[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 159 (Thursday, August 15, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42500-42503]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-20847]


      

[[Page 42499]]


_______________________________________________________________________

Part V





Department of the Interior





_______________________________________________________________________



Fish and Wildlife Service



_______________________________________________________________________



50 CFR Part 20



Migratory Bird Hunting; Establishment of a Youth Waterfowl Hunting Day 
for the 1996-97 Migratory Game Bird Hunting Season; Proposed Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 159 / Thursday, August 15, 1996 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 42500]]



DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 20

RIN 1018-AD69


Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed Rule on the Establishment of a 
Youth Waterfowl Hunting Day for the 1996-97 Migratory Game Bird Hunting 
Season

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; supplemental.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (hereinafter the Service) 
announced in an earlier document (June 14, 1996, Federal Register 61 FR 
30490) that it was considering the establishment of a special youth 
waterfowl hunting day for the 1996-97 duck-hunting season. This rule 
describes the Service's proposal for the special youth hunting day.

DATES: The comment period on the proposed youth hunting day ends on 
August 26, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Parties should submit written comments on the proposals 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. The public may inspect comments during normal 
business hours in room 634, ARLSQ Building, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, 
Arlington, Virginia.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul R. Schmidt, Chief, Office of 
Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, (703) 358-
1714.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulations Schedule for 1996

    On March 22, 1996, the Service published in the Federal Register 
(61 FR 11992) a proposal to amend 50 CFR part 20. The proposal dealt 
with the establishment of seasons, limits, and other regulations for 
migratory game birds under Secs.  20.101 through 20.107, 20.109, and 
20.110 of subpart K. On June 13, 1996, the Service published in the 
Federal Register (61 FR 30114) a second document providing supplemental 
proposals for early- and late-season migratory bird hunting regulations 
frameworks, detailing information on the 1996-97 regulatory schedule, 
and announcing the Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee and 
Flyway Council meetings. On June 14, 1996, the Service published in the 
Federal Register (61 FR 30490) a third document describing the 
Service's proposed regulatory alternatives for the 1996-97 duck hunting 
season and the Service's consideration of a proposed youth waterfowl 
hunting day. On July 22, 1996, the Service published in the Federal 
Register (61 FR 37994) a fourth document which dealt specifically with 
proposed early-season frameworks for the 1996-97 season.
    The Service will publish final regulatory frameworks for early 
seasons in late August, and proposals for late-season frameworks in 
mid-August. The Service will publish final regulatory frameworks for 
the establishment of a youth waterfowl hunting day in early September 
and for late seasons on or about September 23, 1996.
    This rule describes the Service's proposal to establish a youth 
waterfowl hunting day. The Service has considered all comments received 
to date on the notice of consideration and will consider all comments 
on this proposal in the regulations-development process. The Service 
will publish responses to all comments when developing a final 
framework.

Written Comments Received

    The preliminary proposed rulemaking, which appeared in the March 22 
Federal Register, opened the public comment period for migratory bird 
hunting regulations. As of July 30, 1996, the Service had received 190 
comments; 145 of these specifically addressed the establishment of a 
youth waterfowl hunting day. Comments and modifications to the 
preliminary guidelines announced in the June 14 Federal Register are 
discussed below. The headings correspond to the numbered items in the 
March 22 Federal Register.

