issuance of the 2020–21
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
future supplemental proposed
rulemaking documents.
Regulatory Planning and Review
(Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)
Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 provides
that the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) will
review all significant rules. OIRA has
reviewed this rule and has determined
that this rule is significant because it
would have an annual effect of $100
million or more on the economy.
E.O. 13563 reaffirms the principles of
E.O. 12866 while calling for
improvements in the nation’s regulatory
system to promote predictability, to
reduce uncertainty, and to use the best,
most innovative, and least burdensome
tools for achieving regulatory ends. The
executive order directs agencies to
consider regulatory approaches that
reduce burdens and maintain flexibility
and freedom of choice for the public
where these approaches are relevant,
feasible, and consistent with regulatory
objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes
further that regulations must be based
on the best available science and that
the rulemaking process must allow for
public participation and an open
exchange of ideas. We have developed
this rule in a manner consistent with
these requirements.
An economic analysis was prepared
for the 2019–20 season. This analysis
was based on data from the 2011 and
2016 National Hunting and Fishing
Survey, the most recent years 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 2018–
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Oct 11, 2019
Jkt 250001
19 season, (2) issue moderate
regulations allowing more days than
those in alternative 1, and (3) issue
liberal regulations identical to the
regulations in the 2018–19 season. For
the 2019–20 season, we chose
Alternative 3, with an estimated
consumer surplus across all flyways of
$263–$347 million with a mid-point
estimate of $305 million. We also chose
alternative 3 for the 2009–10 through
2018–19 seasons. We will select
regulations for the 2020–21 season in
December. The analysis is part of the
record for this rule and is available at
https://www.regulations.gov at Docket
No. FWS–HQ–MB–2019–0004.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The annual migratory bird hunting
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 costbenefit analysis. This analysis was
revised annually from 1990 through
1995. In 1995, the Service issued a
Small Entity Flexibility Analysis
(Analysis), which was subsequently
updated in 1996, 1998, 2004, 2008,
2013, 2018, and 2019. The primary
source of information about hunter
expenditures for migratory game bird
hunting is the National Hunting and
Fishing Survey, which is generally
conducted at 5-year intervals. The 2019
Analysis is based on the 2011 and 2016
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
$1.6 billion at small businesses in 2019.
Copies of the Analysis are available
upon request from the Division of
Migratory Bird Management (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) or from
https://www.regulations.gov at Docket
No. FWS–HQ–MB–2019–0004.
Clarity of the Rule
We are required by E.O. 12866 and
12988 and by the Presidential
Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write
all rules in plain language. This means
that each rule we publish must:
(a) Be logically organized;
(b) Use the active voice to address
readers directly;
(c) Use clear language rather than
jargon;
(d) Be divided into short sections and
sentences; and
(e) Use lists and tables wherever
possible.
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
If you feel that we have not met these
requirements, send us comments by one
of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To
better help us revise the rule, your
comments should be as specific as
possible. For example, you should tell
us the numbers of the sections or
paragraphs that are unclearly written,
which sections or sentences are too
long, the sections where you feel lists or
tables would be useful, etc.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act
This proposed rule is a major rule
under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act. For the reasons outlined
above, this rule would have an annual
effect on the economy of $100 million
or more. However, because this rule
would establish hunting seasons, we do
not plan to defer the effective date
under the exemption contained in 5
U.S.C. 808(1).
Paperwork Reduction Act
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. This rule does not
contain any new collection of
information that require approval by
OMB under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
OMB has previously approved the
information collection requirements
associated with migratory bird surveys
and the procedures for establishing
annual migratory bird hunting seasons
under the following OMB control
numbers:
• 1018–0019, ‘‘North American
Woodcock Singing Ground Survey’’
(expires 6/30/2021, and in accordance
with 5 CFR 1320.10, an agency may
continue to conduct or sponsor this
collection of information while the
submission is pending at OMB).
• 1018–0023, ‘‘Migratory Bird
Surveys, 50 CFR 20.20’’ (expires 8/31/
2020). Includes Migratory Bird Harvest
Information Program, Migratory Bird
Hunter Surveys, Sandhill Crane Survey,
and Parts Collection Survey.
• 1018–0171, ‘‘Establishment of
Annual Migratory Bird Hunting
Seasons, 50 CFR part 20’’ (expires 06/
30/2021).
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
We have determined and certify, in
compliance with the requirements of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 2
U.S.C. 1502 et seq., that this proposed
rulemaking would not impose a cost of
$100 million or more in any given year
on local or State government or private
E:\FR\FM\15OCP1.SGM
15OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 199 / Tuesday, October 15, 2019 / Proposed Rules
entities. Therefore, this rule is not a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
Civil Justice Reform—Executive Order
12988
The Department, in promulgating this
proposed rule, has determined that this
proposed rule will not unduly burden
the judicial system and that it meets the
requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of E.O. 12988.
Takings Implication Assessment
In accordance with E.O. 12630, this
proposed rule, authorized by the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act, does not
have significant takings implications
and does not affect any constitutionally
protected property rights. This rule
would not result in the physical
occupancy of property, the physical
invasion of property, or the regulatory
taking of any property. In fact, this rule
would allow hunters to exercise
otherwise unavailable privileges and,
therefore, reduce restrictions on the use
of private and public property.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Energy Effects—Executive Order 13211
E.O. 13211 requires agencies to
prepare Statements of Energy Effects
when undertaking certain actions.
While this proposed rule is a significant
regulatory action under E.O. 12866, it is
not expected to adversely affect energy
supplies, distribution, or use. Therefore,
this action is not a significant energy
action and no Statement of Energy
Effects is required.
Government-to-Government
Relationship With Tribes
In accordance with the President’s
memorandum of April 29, 1994,
‘‘Government-to-Government Relations
with Native American Tribal
Governments’’ (59 FR 22951), E.O.
13175, and 512 DM 2, we have
evaluated possible effects on Federally
recognized Indian tribes and have
determined that there are no effects on
Indian trust resources. However, in this
proposed rule, we solicit proposals for
special migratory bird hunting
regulations for certain tribes on Federal
Indian reservations, off-reservation trust
lands, and ceded lands for the 2020–21
migratory bird hunting season. The
resulting proposals will be contained in
a separate proposed rule. By virtue of
these actions, we have consulted with
tribes affected by this rule.
