[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 57 (Friday, March 24, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15642-15648]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7304]




[[Page 15641]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part IV





Department of the Interior





_______________________________________________________________________



Fish and Wildlife Service



_______________________________________________________________________



50 CFR Part 20



Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 1995 / 
Proposed Rules  
=======================================================================
----------------------------------------------------------------------- 
[[Page 15642]] 


DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 20

RIN 1018-AC79


Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed 1995-1996 Migratory Game Bird 
Hunting Regulations (Preliminary) With Requests for Indian Tribal 
Proposals

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (hereinafter the Service) 
proposes to establish annual hunting regulations for certain migratory 
game birds. The Service also requests proposals from Indian tribes that 
wish to establish special migratory bird hunting regulations. These 
regulations will permit the taking of the designated species during the 
1995-96 season. The Service annually prescribes outside limits 
(frameworks) within which States may select hunting seasons. The 
Service has also employed guidelines to establish special migratory 
bird hunting regulations on Federal Indian reservations and ceded 
lands. These seasons provide hunting opportunities for recreation and 
sustenance; aid Federal, State, and tribal governments in the 
management of migratory game birds; and are designed to permit harvests 
at levels compatible with migratory bird population and habitat 
conditions.

DATES: Tribal proposals and related comments should be submitted by 
June 2, 1995. The comment period for proposed early-season frameworks 
will end on July 21, 1995; and for proposed late-season frameworks on 
September 4, 1995. The public hearing for early-season frameworks will 
be held on June 22, 1995, at 9 a.m. The public hearing for late-season 
frameworks will be held on August 3, 1995, at 9 a.m.

ADDRESSES: Both public hearings will be held in the Auditorium, 
Department of the Interior Building, 1849 C Street NW., Washington, DC. 
Written comments on the proposals and notice of intention to testify at 
either hearing may be mailed to the Chief, Office of Migratory Bird 
Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, 
ms 634--ARLSQ, 1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20240. Comments 
received will be available for public inspection during normal business 
hours in room 634, Arlington Square Building, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, 
Arlington, Virginia.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on tribal 
proposals contact Keith A. Morehouse, and for all other issues 
regarding annual migratory bird hunting regulations contact Ron W. 
Kokel. Both Dr. Morehouse and Mr. Kokel may be contacted at: Office of 
Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department 
of the Interior, ms 634--ARLSQ, 1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 
20240 (703) 358-1714.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For administrative purposes, this document 
consolidates the notice of intent and request for tribal proposals with 
the preliminary proposals for the annual regulations-development 
process. The remaining proposed and final rulemaking documents will be 
published separately. For inquiries on tribal guidelines and proposals, 
please contact the following personnel.

--Region 1 - Brad Bortner, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 911 N.E. 
11th Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97232-4181; (503) 231-6164.
--Region 2 - Jeff Haskins, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 
1306, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103; (505) 766-8048.
--Region 3 - Steve Wilds, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Federal 
Building, One Federal Drive, Fort Snelling, Minnesota 55111-4056; (612) 
725-3313.
--Region 4 - Frank Bowers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1875 Century 
Boulevard, Room 324, Atlanta, Georgia 30345; (404) 679-4000.
--Region 5 - George Haas, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 300 Westgate 
Center Drive, Hadley, Massachusetts 01035-9589; (413) 253-8576.
--Region 6 - John Cornely, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 
25486, Denver Federal Center, Denver, Colorado 80225; (303) 236-8676.
--Region 7 - Robin West, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1011 East 
Tudor Road, Anchorage, Alaska 99503; (907) 786-3423.

Notice of Intent To Establish Open Seasons

    This notice announces the intention of the Director, U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, to establish open hunting seasons and daily bag and 
possession limits for certain designated groups or species of migratory 
game birds for 1995-1996 in the contiguous United States, Alaska, 
Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands, under Secs. 20.101 through 
20.107, 20.109, and 20.110 of subpart K of 50 CFR part 20.
    ``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. All other birds 
designated as migratory (under 10.13 of Subpart B of 50 CFR Part 10) in 
the aforementioned conventions may not be hunted. For the 1995-96 
hunting season, regulations will be proposed 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). These proposals are described under Proposed 1995-96 Migratory 
Game Bird Hunting Regulations (Preliminary) in this document. 
Definitions of waterfowl flyways and mourning dove management units, as 
well as a description of the data used in and the factors affecting the 
regulatory process, were published in the March 14, 1990, Federal 
Register (55 FR 9618).