1. Ducks

G. Special Seasons/Species Management

    The June 14 Federal Register announcing the Service's intent to 
consider proposing a youth waterfowl hunting day contained general 
guidelines for its establishment. While the guidelines were preliminary 
in nature, they were intended to provide a general foundation for 
discussion and to facilitate public comment.
    Written Comments: The Arizona Game and Fish Department (Arizona), 
the Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife, the Kansas Department of 
Wildlife and Parks, the Michigan Department of Natural Resources 
(Michigan), 6 organizations, and 56 individuals supported the concept 
of a special youth waterfowl hunting day, citing benefits both in terms 
of educating youth about the outdoors and providing opportunities for 
young people to have a high-quality waterfowling experience.
    Eight organizations opposed the establishment of a ``Youth 
Waterfowl Hunting Day'' for numerous social, moral, and ethical 
reasons. Collectively, they believed that by promoting youth hunting, 
the Service will contribute to human violence and animal abuse by 
destroying children's innate respect for life and desensitizing them to 
the killing of innocent creatures.
    Three petitions with 53 signatures protested the Service's use of 
both taxpayers' funds and staff time to institute a youth hunting day 
that encourages hunting by young people.
    Forty-two individuals commented that the Service should encourage 
non-consumptive wildlife recreation, such as wildlife photography, 
rather than promote sport hunting interests which represent only a 
small segment of society. They suggested that the purpose of 
establishing this program is to sell more hunting licenses that pay for 
Service employees' salaries.
    Four individuals supported the concept, but questioned the need for 
a special youth-only waterfowl hunting day. They suggested that adults 
may take a youth hunting at any time during the regular season and that 
by designating a special youth hunting day, it would establish 
precedent for other special-interest groups. They also feared that 
early-season shooting would condition local ducks to hunting before the 
start of the regular season. Further, they believed that enforcement of 
a youth-only season would be a problem.
    Twenty-three responses indicated general support for a one-day 
youth waterfowl hunt, but recommended changes and/or modifications to 
the timing, age, and accompanying adult requirements, bag limits, 
season length, and species restrictions.
    Michigan recommended that a special youth hunting day not be 
restricted to the period 10 days before/after the regular duck season, 
while the Illinois Department of Natural Resources (Illinois) 
recommended that States be allowed to establish the hunt day within 14 
days of the beginning or end of the regular season framework.
    The Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency (Tennessee) suggested that 
the special day be restricted to the period within the regular duck 
season framework. One individual suggested that the special day should 
occur on or near holidays to allow greater participation, while another 
individual recommended the special day occur on Thanksgiving Day and 
either the day

[[Page 42501]]

before or after. Illinois recommended that States be allowed to select 
any non-school day for the hunt day and that a special day be allowed 
for each established regular season duck zone. Texas, one organization, 
and one individual recommended that up to two days be designated for 
the special youth season. North Dakota recommended that the hunt be 
expanded to more than one day.
    The South Carolina Department of Natural Resources (South Carolina) 
recommended the upper age limit be 17. One individual recommended that 
the upper age limitation for the youth not be restricted to 16. Another 
individual recommended that the upper age limit be increased to 18 
while another recommended it be lowered to 12 to 14. The Wisconsin 
Department of Natural Resources (Wisconsin) and one individual 
recommended a minimum age of 12.
    The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (Texas), one organization, 
and one individual recommended that the number of adults accompanying a 
youth should not exceed three. Texas, Michigan, Illinois, one 
organization, and one individual recommended that adult sponsors be 
allowed to hunt ducks. Wisconsin and one individual recommended that 
the accompanying adult be fully licensed, while Illinois and another 
individual recommended that the accompanying adult not be required to 
have a hunting license. Michigan recommended that the accompanying 
adult's age be left to the discretion of each State. Illinois and one 
organization recommended that the accompanying adult not be restricted 
to parents or legal guardians of the youth. Two individuals recommended 
that the role of the accompanying adult be clarified.
    Texas, one organization, and one individual recommended that the 
bag limit for the hunt day be the same as the regular duck season. The 
North Dakota Game and Fish Department (North Dakota) recommended that 
Flyway-specific species/sex restrictions be eliminated for this hunt, 
while the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (Minnesota) 
recommended a 2- or 3-bird bag limit with no species restrictions.
    Wisconsin, the South Dakota Department of Game, Fish & Parks (South 
Dakota), Illinois, Arizona, Minnesota and one individual suggested that 
geese should also be allowed during the hunt day. Arizona also 
recommended that the special day include coots and moorhens.
    Illinois, Minnesota, and five individuals recommended that State 
licensing requirements be waived for this hunt. Texas and two 
organizations recommended that as many National Wildlife Refuges as 
possible be opened for hunting during the special day. One of the 
organizations also recommended that as many State Wildlife Management 
Areas as possible be opened for hunting and that the concept of ``Youth 
Waterfowl Hunting Day'' be expanded to include dates during the regular 
duck season on refuges.
    The Missouri Department of Conservation (Missouri) recommended that 
the precedent for this type of hunt be evaluated for additional 
opportunity for other selected groups. Missouri and Minnesota 
recommended that an active communication plan be established prior to 
implementation of this hunt. Missouri also recommended that clear 
implementation guidelines should be established. Michigan recommended 
that the comment period for such a hunt be lengthened to allow for more 
review by the Flyway Technical Committees and the public. Illinois 
recommended that implementation of a youth hunt be delayed until the 
1997-98 seasons, while South Dakota recommended that the name of the 
special day be changed to ``Youth Duck Hunting Day.'' One individual 
recommended that the Service encourage hunting guides to offer free 
hunting to youths on the special day.
    Service Response: The Service appreciates the suggestions and 
widespread support for the youth hunting day concept. The Service 
recognizes those organizations and individuals opposed to this concept 
on the basis of general opposition to hunting as a desirable outdoor 
recreational activity. The Service also recognizes the contribution of 
both hunters and non-hunters to natural resource conservation. The 
Service believes recreational sport hunting is a wise and compatible 
use of a renewable natural resource and is directed by various 
legislation to regulate the hunting of migratory waterfowl. The Service 
views its role as one of permitting recreational harvest opportunities 
consistent with long-term resource conservation for all Americans, and 
believes a well-educated and properly trained hunting constituency is 
in the best interest of this objective. Thus, the Service views a youth 
hunting day as an educational opportunity to help ensure safe, high-
quality hunting for future generations of Americans. The Service 
believes that this proposal is consistent with its responsibility to 
provide general education and training in the wise recreational uses of 
our nation's valuable wildlife resources. The Service believes that 
this special training opportunity will be most effective if restricted 
specifically to youth hunters.
    The Service believes that age criteria must be consistent with 
previous definitions of youth hunters that are established in other 
Federal legislation. A youth is defined as a person less than 16 years 
of age in the Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 1934. Therefore, to 
maintain consistency and to avoid confusion, the Service believes that 
this definition should also be employed for the youth waterfowl hunting 
day.
    The Service believes that the period 10 days prior to and after the 
outside framework dates for the regular duck season provides sufficient 
flexibility for States to provide this opportunity to their 
constituents. The proposed youth hunting day can be selected 
independently in each recognized duck hunting zone within a State. The 
Service believes that restricting the opportunity to weekends or 
holidays within the proposed framework is reasonable and should afford 
maximum opportunity for participation by youth hunters during the 
school year.
    The Service also recognizes that numerous differences exist among 
the States with respect to requirements for adult supervision of youth 
hunters. It is not the intent of the Service to mandate conformity with 
respect to these requirements. However, it is the intent of the Service 
to promote only the highest standards of safety and quality 
sportsmanship among youth hunters. Thus, the Service believes that 
adult supervision is necessary, but that the specific qualifications 
should be determined by the various State laws and regulations already 
in place to govern such activities. Further, the Service feels that 
this is an opportunity for the education of young hunters and thus 
believes that on this special day the supervising adult, 18 or older, 
should devote their full time and attention to ensuring a safe, high-
quality and successful hunt to the participating youth rather than 
hunting themselves.
    Regarding bag limits for the special day, the Service has reviewed 
its proposal in light of the need to train youth hunters to be 
responsible participants in waterfowl hunting. Therefore, since sex and 
species restrictions are a necessary and important component of duck 
hunting, the Service sees merit in employing the prevailing bag limits, 
including species and sex restrictions, for this learning opportunity.
    The Service recognizes the potential opportunity that inclusion of 
geese in the youth waterfowl hunt might