Federalism Effects
Due to the migratory nature of certain
species of birds, the Federal
Government has been given
responsibility over these species by the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Oct 11, 2019
Jkt 250001
Migratory Bird Treaty Act. We annually
prescribe frameworks from which the
States make selections regarding the
hunting of migratory birds, and we
employ guidelines to establish special
regulations on Federal Indian
reservations and ceded lands. This
process preserves the ability of the
States and tribes to determine which
seasons meet their individual needs.
Any State or Indian tribe may be more
restrictive than the Federal frameworks
at any time. The frameworks are
developed in a cooperative process with
the States and the Flyway Councils.
This process allows States to participate
in the development of frameworks from
which they will make selections,
thereby having an influence on their
own regulations. These rules do not
have a substantial direct effect on fiscal
capacity, change the roles or
responsibilities of Federal or State
governments, or intrude on State policy
or administration. Therefore, in
accordance with E.O. 13132, these
regulations do not have significant
federalism effects and do not have
sufficient federalism implications to
warrant the preparation of a federalism
summary impact statement.
Executive Order 13771—Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3,
2017) because it is issued with respect
to routine hunting and fishing activities.
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 2020–21 hunting
season are authorized under 16 U.S.C.
703–711, 712, and 742 a–j.
Dated: October 1, 2019.
Rob Wallace,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and
Parks.
Proposed 2020–21 Migratory Game
Bird Hunting Regulations (Preliminary)
Pending current information on
populations, harvest, and habitat
conditions, and receipt of
recommendations from the four Flyway
Councils, we may defer specific
regulatory proposals. No changes from
the 2019–20 frameworks in the
Mississippi, Central, and Pacific
Flyways are being proposed at this time.
Other issues requiring early discussion,
action, or the attention of the States or
tribes are contained below:
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
55125
1. Ducks
Categories used to discuss issues
related to duck harvest management are:
(A) General Harvest Strategy, (B)
Regulatory Alternatives, (C) Zones and
Split Seasons, and (D) Special Seasons/
Species Management. Only those
categories containing substantial
recommendations are discussed below.
A. General Harvest Strategy
We propose to continue using
adaptive harvest management (AHM) to
help determine appropriate duckhunting regulations for the 2020–21
season. AHM permits sound resource
decisions in the face of uncertain
regulatory impacts and provides 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. We 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.
For additional information of AHM, see
https://www.fws.gov/birds/
management/adaptive-harvestmanagement.php.
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 2020–21 season, we
recommend continuing to use
independent optimization to determine
the optimal regulatory choice for each
mallard stock. This means that we
would develop regulations for midcontinent mallards and western
mallards independently, based upon the
breeding stock that contributes
E:\FR\FM\15OCP1.SGM
15OCP1
55126
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 199 / Tuesday, October 15, 2019 / Proposed Rules
primarily to each Flyway. We detailed
implementation of this AHM decision
framework for western and midcontinent mallards in the July 24, 2008,
Federal Register (73 FR 43290).
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Atlantic Flyway
Last year, we implemented a multistock protocol for the Atlantic Flyway.
The protocol is 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 are the same as those used
in the past (under eastern mallard
AHM), except that the mallard bag limit
is not 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 is 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
(see section D.iii. Eastern Mallards
below for further information).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Oct 11, 2019
Jkt 250001
Final 2020–21 AHM Protocol
We will detail the final AHM protocol
for the 2020–21 season in the
supplemental proposed rule, which we
will publish in late-September (see
Schedule of Biological Information
Availability, Regulations Meetings and
Federal Register Publications for the
2020–21 Seasons at the end of this
proposed rule for further information).
We will propose a specific regulatory
alternative in December for each of the
Flyways to use for their 2020–21
seasons after status information
becomes available in late August 2019.
B. Regulatory Alternatives
The basic structure of the current
regulatory alternatives for AHM was
adopted in 1997. In 2002, based upon
recommendations from the Flyway
Councils, we extended framework dates
in the ‘‘moderate’’ and ‘‘liberal’’
regulatory alternatives by changing the
opening date from the Saturday nearest
October 1 to the Saturday nearest
September 24, and by changing the
closing date from the Sunday nearest
January 20 to the last Sunday in
January. These extended dates were
made available with no associated
penalty in season length or bag limits.
Last year, we adopted a closing duck
framework date of January 31 for the
‘‘moderate’’ and ‘‘liberal’’ alternatives in
the Atlantic Flyway as part of the
Atlantic Flyway’s new multi-stock AHM
protocol (83 FR 47868; September 21,
2018). We subsequently further
extended the framework closing date to
January 31 across all four Flyways for
the 2019–20 hunting season (84 FR
16152; April 17, 2019).
More recently, the John D. Dingell, Jr.
Conservation, Management, and
Recreation Act (Act), signed into law on
March 12, 2019 (Pub. L. 116–9),
amended the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
to specify that the framework closing
date for hunting ducks, mergansers, and
coots ‘‘shall be no later than January 31
of each year.’’ The Act also states that,
with regard to these species, the
Secretary shall ‘‘adopt the
recommendation of each respective
flyway council (as defined in section
20.152 of title 50, Code of Federal
Regulations) for the Federal framework
if the Secretary determines that the
recommendation is consistent with
science-based and sustainable harvest
management.’’ Thus, as directed by the
law, we have adjusted the framework
closing date under each regulatory
alternative for all four Flyways to
January 31.
For 2020–21, we propose to utilize the
same regulatory alternatives that are in
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
effect for the 2019–20 season, with the
exceptions noted above (see table below
for specifics of the regulatory
alternatives). Alternatives are specified
for each Flyway and are designated as
‘‘RES’’ for the restrictive, ‘‘MOD’’ for the
moderate, and ‘‘LIB’’ for the liberal
alternative. We will finalize the
regulatory alternatives for each of the
Flyways for the 2020–21 seasons in
early-December 2019.