Regulatory Schedule for 1995-1996

    This is the first in a series of proposed and final rulemaking 
documents for migratory game bird hunting regulations. Proposals 
relating to the harvest of migratory game birds that may be initiated 
after publication of this proposed rulemaking will be made available 
for public review in supplemental proposed rulemakings to be published 
in the Federal Register. Also, additional supplemental proposals will 
be published for public comment in the Federal Register as population, 
habitat, harvest, and other information become available.
    Because of the late dates when certain portions of these data 
become available, it is anticipated that comment periods on some 
proposals will necessarily be abbreviated. Special circumstances that 
limit the amount of time which the Service can allow for public comment 
are involved in the establishment of these regulations. Specifically, 
two considerations compress the time in which the rulemaking process 
must operate: the need, on one hand, to establish final rules at a time 
early enough in the summer to allow resource agencies to select and 
publish season dates and bag limits prior to the hunting seasons and, 
on the other hand, the lack of current data on the status of most 
migratory game birds until later in the summer.
    Because the process is strongly influenced by the times when 
information is available for consideration, the overall regulations 
process is divided into two segments. Early seasons are those seasons 
that generally open prior to October 1, and [[Page 15643]] include 
seasons in Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands. Late 
seasons are those seasons opening in the remainder of the United States 
about October 1 and later, and include most of the waterfowl seasons.
    Major steps in the 1995-1996 regulatory cycle relating to public 
hearings and Federal Register notifications are illustrated in the 
accompanying diagram. Dates shown relative to publication of Federal 
Register documents are target dates.
    Sections of this and subsequent documents which outline hunting 
frameworks and guidelines are organized under numbered headings. These 
headings are:
1. Ducks
2. Sea Ducks
3. Mergansers
4. Canada Geese
5. White-fronted Geese
6. Brant
7. Snow and Ross's (Light) Geese
8. Tundra Swans
9. Sandhill Cranes
10. Coots
11. Moorhens and Gallinules
12. Rails
13. Snipe
14. Woodcock
15. Band-tailed Pigeons
16. Mourning Doves
17. White-winged and White-tipped Doves
18. Alaska
19. Hawaii
20. Puerto Rico
21. Virgin Islands
22. Falconry
23. Other
    Later sections of this and subsequent documents will refer only to 
numbered items requiring attention. Therefore, items requiring no 
attention will be omitted and the remaining numbered items will be 
discontinuous and appear incomplete.

Public Hearings

    Two public hearings pertaining to 1995-1996 migratory game bird 
hunting regulations are scheduled. Both hearings will be conducted in 
accordance with 455 DM 1 of the Departmental Manual. On June 22, a 
public hearing will be held at 9 a.m. in the Auditorium of the 
Department of the Interior Building, 1849 C Street NW., Washington, DC. 
This hearing is for the purpose of reviewing the status of migratory 
shore and upland game birds. Proposed hunting regulations will be 
discussed for these species plus regulations for migratory game birds 
in Alaska, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands; special September 
waterfowl seasons in designated States; special sea duck seasons in the 
Atlantic Flyway, and extended falconry seasons. On August 3, a public 
hearing will be held at 9 a.m. in the Auditorium of the Department of 
the Interior Building, address above. This hearing is for the purpose 
of reviewing the status and proposed regulations for waterfowl not 
previously discussed at the June 22 public hearing. The public is 
invited to participate in both hearings. Persons wishing to make a 
statement at these hearings should write to the address indicated under 
the caption ADDRESSES.