[[Page 42502]]

provide. However, due to season closures and restrictions in place to 
protect certain populations of Canada geese in various parts of the 
country, the Service believes this complication is not appropriate at 
this point. This is certainly a matter for consideration in future 
regulatory cycles. The Service concurs that the proposal should include 
coots, moorhens, and gallinules, as these species are normally included 
in regular duck seasons.
    The Service will encourage youth hunting day participation wherever 
it can, including National Wildlife refuges with established hunting 
programs. The Service will continue to evaluate this opportunity 
annually, including an assessment of possible expansion and the need 
for additional criteria. The Service believes that this opportunity 
should be offered during the 1996-97 hunting season and that further 
dialogue and refinements can be incorporated in future years.
    The Service believes that the long-term conservation of North 
America's migratory bird resources depends on the future attitudes and 
actions of today's youth. The proposed special youth day will assist in 
the formation and development of a conservation ethic in future 
generations. The special day would provide an opportunity for young 
hunters (15 or under), accompanied by an adult (18 or older), to 
experience a safe, high-quality waterfowling experience. The Service's 
intent in establishing this special day is to introduce youth to the 
concepts of ethical utilization and stewardship of waterfowl and other 
natural resources, encourage youngsters and adults to experience the 
outdoors together, and contribute to the long-term conservation of the 
migratory bird resource. Because the special 1-day hunt would be 
limited to youth hunters, the Service believes that waterfowl 
populations can support the additional harvest and that the hunt would 
produce long-term benefits to the resource.
    Therefore, the Service is proposing the following guidelines:
    1. States may select 1 day per duck-hunting zone, designated as 
``Youth Waterfowl Hunting Day'', in addition to their regular duck 
seasons.
    2. The day must be held outside any regular duck season on either a 
weekend or holiday when youth hunters would have the maximum 
opportunity to participate.
    3. The day could be held up to 10 days before or after any regular 
duck-season frameworks or within any split of a regular duck season.
    4. The daily bag limit may include ducks, mergansers, coots, 
moorhens, and gallinules and would be the same as that allowed in the 
regular season. Flyway species restrictions would remain in effect.
    5. Youth hunters must be 15 years of age or younger.
    6. An adult at least 18 years of age must accompany the youth 
hunter into the field. This adult could not duck hunt but may 
participate in other seasons that are open on the special youth day.
    7. The special youth hunt day will be considered a trial for the 
1996-97 season and will be evaluated by the Service.
    The Service recognizes the value of hunter education and safety 
training for all those who participate in sport hunting and especially 
for all participants in the ``Youth Waterfowl Hunting Day.'' These 
courses should promote positive outdoor experiences while emphasizing 
the need to act safely and responsibly during this special hunting day 
as well as any other day during the season.