C. Zones and Split Seasons
Zones and split seasons are ‘‘special
regulations’’ designed to distribute
hunting opportunities and harvests
according to temporal, geographic, and
demographic variability in waterfowl
and other migratory game bird
populations. For ducks, States have
been allowed the option of dividing
their allotted hunting days into two (or
in some cases three) segments (splits) to
take advantage of species-specific peaks
of abundance or to satisfy hunters in
different areas who want to hunt during
the peak of waterfowl abundance in
their area. However, the split-season
option does not fully satisfy many States
who wish to provide a more equitable
distribution of harvest opportunities.
Therefore, we also have allowed the
establishment of independent seasons in
up to four zones within States for the
purpose of providing more equitable
distribution of harvest opportunity for
hunters throughout the State.
In 1978, we prepared an
environmental assessment (EA) on the
use of zones to set duck hunting
regulations. A primary tenet of the 1978
EA was that zoning would be for the
primary purpose of providing equitable
distribution of duck hunting
opportunities within a State or region
and not for the purpose of increasing
total annual waterfowl harvest in the
zoned areas. In fact, target harvest levels
were to be adjusted downward if they
exceeded traditional levels as a result of
zoning. Subsequent to the 1978 EA, we
conducted a review of the use of zones
and split seasons in 1990. In 2011, we
prepared a new EA analyzing some
specific proposed changes to the zone
and split-season guidelines. The current
guidelines were then finalized in 2011
(76 FR 53536; August 26, 2011).
Currently, every 5 years, States are
afforded the opportunity to change the
zoning and split-season configuration
within which they set their annual duck
hunting regulations. The next regularly
scheduled open season for changes to
zone and split-season configurations
will be in 2020, for use during the 2021–
25 period. For those States wishing to
change zone and split-season
configurations in time for the 2021–25
E:\FR\FM\15OCP1.SGM
15OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 199 / Tuesday, October 15, 2019 / Proposed Rules
seasons, we will need to receive new
configuration and zone descriptions by
May 1, 2020.
For the 2021–25 open season, the
guidelines for duck zone and splitseason configurations are as follows:
Guidelines for Duck Zones and Split
Seasons
The following zone and split-season
guidelines apply only for the regular
duck season:
(1) A zone is a geographic area or
portion of a State, with a contiguous
boundary, for which independent dates
may be selected for the regular duck
season.
(2) Consideration of changes for
management-unit boundaries is not
subject to the guidelines and provisions
governing the use of zones and split
seasons for ducks.
(3) Only minor (less than a county in
size) boundary changes will be allowed
for any grandfathered arrangement, and
changes are limited to the open season.
(4) Once a zone and split option is
selected during an open season, it must
remain in place for the following 5
years.
Any State may continue the
configuration used in the previous 5year period. If changes are made, the
zone and split-season configuration
must conform to one of the following
options:
(1) No more than four zones with no
splits;
(2) Split seasons (no more than three
segments) with no zones; or
(3) No more than three zones with the
option for two-way (two-segment) split
seasons in one, two, or all zones.
Grandfathered Zone and Split
Arrangements
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
When we first implemented the zone
and split guidelines in 1991, several
States had completed experiments with
zone and split arrangements different
from our original options. We offered
those States a one-time opportunity to
continue (‘‘grandfather’’) those
arrangements, with the stipulation that
only minor changes could be made to
zone boundaries. If any of those States
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Oct 11, 2019
Jkt 250001
now wish to change their zone and split
arrangement:
(1) The new arrangement must
conform to one of the three options
identified above; and
(2) The State cannot go back to the
grandfathered arrangement that it
previously had in place.
Management Units
We will continue to utilize the
specific limitations previously
established regarding the use of zones
and split seasons in special management
units, including the High Plains Mallard
Management Unit. We note that the
original justification and objectives
established for the High Plains Mallard
Management Unit provided for
additional days of hunting opportunity
at the end of the regular duck season. In
order to maintain the integrity of the
management unit, current guidelines
prohibit simultaneous zoning and/or
three-way split seasons within a
management unit and the remainder of
the State. Removal of this limitation
would allow additional proliferation of
zone and split configurations and
compromise the original objectives of
the management unit.
D. Special Seasons/Species
Management
iii. Eastern Mallards
For the Atlantic Flyway, under the
proposed multi-stock AHM protocol for
the Atlantic Flyway, the mallard bag
limit is not prescribed by the regulatory
alternative, but is instead based on a
separate assessment of the harvest
potential of eastern mallards. We will
propose a specific mallard bag limit for
the Atlantic Flyway in December.
16. Doves
In 2006 (see July 28, 2006, Federal
Register, 71 FR 43008), we approved
guidelines for the use of zones and split
seasons for doves with implementation
beginning in the 2007–08 season. While
the initial period was for 4 years (2007–
10), we further stated that, beginning in
2011, zoning would conform to a 5-year
period.
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
55127
The next open season for changes to
dove zone and split configurations will
be in 2020, for use during the 2021–25
period. For those States wishing to
change zone and split-season
configurations in time for the 2021–25
seasons, we will need to receive new
configuration and zone descriptions by
May 1, 2020.
The guidelines are as follows:
Guidelines for Dove Zones and Split
Seasons in the Eastern and Central
Mourning Dove Management Units
(1) A zone is a geographic area or
portion of a State, with a contiguous
boundary, for which independent
seasons may be selected for dove
hunting.
(2) States may select a zone and split
option during an open season. The
option must remain in place for the
following 5 years except that States may
make a one-time change and revert to
their previous zone and split
configuration in any year of the 5-year
period. Formal approval will not be
required, but States must notify the
Service before making the change.
(3) Zoning periods for dove hunting
will conform to those years used for
ducks, e.g., 2021–25.
(4) The zone and split configuration
consists of two zones with the option for
three-way (three-segment) split seasons
in one or both zones. As a grandfathered
arrangement, Texas will have three
zones with the option for two-way (twosegment) split seasons in one, two, or all
three zones.
(5) States that do not wish to zone for
dove hunting may split their seasons
into no more than three segments.
For the 2021–25 period, any State
may continue the configuration used in
2016–20. If changes are made, the zone
and split-season configuration must
conform to one of the options listed
above. If Texas uses a new configuration
for the entirety of the 5-year period, it
cannot go back to the grandfathered
arrangement that it previously had in
place.