Requests for Tribal Proposals

Background

    Beginning with the 1985-86 hunting season, the Service has employed 
guidelines described in the June 4, 1985, Federal Register (50 FR 
23467) to establish special migratory bird hunting regulations on 
Federal Indian reservations (including off-reservation trust lands) and 
ceded lands. The guidelines were developed in response to tribal 
requests for Service 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 and length, and for 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, the regulations established under the guidelines would have to 
be consistent with the annual March 10 to September 1 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 capable of application to those tribes 
that have reserved hunting rights on Federal Indian reservations 
(including off-reservation trust lands) and ceded lands. They also 
apply to the establishment of migratory 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 bird 
hunting by nonmembers on Indian-owned reservation lands, subject to 
Service approval. The question of jurisdiction is more complex on 
reservations that include lands owned by non-Indians, especially when 
the surrounding States have established or intend to establish 
regulations governing hunting by non-Indians on these lands. In such 
cases, the Service encourages the tribes and States to reach agreement 
on regulations that would apply throughout the reservations. When 
appropriate, the Service will consult with a tribe and State with the 
aim of facilitating an accord. The Service 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. As explained in previous rulemaking documents, it is 
incumbent upon the tribe and/or the State to put forward a request for 
consultation as a result of the proposal being published in the Federal 
Register. The Service will not presume to make a determination, without 
being advised by a tribe or a State, that any issue is/is not worthy of 
formal consultation.
    One of the guidelines provides for the continuation of harvest of 
migratory game birds by tribal members on reservations where it is a 
customary practice. The Service does 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 bird resource. For several years, the Service has reached 
annual agreement with tribes (for example, in Minnesota, the Mille Lacs 
Band of Chippewa Indians) for hunting by tribal members on their lands 
or on lands where they have reserved hunting rights. The Service will 
continue to consult with tribes that wish to reach a mutual agreement 
on hunting regulations for on-reservation hunting by tribal members.
    The guidelines should not be viewed as inflexible. Nevertheless, 
the Service believes that they provide appropriate opportunity to 
accommodate the reserved hunting rights and management authority of 
Indian tribes while ensuring that the migratory 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.

[[Page 15644]] Details Needed in Tribal Proposals

    Tribes that wish to use the guidelines to establish special hunting 
regulations for the 1995-96 hunting season must submit a proposal that 
includes: (1) the requested hunting season dates and other details 
regarding regulations to be observed; (2) harvest anticipated under the 
requested regulations; (3) methods that will be employed to measure or 
monitor harvest (mail-questionnaire survey, bag checks, etc.); (4) 
steps that will be taken to limit level of harvest, where it could be 
shown that failure to limit such harvest would seriously impact the 
migratory bird resource; and (5) tribal capabilities to establish and 
enforce migratory bird hunting regulations.
    A tribe that desires the earliest possible opening of the waterfowl 
season should specify this in the 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, the proposal should request the same daily bag 
and possession limits and season length for ducks and geese that 
Federal regulations are likely to permit the States in the Flyway in 
which the reservation is located.

Tribal Proposal Procedures

    Pertinent details in proposals received from tribes will be 
published for public review in later Federal Register documents. 
Because of the time required for Service and public review, Indian 
tribes that desire special migratory bird hunting regulations for the 
1995-96 hunting season should submit their proposals as soon as 
possible, but no later than June 2, 1995. Tribal inquiries regarding 
the guidelines and proposals should be directed to the appropriate 
Service Regional Office listed under the caption Supplementary 
Information. Tribes that request special 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 Solicited

    The policy of the Department of the Interior is, whenever 
practicable, to afford the public an opportunity to participate in the 
rulemaking process. Accordingly, interested persons are invited to 
submit written comments, suggestions, or recommendations regarding the 
proposed regulations. Promulgation of final migratory game bird hunting 
regulations will take into consideration all comments received by the 
Service. Such comments, and any additional information received, may 
lead to final regulations that differ from these proposals. Interested 
persons are invited to participate in this rulemaking by submitting 
written comments to the address indicated under the caption ADDRESSES.
    Comments received on the proposed annual regulations will be 
available for public inspection during normal business hours at the 
Service's office in room 634, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, 
Virginia. Specific comment periods will be established for each series 
of proposed rulemakings. All relevant comments will be accepted through 
the closing date of the comment period on the particular proposal under 
consideration. The Service will consider, but possibly may not respond 
in detail to, each comment. As in the past, the Service will summarize 
all comments received during the comment period and respond to them 
after the closing date.

Flyway Council Meetings

    Departmental representatives will be present at the following 
winter meetings of the various Flyway Councils:

    DATE: March 25, 1995
--National Waterfowl Council, 3:30 p.m.