Public Comment Invited

    The Service intends that adopted final rules be as responsive as 
possible to all concerned interests and wants to obtain comments from 
all interested areas of the public, as well as other government 
agencies. Such comments, and any additional information received, may 
lead to final regulations that differ from these proposals.
    However, special circumstances involved in establishing these 
regulations limit the amount of time the Service can allow for public 
comment. Specifically, two considerations compress the time in which 
the rulemaking process must operate: (1) the need to establish final 
rules at a point early enough in the summer to allow affected State 
agencies to appropriately adjust their licensing and regulatory 
mechanisms; and (2) the unavailability, before mid-June, of specific, 
reliable data on this year's status of some waterfowl and migratory 
shore and upland game bird populations. Therefore, and in light of the 
fact that the Service sought, and received significant, public comment 
in the development of this proposal, the Service believes allowing 
comment periods past the dates specified is contrary to the public 
interest.

Comment Procedure

    The Department of the Interior's policy affords the public an 
opportunity to participate in the rulemaking process, whenever 
practical. Accordingly, interested persons may participate by 
submitting written comments 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. The public may 
inspect comments during normal business hours at the Service's office 
in room 634, Arlington Square Building, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, 
Arlington, Virginia. The Service will consider all comments received 
and will try to acknowledge received comments, but may not provide an 
individual response to each commenter.

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 EPA on June 9, 1988. The Service published a Notice 
of Availability in the June 16, 1988, Federal Register (53 FR 22582). 
The Service published its Record of Decision on August 18, 1988 (53 FR 
31341). Copies of these documents are available from the Service at the 
address indicated under the caption ADDRESSES.

Endangered Species Act Consideration

    As in the past, the Service will design hunting regulations to 
remove or alleviate chances of conflict between migratory game bird 
hunting seasons and the protection and conservation of endangered and 
threatened species. Consultations are presently under way to ensure 
that actions resulting from these regulatory proposals will not likely 
jeopardize the continued existence of endangered or threatened species 
or result in the destruction or adverse modification of their critical 
habitat. Findings from these consultations will be included in a 
biological opinion and may cause modification of some regulatory 
measures proposed in this document. The final frameworks will reflect 
any such modifications. The Service's biological opinions resulting 
from its consultation under Section 7 are public documents available 
for public inspection in the Division of Endangered Species and the 
Office of Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 
Arlington Square Building, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Virginia.


[[Page 42503]]



Regulatory Flexibility Act; Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 and the 
Paperwork Reduction Act

    In the Federal Register dated March 22, 1996, the Service reported 
measures it took to comply with requirements of the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act and the Executive Order. One measure was to prepare a 
Small Entity Flexibility Analysis (Analysis) in 1995 documenting the 
significant beneficial economic effect on a substantial number of small 
entities. The Analysis estimated that migratory bird hunters would 
spend between $258 and $586 million at small businesses in 1995. Copies 
of the Analysis are available upon request from the Office of Migratory 
Bird Management. This rule was not subject to review by the Office of 
Management and Budget under E.O. 12866.
    The Service examined these proposed regulations under the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 and found no information collection requirements.

Unfunded Mandates

    The Service has determined and certifies in compliance with the 
requirements of the Unfunded Mandates Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502 et seq., that 
this rulemaking will not impose a cost of $100 million or more in any 
given year on local or State government or private entities.

Civil Justice Reform - Executive Order 12988

    The Department, in promulgating this proposed rule, has determined 
that these regulations meet the applicable standards provided in 
Sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988.

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 1996-97 
hunting season are authorized under 16 U.S.C. 703-711, 16 U.S.C. 712, 
and 16 U.S.C. 742 a-j.

    Dated: August 8, 1996.
Donald J. Barry,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 96-20847 Filed 8-14-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-F