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
E:\FR\FM\15OCP1.SGM
15OCP1
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 199 / Tuesday, October 15, 2019 / Proposed Rules
16:07 Oct 11, 2019
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\15OCP1.SGM
15OCP1
EP15OC19.002</GPH>
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
55128
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 199 / Tuesday, October 15, 2019 / Proposed Rules
55129
[FR Doc. 2019–22151 Filed 10–11–19; 8:45 am]
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Oct 11, 2019
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\15OCP1.SGM
15OCP1
EP15OC19.003</GPH>
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
BILLING CODE 4333–15–C
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 199 (Tuesday, October 15, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55120-55129]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-22151]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 20
[Docket No. FWS-HQ-MB-2019-0004; FF09M21200-189-FXMB1231099BPP0]
RIN 1018-BD89
Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed 2020-21 Migratory Game Bird
Hunting Regulations (Preliminary) With Requests for Indian Tribal
Proposals; Notice of Meetings
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; availability of supplemental information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (hereinafter the Service or
we) proposes to establish annual hunting regulations for certain
migratory game birds for the 2020-21 hunting season. We annually
prescribe outside limits (frameworks) within which States may select
hunting seasons. This proposed rule provides the regulatory schedule,
announces the Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee (SRC)
meetings, describes the proposed regulatory
[[Page 55121]]
alternatives for the 2020-21 duck hunting seasons, and requests
proposals from Indian tribes that wish to establish special migratory
game bird hunting regulations on Federal Indian reservations and ceded
lands. Migratory bird hunting seasons provide opportunities for
recreation and sustenance; aid Federal, State, and tribal governments
in the management of migratory game birds; and permit harvests at
levels compatible with migratory game bird population status and
habitat conditions.
DATES: Comments: You may comment on the general harvest strategy and
the proposed regulatory alternatives for the 2020-21 season until
November 15, 2019. Following subsequent Federal Register documents, you
will be given an opportunity to submit comments on the proposed
frameworks by January 15, 2020. Tribes must submit proposals and
related comments on or before December 1, 2019.
Meetings: The SRC will conduct a meeting on October 8-9, 2019, to
consider and develop proposed regulations for the 2020-21 migratory
game bird hunting seasons. Meetings on both days are open to the public
and will commence at approximately 8:00 a.m.
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-HQ-
MB-2019-0004.
U.S. Mail or Hand-Delivery: Public Comments Processing,
Attn: FWS-HQ-MB-2019-0004; 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 8-9, 2019, SRC meeting 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:
Process for the Annual Migratory Game Bird Hunting Regulations
Beginning in the summer of 2015, with the development of the 2016-
17 hunting seasons, we now make decisions for migratory bird harvest
management based on predictions derived from long-term biological
information and established harvest strategies. Under this 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. This proposed rule is the first in a
series of proposed and final rulemaking documents for the establishment
of the 2020-21 hunting seasons.
Background and Overview
Migratory game birds are those bird species so designated in
conventions between the United States and several foreign nations for
the protection and management of these birds. Under the Migratory Bird
Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-712), the Secretary of the Interior is
authorized to determine when ``hunting, taking, capture, killing,
possession, sale, purchase, shipment, transportation, carriage, or
export of any * * * bird, or any part, nest, or egg'' of migratory game
birds can take place, and to adopt regulations for this purpose. These
regulations are written after giving due regard to ``the zones of
temperature and to the distribution, abundance, economic value,
breeding habits, and times and lines of migratory flight of such
birds'' and are updated annually (16 U.S.C. 704(a)). This
responsibility has been delegated to the Service as the lead Federal
agency for managing and conserving migratory birds in the United
States. However, migratory game bird management is a cooperative effort
of State, Tribal, and Federal governments.
The Service develops migratory game bird hunting regulations by
establishing the frameworks, or outside limits, for season lengths, bag
limits, and areas for migratory game bird hunting. Acknowledging
regional differences in hunting conditions, the Service has
administratively divided the Nation into four Flyways for the primary
purpose of managing migratory game birds. Each Flyway (Atlantic,
Mississippi, Central, and Pacific) has a Flyway Council, a formal
organization generally composed of one member from each State and
Province in that Flyway. The Flyway Councils, established through the
Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, also assist in researching
and providing migratory game bird management information for Federal,
State, and Provincial governments, as well as private conservation
entities and the general public.
The process for adopting migratory game bird hunting regulations,
located in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at part
20, is constrained by three primary factors. Legal and administrative
considerations dictate how long the rulemaking process will last. Most
importantly, however, the biological cycle of migratory game birds
controls the timing of data-gathering activities and thus the dates on
which these results are available for consideration and deliberation.
For the regulatory cycle, Service biologists gather, analyze, and
interpret biological survey data and provide this information to all
those involved in the process through a series of published status
reports and presentations to Flyway Councils and other interested
parties. Because the Service is required to take abundance of migratory
game birds and other factors into consideration, the Service undertakes
a number of surveys throughout the year in conjunction with Service
Regional Offices, the Canadian Wildlife Service, and State and
Provincial wildlife-management agencies. To determine the appropriate
frameworks for each species, we consider factors such as population
size and trend, geographical distribution, annual breeding effort,
condition of breeding and wintering habitat, number of hunters, and
anticipated harvest. After frameworks are established for season
lengths, bag limits, and areas for migratory game bird hunting, States
may select season dates, bag limits, and other regulatory options for
the hunting seasons. States may always be more conservative in their
selections than the Federal frameworks, but never more liberal.
Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee Meetings
The SRC conducted an open meeting on April 23, 2019, to discuss
preliminary issues for the 2020-21 regulations, and will conduct
another meeting on October 8-9, 2019 to review information on the
current status of migratory game birds and develop 2020-21 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 for information about these
meetings.