    DATE: March 26, 1995
--Atlantic Flyway Council, 9:00 a.m.
--Mississippi Flyway Council, 8:00 a.m.
--Central Flyway Council, 8:00 a.m.
--Pacific Flyway Council, 10:00 a.m.
    The Council meetings will be held at the Minneapolis Hilton and 
Towers, Minneapolis, Minnesota.

NEPA Consideration

    NEPA considerations are covered by the programmatic document, 
``Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement: Issuance of Annual 
Regulations Permitting the Sport Hunting of Migratory Birds (FSES 88-
14)'', filed with the Environmental Protection Agency on June 9, 1988. 
Notice of Availability was published in the Federal Register on June 
16, 1988 (53 FR 22582). The Service's Record of Decision was published 
on August 18, 1988 (53 FR 31341). In addition, an August 1985 
environmental assessment entitled ``Guidelines for Migratory Bird 
Hunting Regulations on Federal Indian Reservations and Ceded Lands'' is 
available from the Service at the address indicated under the caption 
ADDRESSES.

Endangered Species Act Consideration

    Prior to issuance of the 1995-96 migratory game bird hunting 
regulations, consideration will be given to 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 this Act may cause changes to be made to proposals in this 
and future supplemental proposed rulemaking documents.

Regulatory Flexibility Act and the Paperwork Reduction Act

    This document was reviewed under Executive Order 12866.
    These regulations have a significant economic impact on substantial 
numbers of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 
U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Therefore, in accordance with Office of Management 
and Budget instructions, a Final Regulatory Impact Analysis (FRIA) was 
prepared in 1981 and revised in 1990. Although a FRIA is no longer 
required, the economic analysis contained in the FRIA has been reviewed 
and the Service has determined that it meets the requirements of 
Executive Order 12866. This analysis was updated for 1995. The FRIA 
update included waterfowl hunter and harvest information from the 1993-
94 season. The summary of the 1995 update follows:
    ``New information which can be compared to that appearing in the 
1990 Final Regulatory Impact Analysis (FRIA) includes estimates of the 
1993 fall flight of ducks from surveyed areas, and hunter activity and 
harvest information from the 1993-94 hunting season. Decreased 
production in prairie Canada and increased production from the 
northcentral U.S. resulted in a total 1993 fall flight of ducks similar 
(-5 percent) to that predicted in 1992. Because the status of ducks has 
not yet fully recovered from the drought of the 1980's, hunting 
regulations were developed that maintained the reduced hunting 
opportunity established in the 1988-89 season. There were no 
significant changes in hunter activity between the 1992-93 and the 
1993-94 seasons. Hunter numbers decreased by 1 percent and waterfowl 
hunters spent an average of 3 percent more days hunting, resulting in a 
2 percent increase in the total number of hunting days. Many 
nonregulatory factors, however, influence hunter participation. There 
was essentially no change in the total duck harvest between the 1992-93 
and the 1993-94 seasons.''
    Copies of the updated analysis are available upon request from the 
Office [[Page 15645]] of Migratory Bird Management. The address is 
indicated under the caption ADDRESSES.
    These regulations contain no information collections subject to 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review under the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). However, the Service 
does utilize information acquired through other various information 
collections in the formulation of these regulations. These information 
collection requirements have been approved by OMB and assigned 
clearance numbers 1018-0005, 1018-0006, 1018-0008, 1018-0009, 1018-
0010, 1018-0015, 1018-0019, and 1018-0023.

Authorship

    The primary authors of this proposed rule are Keith A. Morehouse 
and Ron W. Kokel, Office of Migratory Bird Management, (703) 358-1714.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 20

    Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Transportation, Wildlife.
    The rules that eventually will be promulgated for the 1995-96 
hunting season are authorized under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (July 
3, 1918), as amended, (16 U.S.C. 703-711); the Fish and Wildlife 
Improvement Act of 1978 (November 8, 1978), as amended, (16 U.S.C. 
712); and the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 (August 8, 1956), as 
amended, (16 U.S.C. 742 a-d and e-j).

    Dated: March 10, 1995.
George T. Frampton, Jr.,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.

Proposed 1995-1996 Migratory Game Bird Hunting Regulations 
(Preliminary)

    Pending current information on populations, harvest, and habitat 
conditions, and receipt of recommendations from the four Flyway 
Councils; specific framework proposals (including opening and closing 
dates, seasons lengths, and bag limits) may be deferred. Unless 
otherwise specified, no change from the final 1994-95 frameworks of 
August 17 and September 27, 1994, (59 FR 42474 and 49304) is proposed. 
Specific preliminary proposals that vary from the 1994-95 frameworks 
and issues requiring early discussion, action, or the attention of the 
States or tribes are contained below:

1. Ducks

A. General Harvest Strategy

    Despite the large volume of information available on hunter 
activity, duck harvest levels, and population status, the annual 
process of setting duck hunting regulations has often been 
characterized by a lack of consensus among managers on an appropriate 
harvest strategy. The Service believes there are three fundamental 
reasons for the annual debate over setting duck hunting regulations: 
(1) harvest-management objectives have not always been clearly stated 
or agreed upon, (2) a large number of regulatory options has hindered 
our assessment of their effects; and (3) management of an 
international, migratory resource is difficult and the complex 
relationship between harvest and population status could be more fully 
understood. To address these difficulties, the Service is developing a 
more formal and objective decision-making process. This process 
requires clear identification of harvest-management objectives, a 
limited number of regulatory options, and alternative, yet credible, 
hypotheses regarding the influence of harvest on duck populations. 
Using these elements, a harvest strategy can be developed to help 
managers better understand the effects of hunting, while also providing 
maximum harvest opportunities consistent with long-term resource 
conservation goals. The Service proposes to implement some aspects of 
this process for the 1995-96 hunting season, with broader 
implementation to occur over the next few years.
    This year, as part of the implementation process, the Service 
proposes a duck harvest-management objective that balances hunting 
opportunities with the desire to achieve waterfowl population goals 
identified in the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (hereinafter 
the Plan). Under this harvest-management objective, the relative 
importance of hunting opportunity increases as populations approach the 
goals in the Plan (e.g. 8.1 million mallards). Thus, hunting 
opportunity would be maximized when the population is at or above 
goals. Additionally, while the Service believes that the Plan's 
population goals would tend to exert a conservative influence on 
overall duck harvest management, other factors, such as habitat, also 
need to be considered.
    For the 1995-96 season, the Service proposes that three regulatory 
options be considered: restrictive, moderate, or liberal seasons. Each 
regulatory option or ``package'' would contain Flyway-specific season 
lengths, bag limits, and framework opening and closing dates, mutually 
agreed upon by the Service and Flyway Councils. Public comment would 
also be solicited. Several reasons exist for considering discrete 
regulatory ``packages.'' First, the Service believes that regulatory 
changes should be of sufficient magnitude to cause measurable changes 
in duck harvest rates. Minor changes (i.e., ``tinkering'') in 
regulations that have little or no consequential overall impact on 
waterfowl resources and harvest can confuse both hunters and the 
public. Second, waterfowl managers must have adequate time to evaluate 
proposed regulatory options. This evaluation involves a determination 
of expected duck harvest rates and resource impacts. Frequently, 
adequate time for a thorough evaluation is not available when new 
regulatory options are introduced late in the regulations-setting 
process. Introducing prescriptive regulatory options or packages early 
in the regulations-setting process allows managers to carefully and 
thoroughly evaluate the expected resource impacts.
    An equally important component of the regulatory packages is 
guidelines for their use. Flyway Councils and waterfowl managers must 
know when, and under what conditions, to use each regulatory package. 
These guidelines are currently being developed and will be proposed by 
the Service and made available for public comment. The guidelines will 
specify the particular regulatory package appropriate for various 
combinations of duck population size and wetland conditions on the 
breeding grounds. For example, liberal hunting regulations would be 
proposed when population levels were high (relative to Plan goals), 
breeding-habitat conditions were exceptionally good, or both. The 
Service believes it is important that these guidelines be consistent 
with the goal of maximum sustainable hunting opportunities and the 
desire to achieve population levels specified in the Plan.
    In setting annual hunting regulations for ducks, the Service 
considers not only biological, but sociological, recreational, and 
economic impacts. The proposed process described above is intended to 
improve our understanding of the biological impacts of hunting by 
making more efficient use of harvest and population data from current 
waterfowl monitoring programs, while simultaneously pursuing 
traditional harvest and population objectives. The Service will 
continue to rely on the established process of public input for 
considering non-biological impacts. [[Page 15646]] 
    Specific details of this year's proposed regulatory ``packages'' 
for each Flyway, guidelines for the use of these regulatory packages, 
and a general description of the harvest management objective and the 
alternative hypotheses of duck population dynamics that were considered 
in this proposed process will be available for public comment on March 
24, 1995, by writing to the address under the caption ADDRESSES. 
Additional information regarding specific population goals identified 
in the North American Waterfowl Management Plan will be available as 
well at the address provided above.