[[Page 55122]]
Notice of Intent To Establish Open Seasons
This document announces our intent to establish open hunting
seasons and daily bag and possession limits for certain designated
groups or species of migratory game birds for 2020-21 in the contiguous
United States, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands,
under Sec. Sec. 20.101 through 20.107, 20.109, and 20.110 of subpart K
of 50 CFR part 20. For the 2020-21 migratory game bird hunting season,
we will propose regulations for certain designated members of the avian
families Anatidae (ducks, geese, and swans); Columbidae (doves and
pigeons); Gruidae (cranes); Rallidae (rails, coots, moorhens, and
gallinules); and Scolopacidae (woodcock and snipe). We describe these
proposals under Proposed 2020-21 Migratory Game Bird Hunting
Regulations (Preliminary) in this document. We annually publish
definitions of flyways and management units, and a description of the
data used in and the factors affecting the regulatory process (see June
4, 2018, Federal Register (83 FR 25738) for the latest definitions and
descriptions).
Regulatory Schedule for 2020-21
This document is the first in a series of proposed, supplemental,
and final rulemaking documents 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 2020-21
regulatory cycle relating to open public meetings and Federal Register
notifications are illustrated in the diagram at the end of this
proposed rule. All publication dates of Federal Register documents are
target dates. All sections of this and subsequent documents outlining
hunting frameworks and guidelines are organized under numbered
headings. These headings are:
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. Eastern Mallards
iv. Black Ducks
v. Canvasbacks
vi. Pintails
vii. Scaup
viii. Mottled Ducks
ix. Wood Ducks
x. Youth Hunt
xi. Mallard Management Units
xii. Other
2. Sea Ducks
3. Mergansers
4. Canada Geese
A. Special Early 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. Doves
17. Alaska
18. Hawaii
19. Puerto Rico
20. Virgin Islands
21. Falconry
22. Other
Later sections of this and subsequent documents will refer only to
numbered items requiring your attention. Therefore, it is important to
note that we will omit those items requiring no attention, so remaining
numbered items will be discontinuous, making the list appear
incomplete.
The proposed regulatory alternatives for the 2020-21 duck hunting
seasons are contained at the end of this document. We plan to publish
final duck regulatory alternatives and proposed season frameworks in
mid-December 2019. We plan to publish final season frameworks in late
February 2020.
Review of Public Comments
This proposed rulemaking contains the proposed regulatory
alternatives for the 2020-21 duck hunting seasons. This proposed
rulemaking also describes other recommended changes or specific
preliminary proposals that vary from the 2019-20 regulations and issues
requiring early 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 2020-21 season. We seek
additional information and comments on this proposed rule.
Consolidation of Rulemaking Documents
For administrative purposes, this document consolidates the notice
of our intent to establish open migratory game bird hunting seasons and
the request for tribal proposals with the preliminary proposals for the
annual hunting regulations-development process. We will publish the
remaining proposed and final rulemaking documents separately. For
inquiries on tribal guidelines and proposals, tribes should contact:
Tina Chouinard, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 606 Browns Church Road,
Jackson, TN 38305; 731-432-0981; [email protected].
Requests for Tribal Proposals
Background
Beginning with the 1985-86 hunting season, we have employed
guidelines described in the June 4, 1985, Federal Register (50 FR
23467) to establish special migratory game bird hunting regulations on
Federal Indian reservations (including off-reservation trust lands) and
ceded lands. We developed these guidelines in response to tribal
requests for our recognition of their reserved hunting rights, and for
some tribes, recognition of their authority to regulate hunting by both
tribal and nontribal members throughout their reservations. The
guidelines include possibilities for:
(1) On-reservation hunting by both tribal and nontribal members,
with hunting by nontribal members on some reservations to take place
within Federal frameworks, but on dates different from those selected
by the surrounding State(s);
(2) On-reservation hunting by tribal members only, outside of usual
Federal frameworks for season dates, season length, and daily bag and
possession limits; and
(3) Off-reservation hunting by tribal members on ceded lands,
outside of usual framework dates and season length, with some added
flexibility in daily bag and possession limits.
In all cases, tribal regulations established under the guidelines
must be consistent with the annual March 11 to August 31 closed season
mandated by the 1916 Convention Between the United States and Great
Britain (for Canada) for the Protection of Migratory Birds
(Convention). The guidelines are applicable to those tribes that have
reserved hunting rights on Federal Indian reservations (including off-
reservation trust lands) and ceded lands. They also may be applied to
the establishment of migratory game bird hunting regulations for
nontribal members on all lands within the exterior boundaries of
reservations where tribes have full wildlife-management authority over
such hunting, or where the tribes and affected States otherwise have
reached agreement over hunting by nontribal members on non-Indian
lands.
Tribes usually have the authority to regulate migratory game bird
hunting by nonmembers on Indian-owned reservation lands, subject to our
approval. The question of jurisdiction is
[[Page 55123]]
more complex on reservations that include lands owned by non-Indians,
especially when the surrounding States have established or intend to
establish regulations governing migratory bird hunting by non-Indians
on these lands. In such cases, we encourage the tribes and States to
reach agreement on regulations that would apply throughout the
reservations. When appropriate, we will consult with a tribe and State
with the aim of facilitating an accord. We also will consult jointly
with tribal and State officials in the affected States where tribes may
wish to establish special hunting regulations for tribal members on
ceded lands. It is incumbent upon the tribe and/or the State to request
consultation as a result of the proposal being published in the Federal
Register. We will not presume to make a determination, without being
advised by either a tribe or a State, that any issue is or is not
worthy of formal consultation.
One of the guidelines provides for the continuation of tribal
members' harvest of migratory game birds on reservations where such
harvest is a customary practice. We do not oppose this harvest,
provided it does not take place during the closed season required by
the Convention, and it is not so large as to adversely affect the
status of the migratory game bird resource. Since the inception of
these guidelines, we have reached annual agreement with tribes for
migratory game bird hunting by tribal members on their lands or on
lands where they have reserved hunting rights. We will continue to
consult with tribes that wish to reach a mutual agreement on hunting
regulations for on-reservation hunting by tribal members. Tribes should
not view the guidelines as inflexible. These guidelines provide
appropriate opportunity to accommodate the reserved hunting rights and
management authority of Indian tribes while also ensuring that the
migratory game bird resource receives necessary protection. The
conservation of this important international resource is paramount. Use
of the guidelines is not required if a tribe wishes to observe the
hunting regulations established by the State(s) in which the
reservation is located.