F. Zones and Splits

    In 1990, the Service determined that the use of zones and split 
seasons was an acceptable means by which States could redistribute 
harvest opportunities and established a long-term strategy for the use 
of zones and split-season options for duck seasons (55 FR 38901-38902). 
This long-term strategy contained guidelines that limited selection of 
zone/split options available to States to 5-year intervals. The 1995-96 
season will be the final year of the 5-year assessment period and the 
Service reminds those States that made changes during the last open 
season in 1990 that a review of pertinent data (e.g. estimates of 
harvest, hunter numbers and success) will be required at the end of 
this year's hunting season. This review does not have to be the result 
of a rigorous experimental design, but nonetheless should assist the 
Service in ascertaining whether major changes occurred as a result of 
zone/split regulations. As a matter of information for preparation of 
proposals for 1996-97, the Service does not anticipate any changes in 
the existing guidelines governing zone and split options for the 
upcoming open season.
    Temporary Zone in the Southern San Joaquin Valley of California. In 
1994, the Service allowed the State of California to continue this zone 
on a temporary basis. The Service acknowledges that the Southern San 
Joaquin Valley Zone appears to provide economic incentives for 
maintaining privately-managed wetlands, especially during recent years 
when season lengths have been relatively short. Accordingly, the 
Service will consider allowing this zone to continue on a temporary 
basis during the final year of the 5-year moratorium on zone changes 
pending review of harvest and hunter participation information.

G. Special Seasons/Species Management

i. Canvasback Management
    In 1994, the Service re-opened the hunting season on canvasbacks. 
Based on population levels, expected production, and projected harvest 
estimates, the Service believed that a season in all Flyways with a 1-
bird daily bag limit was warranted. The Service is aware of the high 
harvest potential for this species and will evaluate last season's 
canvasback harvest. For this year, the Service will defer a decision on 
canvasback hunting until the 1994-95 harvest and 1995 spring population 
status information are available. The Service proposes no change in the 
process employed for deciding on regulations governing the harvest of 
canvasbacks.

ii. September Teal Seasons
    In 1990, the Service established a strategy for the use of shooting 
hours which stated that shooting hours would begin at sunrise unless 
States could demonstrate that the impact of presunrise shooting hours 
on nontarget duck species was negligible. During the 1993-94 teal 
seasons, several Mississippi and Central Flyway States conducted 
evaluations of shooting hours for teal seasons. In 1994, the Service 
allowed those States in the Mississippi and Central Flyways that had 
conducted evaluations of presunrise shooting hours for teal to begin 
shooting hours at one-half hour before sunrise, since the evaluations 
demonstrated that the attempted harvest of non-target species was no 
different between pre- and post-sunrise periods in those States. The 
Service notes, however, that final reports of the evaluations are still 
needed from the Mississippi and Central Flyway States and believes that 
comprehensive final reports are necessary for completion of the 
evaluations. The Service has not yet received these reports and 
requests that they be submitted prior to the June regulations meetings.

iii. September Teal/Wood Duck Seasons
    Since these seasons were last reviewed in the early 1980s, the 
Service requests that Florida, Kentucky, and Tennessee provide an 
update of recovery and survival rates, harvest estimates, and 
derivations of banded birds harvested during these seasons. Preferably, 
these reports should be submitted prior to this summer's Flyway 
meetings. The Service will make a full assessment of these seasons 
pending the completion of the cooperative Wood Duck Initiative final 
report due in 1996.

4. Canada Geese

A. Special Seasons

    The Service is currently reviewing the existing procedures for 
establishing and evaluating special Canada goose seasons in the 
Atlantic and Mississippi Flyways with the intent of streamlining and 
simplifying the process. Possible changes the Service is considering 
include the elimination of the experimental-status requirement for 
special seasons conducted between the 1st and 15th of September. 
However, States not participating in the Migratory Bird Harvest 
Information Program would continue to be responsible for monitoring 
hunter activity and harvest during these special seasons. For seasons 
held after September 15, the Service anticipates that current 
requirements for special Canada goose seasons will continue.