Details Needed in Tribal Proposals
Tribes that wish to use the guidelines to establish special hunting
regulations for the 2020-21 migratory game bird hunting season should
submit a proposal that includes: (1) The requested migratory game bird
hunting season dates and other details regarding the proposed
regulations; (2) harvest anticipated under the proposed regulations;
and (3) tribal capabilities to enforce migratory game bird hunting
regulations. For those situations where it could be shown that failure
to limit tribal harvest could seriously impact the migratory game bird
resource, we also request information on the methods employed to
monitor harvest and any potential steps taken to limit level of
harvest. A tribe that desires the earliest possible opening of the
migratory game bird season for nontribal members should specify this
request in its proposal, rather than request a date that might not be
within the final Federal frameworks. Similarly, unless a tribe wishes
to set more restrictive regulations than Federal regulations will
permit for nontribal members, the proposal should request the same
daily bag and possession limits and season length for migratory game
birds that Federal regulations are likely to permit the States in the
Flyway in which the reservation is located.
Tribal Proposal Procedures
We will publish details of tribal proposals for public review in
later Federal Register documents. Because of the time required for
review by us and the public, Indian tribes that desire special
migratory game bird hunting regulations for the 2020-21 hunting season
should submit their proposals no later than December 1, 2019. Tribes
should direct inquiries regarding the guidelines and proposals to the
person listed above under the caption Consolidation of Rulemaking
Documents. Tribes that request special migratory game bird hunting
regulations for tribal members on ceded lands should send a courtesy
copy of the proposal to officials in the affected State(s).
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 this 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 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, 5275 Leesburg
Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041.
For each series of proposed rulemakings, we will establish specific
comment periods. We will consider, but 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.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Consideration
The programmatic document, ``Second Final Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement: Issuance of Annual Regulations
Permitting the Sport Hunting of Migratory Birds (EIS 20130139),'' filed
with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on May 24, 2013,
addresses NEPA compliance by the Service for issuance of the annual
framework regulations for hunting of migratory game bird species. We
published a notice of availability in the Federal Register on May 31,
2013 (78 FR 32686), and our Record of Decision on July 26, 2013 (78 FR
45376). We also address NEPA compliance for waterfowl hunting
frameworks through the annual preparation of separate environmental
assessments, the most recent being ``Duck Hunting Regulations for 2019-
20,'' with its corresponding April 2019 finding of no significant
impact. In addition, an August 1985 environmental assessment entitled
``Guidelines for Migratory Bird Hunting Regulations on
[[Page 55124]]
Federal Indian Reservations and Ceded Lands'' is available from the
address indicated under the caption FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Endangered Species Act Consideration
Before issuance of the 2020-21 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 future supplemental proposed
rulemaking documents.
Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)
Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 provides that the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) will review all significant rules. OIRA has reviewed
this rule and has determined that this rule is significant because it
would have an annual effect of $100 million or more on the economy.
E.O. 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while calling for
improvements in the nation's regulatory system to promote
predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, most
innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends.
The executive order directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches
that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for
the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and
consistent with regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further
that regulations must be based on the best available science and that
the rulemaking process must allow for public participation and an open
exchange of ideas. We have developed this rule in a manner consistent
with these requirements.
An economic analysis was prepared for the 2019-20 season. This
analysis was based on data from the 2011 and 2016 National Hunting and
Fishing Survey, the most recent years 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 2018-19 season, (2) issue moderate
regulations allowing more days than those in alternative 1, and (3)
issue liberal regulations identical to the regulations in the 2018-19
season. For the 2019-20 season, we chose Alternative 3, with an
estimated consumer surplus across all flyways of $263-$347 million with
a mid-point estimate of $305 million. We also chose alternative 3 for
the 2009-10 through 2018-19 seasons. We will select regulations for the
2020-21 season in December. The analysis is part of the record for this
rule and is available at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-
HQ-MB-2019-0004.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The annual migratory bird hunting 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 through 1995. In 1995, the
Service issued a Small Entity Flexibility Analysis (Analysis), which
was subsequently updated in 1996, 1998, 2004, 2008, 2013, 2018, and
2019. The primary source of information about hunter expenditures for
migratory game bird hunting is the National Hunting and Fishing Survey,
which is generally conducted at 5-year intervals. The 2019 Analysis is
based on the 2011 and 2016 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
$1.6 billion at small businesses in 2019. Copies of the Analysis are
available upon request from the Division of Migratory Bird Management
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) or from https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-HQ-MB-2019-0004.
Clarity of the Rule
We are required by E.O. 12866 and 12988 and by the Presidential
Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain language. This
means that each rule we publish must:
(a) Be logically organized;
(b) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
(c) Use clear language rather than jargon;
(d) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
(e) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us
comments by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To better help us
revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as possible. For
example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections or paragraphs
that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences are too long,
the sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful, etc.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
This proposed rule is a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. For the reasons outlined
above, this rule would have an annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more. However, because this rule would establish hunting
seasons, we do not plan to defer the effective date under the exemption
contained in 5 U.S.C. 808(1).
Paperwork Reduction Act
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. This rule does not contain any new
collection of information that require approval by OMB under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). OMB has
previously approved the information collection requirements associated
with migratory bird surveys and the procedures for establishing annual
migratory bird hunting seasons under the following OMB control numbers:
1018-0019, ``North American Woodcock Singing Ground
Survey'' (expires 6/30/2021, and in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10, an
agency may continue to conduct or sponsor this collection of
information while the submission is pending at OMB).
1018-0023, ``Migratory Bird Surveys, 50 CFR 20.20''
(expires 8/31/2020). Includes Migratory Bird Harvest Information
Program, Migratory Bird Hunter Surveys, Sandhill Crane Survey, and
Parts Collection Survey.
1018-0171, ``Establishment of Annual Migratory Bird
Hunting Seasons, 50 CFR part 20'' (expires 06/30/2021).
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
We have determined and certify, in compliance with the requirements
of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502 et seq., that this
proposed rulemaking would not impose a cost of $100 million or more in
any given year on local or State government or private
[[Page 55125]]
entities. Therefore, this rule is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
Civil Justice Reform--Executive Order 12988
The Department, in promulgating this proposed rule, has determined
that this proposed rule will not unduly burden the judicial system and
that it meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of E.O.
12988.
Takings Implication Assessment
In accordance with E.O. 12630, this proposed rule, authorized by
the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, does not have significant takings
implications and does not affect any constitutionally protected
property rights. This rule would not result in the physical occupancy
of property, the physical invasion of property, or the regulatory
taking of any property. In fact, this rule would allow hunters to
exercise otherwise unavailable privileges and, therefore, reduce
restrictions on the use of private and public property.
Energy Effects--Executive Order 13211
E.O. 13211 requires agencies to prepare Statements of Energy
Effects when undertaking certain actions. While this proposed rule is a
significant regulatory action under E.O. 12866, it is not expected to
adversely affect energy supplies, distribution, or use. Therefore, this
action is not a significant energy action and no Statement of Energy
Effects is required.
Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes
In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994,
``Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal
Governments'' (59 FR 22951), E.O. 13175, and 512 DM 2, we have
evaluated possible effects on Federally recognized Indian tribes and
have determined that there are no effects on Indian trust resources.
However, in this proposed rule, we solicit proposals for special
migratory bird hunting regulations for certain tribes on Federal Indian
reservations, off-reservation trust lands, and ceded lands for the
2020-21 migratory bird hunting season. The resulting proposals will be
contained in a separate proposed rule. By virtue of these actions, we
have consulted with tribes affected by this rule.
Federalism Effects
Due to the migratory nature of certain species of birds, the
Federal Government has been given responsibility over these species by
the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. We annually prescribe frameworks from
which the States make selections regarding the hunting of migratory
birds, and we employ guidelines to establish special regulations on
Federal Indian reservations and ceded lands. This process preserves the
ability of the States and tribes to determine which seasons meet their
individual needs. Any State or Indian tribe may be more restrictive
than the Federal frameworks at any time. The frameworks are developed
in a cooperative process with the States and the Flyway Councils. This
process allows States to participate in the development of frameworks
from which they will make selections, thereby having an influence on
their own regulations. These rules do not have a substantial direct
effect on fiscal capacity, change the roles or responsibilities of
Federal or State governments, or intrude on State policy or
administration. Therefore, in accordance with E.O. 13132, these
regulations do not have significant federalism effects and do not have
sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a
federalism summary impact statement.
Executive Order 13771--Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339,
February 3, 2017) because it is issued with respect to routine hunting
and fishing activities.
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 2020-21
hunting season are authorized under 16 U.S.C. 703-711, 712, and 742 a-
j.
Dated: October 1, 2019.
Rob Wallace,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
Proposed 2020-21 Migratory Game Bird Hunting Regulations (Preliminary)
Pending current information on populations, harvest, and habitat
conditions, and receipt of recommendations from the four Flyway
Councils, we may defer specific regulatory proposals. No changes from
the 2019-20 frameworks in the Mississippi, Central, and Pacific Flyways
are being proposed at this time. Other issues requiring early
discussion, action, or the attention of the States or tribes are
contained below:
1. Ducks
Categories used to discuss issues related to duck harvest
management are: (A) General Harvest Strategy, (B) Regulatory
Alternatives, (C) Zones and Split Seasons, and (D) Special Seasons/
Species Management. Only those categories containing substantial
recommendations are discussed below.
A. General Harvest Strategy
We propose to continue using adaptive harvest management (AHM) to
help determine appropriate duck-hunting regulations for the 2020-21
season. AHM permits sound resource decisions in the face of uncertain
regulatory impacts and provides 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. We 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.
For additional information of AHM, see https://www.fws.gov/birds/management/adaptive-harvest-management.php.
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 2020-21 season, we recommend continuing 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
[[Page 55126]]
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
Last year, we implemented a multi-stock protocol for the Atlantic
Flyway. The protocol is 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 are the same as those used in the
past (under eastern mallard AHM), except that the mallard bag limit is
not 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 is 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 (see
section D.iii. Eastern Mallards below for further information).
Final 2020-21 AHM Protocol
We will detail the final AHM protocol for the 2020-21 season in the
supplemental proposed rule, which we will publish in late-September
(see Schedule of Biological Information Availability, Regulations
Meetings and Federal Register Publications for the 2020-21 Seasons at
the end of this proposed rule for further information). We will propose
a specific regulatory alternative in December for each of the Flyways
to use for their 2020-21 seasons after status information becomes
available in late August 2019.
B. Regulatory Alternatives
The basic structure of the current regulatory alternatives for AHM
was adopted in 1997. In 2002, based upon recommendations from the
Flyway Councils, we extended framework dates in the ``moderate'' and
``liberal'' regulatory alternatives by changing the opening date from
the Saturday nearest October 1 to the Saturday nearest September 24,
and by changing the closing date from the Sunday nearest January 20 to
the last Sunday in January. These extended dates were made available
with no associated penalty in season length or bag limits. Last year,
we adopted a closing duck framework date of January 31 for the
``moderate'' and ``liberal'' alternatives in the Atlantic Flyway as
part of the Atlantic Flyway's new multi-stock AHM protocol (83 FR
47868; September 21, 2018). We subsequently further extended the
framework closing date to January 31 across all four Flyways for the
2019-20 hunting season (84 FR 16152; April 17, 2019).
More recently, the John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation, Management,
and Recreation Act (Act), signed into law on March 12, 2019 (Pub. L.
116-9), amended the Migratory Bird Treaty Act to specify that the
framework closing date for hunting ducks, mergansers, and coots ``shall
be no later than January 31 of each year.'' The Act also states that,
with regard to these species, the Secretary shall ``adopt the
recommendation of each respective flyway council (as defined in section
20.152 of title 50, Code of Federal Regulations) for the Federal
framework if the Secretary determines that the recommendation is
consistent with science-based and sustainable harvest management.''
Thus, as directed by the law, we have adjusted the framework closing
date under each regulatory alternative for all four Flyways to January
31.
For 2020-21, we propose to utilize the same regulatory alternatives
that are in effect for the 2019-20 season, with the exceptions noted
above (see table below for specifics of the regulatory alternatives).
Alternatives are specified for each Flyway and are designated as
``RES'' for the restrictive, ``MOD'' for the moderate, and ``LIB'' for
the liberal alternative. We will finalize the regulatory alternatives
for each of the Flyways for the 2020-21 seasons in early-December 2019.