B. Regular Seasons

    In the Atlantic Flyway, the Service and the Flyway Council will 
cooperatively conduct an assessment of the just concluded 3-year 
harvest-reduction program. It is likely that further adjustments to 
regular season harvest regulations will be proposed.
    The Service also remains concerned about the status of the Southern 
James Bay and Dusky Canada goose populations. The Service will 
carefully review and consider all harvest regulations to ensure that 
these populations are not impacted.

5. White-fronted Geese

    In 1994, the Service denied the Pacific Flyway Council's request 
for liberalization of seasons and limits on white-fronted geese in 
Washington, Oregon, and California because the population objective had 
not been attained and because a Flyway harvest strategy had not been 
completed. Given that the most recent 3-year average index of Pacific 
Flyway white-fronted geese is 283,600, with the 1994 fall count being 
324,800, the Service now believes some liberalization is warranted, 
provided a suitable harvest strategy is developed beforehand.

8. Tundra Swans

    In 1990 and 1991, the Service agreed to experimentally increase the 
number of permits available to North and South Dakota (1,000 each) for 
tundra swan hunting. The additional permits were also experimentally 
allocated for the 1992-94 hunting seasons. An assessment of these 
experimental [[Page 15647]] seasons in the form of a final report 
should be submitted to the Service by these States by June 1, 1995. The 
final report should contain biological information collected during 
these experimental seasons that would address the objectives identified 
in the Memorandum of Understanding between the Service and each State. 
These objectives include: (1) to determine the fall distribution, 
chronology of migration, and identification of major concentration 
areas of tundra swans in each State; (2) to determine the number of 
tundra swans harvested by permittees in each State; and (3) to evaluate 
hunter activity and success, hunting methods and harvest locations and 
estimate crippling losses associated with the hunting of tundra swans. 
To properly address these objectives the Service encourages these 
States to follow the evaluation guidelines in the ``Eastern Population 
Tundra Swan Sport Hunting Plan'' that was completed in 1988, which 
specifies that evaluation procedures should include an annual harvest 
survey and a minimum of 2 years of population survey information.
    In 1994, the Service restricted seasons and hunt areas in Utah and 
required that Montana, Utah, and Nevada measure the accidental take, if 
any, of trumpeter swans by tundra swan hunters. Pending reports on the 
occurrence and take of trumpeter swans in the hunt areas, possible 
additional changes may be warranted. The Service believes tundra swan 
hunting in these three States is warranted but seasons may be further 
modified to minimize, but not preclude, the accidental take of 
trumpeter swans.

14. Woodcock

    The Service is concerned with the gradual long-term declines in 
woodcock populations in both the Eastern and Central Management 
Regions. Although habitat changes appear to be the primary factor in 
the declines, adjustment of harvest opportunities may be appropriate in 
light of current population trends. The Service and the Flyway Councils 
should continue their ongoing review of the status of woodcock and 
cooperatively develop a harvest-management strategy.

15. Band-tailed Pigeons

    The Service supports the continuation of seasons on both the 
Coastal and Interior populations. However, the Service remains 
concerned about the long-term decline in the Coastal population and 
continues to support restrictive harvest regulations. As in 1993 and 
1994, all States having band-tailed pigeon hunting seasons must again 
require either participation in the nationwide Migratory Bird Harvest 
Information Program or require band-tailed pigeon hunters to obtain 
mandatory State permits to provide sampling frames for obtaining more 
precise estimates of band-tailed pigeon harvest. Those States not 
participating in the Harvest Information Program will be required to 
conduct a harvest survey and provide the results to the Service by June 
1 of each year. The Service will continue to closely monitor population 
and harvest information from both populations and will evaluate this 
information in June prior to making any decisions regarding the 1995-96 
seasons. Indian tribes also should consider this situation when 
proposing harvest regulations for this species.
BILLING CODE 4310-55-F

[[Page 15648]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TP24MR95.013


[FR Doc. 95-7304 Filed 3-23-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C