C. Zones and Split Seasons
Zones and split seasons are ``special regulations'' designed to
distribute hunting opportunities and harvests according to temporal,
geographic, and demographic variability in waterfowl and other
migratory game bird populations. For ducks, States have been allowed
the option of dividing their allotted hunting days into two (or in some
cases three) segments (splits) to take advantage of species-specific
peaks of abundance or to satisfy hunters in different areas who want to
hunt during the peak of waterfowl abundance in their area. However, the
split-season option does not fully satisfy many States who wish to
provide a more equitable distribution of harvest opportunities.
Therefore, we also have allowed the establishment of independent
seasons in up to four zones within States for the purpose of providing
more equitable distribution of harvest opportunity for hunters
throughout the State.
In 1978, we prepared an environmental assessment (EA) on the use of
zones to set duck hunting regulations. A primary tenet of the 1978 EA
was that zoning would be for the primary purpose of providing equitable
distribution of duck hunting opportunities within a State or region and
not for the purpose of increasing total annual waterfowl harvest in the
zoned areas. In fact, target harvest levels were to be adjusted
downward if they exceeded traditional levels as a result of zoning.
Subsequent to the 1978 EA, we conducted a review of the use of zones
and split seasons in 1990. In 2011, we prepared a new EA analyzing some
specific proposed changes to the zone and split-season guidelines. The
current guidelines were then finalized in 2011 (76 FR 53536; August 26,
2011).
Currently, every 5 years, States are afforded the opportunity to
change the zoning and split-season configuration within which they set
their annual duck hunting regulations. The next regularly scheduled
open season for changes to zone and split-season configurations will be
in 2020, for use during the 2021-25 period. For those States wishing to
change zone and split-season configurations in time for the 2021-25
[[Page 55127]]
seasons, we will need to receive new configuration and zone
descriptions by May 1, 2020.
For the 2021-25 open season, the guidelines for duck zone and
split-season configurations are as follows:
Guidelines for Duck Zones and Split Seasons
The following zone and split-season guidelines apply only for the
regular duck season:
(1) A zone is a geographic area or portion of a State, with a
contiguous boundary, for which independent dates may be selected for
the regular duck season.
(2) Consideration of changes for management-unit boundaries is not
subject to the guidelines and provisions governing the use of zones and
split seasons for ducks.
(3) Only minor (less than a county in size) boundary changes will
be allowed for any grandfathered arrangement, and changes are limited
to the open season.
(4) Once a zone and split option is selected during an open season,
it must remain in place for the following 5 years.
Any State may continue the configuration used in the previous 5-
year period. If changes are made, the zone and split-season
configuration must conform to one of the following options:
(1) No more than four zones with no splits;
(2) Split seasons (no more than three segments) with no zones; or
(3) No more than three zones with the option for two-way (two-
segment) split seasons in one, two, or all zones.
Grandfathered Zone and Split Arrangements
When we first implemented the zone and split guidelines in 1991,
several States had completed experiments with zone and split
arrangements different from our original options. We offered those
States a one-time opportunity to continue (``grandfather'') those
arrangements, with the stipulation that only minor changes could be
made to zone boundaries. If any of those States now wish to change
their zone and split arrangement:
(1) The new arrangement must conform to one of the three options
identified above; and
(2) The State cannot go back to the grandfathered arrangement that
it previously had in place.
Management Units
We will continue to utilize the specific limitations previously
established regarding the use of zones and split seasons in special
management units, including the High Plains Mallard Management Unit. We
note that the original justification and objectives established for the
High Plains Mallard Management Unit provided for additional days of
hunting opportunity at the end of the regular duck season. In order to
maintain the integrity of the management unit, current guidelines
prohibit simultaneous zoning and/or three-way split seasons within a
management unit and the remainder of the State. Removal of this
limitation would allow additional proliferation of zone and split
configurations and compromise the original objectives of the management
unit.
D. Special Seasons/Species Management
iii. Eastern Mallards
For the Atlantic Flyway, under the proposed multi-stock AHM
protocol for the Atlantic Flyway, the mallard bag limit is not
prescribed by the regulatory alternative, but is instead based on a
separate assessment of the harvest potential of eastern mallards. We
will propose a specific mallard bag limit for the Atlantic Flyway in
December.
16. Doves
In 2006 (see July 28, 2006, Federal Register, 71 FR 43008), we
approved guidelines for the use of zones and split seasons for doves
with implementation beginning in the 2007-08 season. While the initial
period was for 4 years (2007-10), we further stated that, beginning in
2011, zoning would conform to a 5-year period.
The next open season for changes to dove zone and split
configurations will be in 2020, for use during the 2021-25 period. For
those States wishing to change zone and split-season configurations in
time for the 2021-25 seasons, we will need to receive new configuration
and zone descriptions by May 1, 2020.
The guidelines are as follows:
Guidelines for Dove Zones and Split Seasons in the Eastern and Central
Mourning Dove Management Units
(1) A zone is a geographic area or portion of a State, with a
contiguous boundary, for which independent seasons may be selected for
dove hunting.
(2) States may select a zone and split option during an open
season. The option must remain in place for the following 5 years
except that States may make a one-time change and revert to their
previous zone and split configuration in any year of the 5-year period.
Formal approval will not be required, but States must notify the
Service before making the change.
(3) Zoning periods for dove hunting will conform to those years
used for ducks, e.g., 2021-25.
(4) The zone and split configuration consists of two zones with the
option for three-way (three-segment) split seasons in one or both
zones. As a grandfathered arrangement, Texas will have three zones with
the option for two-way (two-segment) split seasons in one, two, or all
three zones.
(5) States that do not wish to zone for dove hunting may split
their seasons into no more than three segments.
For the 2021-25 period, any State may continue the configuration
used in 2016-20. If changes are made, the zone and split-season
configuration must conform to one of the options listed above. If Texas
uses a new configuration for the entirety of the 5-year period, it
cannot go back to the grandfathered arrangement that it previously had
in place.
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
[[Page 55128]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP15OC19.002
[[Page 55129]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP15OC19.003
[FR Doc. 2019-22151 Filed 10-11-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-C
