[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 109 (Friday, June 6, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31298-31306]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-14882]
[[Page 31297]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part V
Department of the Interior
_______________________________________________________________________
Fish and Wildlife Service
_______________________________________________________________________
50 CFR Part 20
Migratory Bird Hunting; Supplemental Proposals for Migratory Game Bird
Hunting Regulations; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 109 / Friday, June 6, 1997 / Proposed
Rules
[[Page 31298]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 20
RIN: 1018-AE14
Migratory Bird Hunting; Supplemental Proposals for Migratory Game
Bird Hunting Regulations; Notice of Meetings
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; supplemental.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (hereinafter the Service)
proposed in an earlier document to establish annual hunting regulations
for certain migratory game birds for the 1997-98 hunting season. This
supplement to the proposed rule provides the regulatory schedule;
announces a special meeting to discuss and review Adaptive Harvest
Management; announces the Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee
and Flyway Councils meetings; and describes the proposed regulatory
alternatives for the 1997-98 duck hunting seasons and other proposed
changes from the 1996-97 hunting regulations.
DATES: The Service will hold a special open meeting at 9:00 a.m. on
June 24, 1997, to review the concepts and process of Adaptive Harvest
Management. The Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee will
consider and develop proposed regulations for early-season migratory
bird hunting at 8:30 a.m. on June 25 and 26, and for late-season
migratory bird hunting on August 5 and 6. The Service will hold public
hearings on proposed early- and late-season frameworks at 9:00 a.m. on
June 27 and August 7, 1997, respectively. The comment period for the
proposed regulatory alternatives for the 1997-98 duck hunting seasons
will end on July 3, 1997. The comment period for proposed migratory
bird hunting-season frameworks for Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the
Virgin Islands, and other early seasons will end on July 25, 1997. The
comment period for late-season proposals will end on September 4, 1997.
ADDRESSES: The Adaptive Harvest Management Meeting and the Service
Migratory Bird Regulations Committee will meet in room 200 of the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service's Arlington Square Building, 4401 N. Fairfax
Drive, Arlington, Virginia. The Service will hold public hearings in
the Auditorium of the Department of the Interior Building, 1849 C
Street, NW., Washington, DC. Parties should submit written comments on
the proposals and/or a notice of intent to participate in either
hearing 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 1997
On March 13, 1997, the Service published in the Federal Register
(62 FR 12054) 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. This document is the second in a series of
proposed, supplemental, and final rules for migratory game bird hunting
regulations. The Service will propose early-season frameworks in late
June and late-season frameworks in early August. The Service will
publish final regulatory alternatives for the 1997-98 duck hunting
seasons in mid-July and final regulatory frameworks for early seasons
on or about August 20, 1997, and those for late seasons on or about
September 25, 1997.
On June 27, 1997, the Service will hold a public hearing in
Washington, DC, to review the status of migratory shore and upland game
birds and waterfowl hunted during early seasons and the recommended
hunting regulations for these species.
On August 7, 1997, the Service will hold a public hearing in
Washington, DC, to review the status of waterfowl and recommended
hunting regulations for regular waterfowl seasons, and other species
and seasons not previously discussed at the June 27 public hearing.
Announcement of Adaptive Harvest Management Meeting
The June 24 meeting will review the concepts and process of
Adaptive Harvest Management. Representatives from the Service, the
Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee, and Flyway Council
Consultants will attend.
Announcement of Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee
Meetings
The June 25 meeting will review information on the current status
of migratory shore and upland game birds and develop 1997-98 migratory
game bird regulations recommendations for these species plus
regulations for migratory game birds in Alaska, Puerto Rico, and the
Virgin Islands; special September waterfowl seasons in designated
States; special sea duck seasons in the Atlantic Flyway; and extended
falconry seasons. In addition, the Service will review and discuss
preliminary information on the status of waterfowl as it relates to the
development of the final regulatory packages for the 1997-98 regular
waterfowl seasons. The June 26 meeting will ensure that the Service
develops its regulations recommendations in full consultation.
The August 5 meeting will review information on the current status
of waterfowl and develop 1997-98 migratory game bird regulations
recommendations for regular waterfowl seasons and other species and
seasons not previously discussed at the early season meetings. The
August 6 meeting will ensure that the Service develops its regulations
recommendations in full consultation.
In accordance with Departmental policy, these meetings are open to
public observation. Members of the public may submit written comments
on the matters discussed to the Director.
Announcement of Flyway Council Meetings
Service representatives will be present at the following meetings
of the Flyway Councils:
Atlantic Flyway--July 31-August 1, Savannah Georgia (Savannah
Marriott River Front)
Central Flyway--July 30-31, Cypress Hills, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
Mississippi Flyway--July 30-31, Hot Springs, Arkansas
Pacific Flyway--July 30-31, Reno, Nevada (Peppermill Hotel)
Although agendas are not yet available, these meetings usually
commence at 8:30 a.m. on the days indicated.
Review of Public Comments
This supplemental rulemaking contains the proposed regulatory
alternatives for the 1997-98 duck hunting seasons. All comments and
recommendations received through May 1, 1997, relating to the
development of these alternatives are included and addressed herein.
[[Page 31299]]
This supplemental rulemaking also describes other recommended
changes based on the preliminary proposals published in the March 13,
1997, Federal Register. Only those recommendations requiring either new
proposals or substantial modification of the preliminary proposals are
included here. This supplement does not include recommendations that
support or oppose but do not recommend alternatives to the preliminary
proposals. The Service will consider these comments later in the
regulations-development process. The Service will publish responses to
all proposals, written comments, and public-hearing testimony when it
develops final frameworks.
The Service seeks additional information and comments on the
recommendations in this supplemental proposed rule. The Service will
consider all recommendations and associated comments during development
of the final frameworks.
New proposals and modifications to previously described proposals
are discussed below. Wherever possible, they are discussed under
headings corresponding to the numbered items in the March 13, 1997,
Federal Register.
General
Written Comments: Several individuals from Tennessee and
Mississippi recommended either a noon or 1:00 p.m. closing time for
duck hunting, citing positive benefits to the duck population and law
enforcement.
An individual from Minnesota urged elimination of the 4:00 p.m.
closing time in Minnesota.
1. Ducks
Categories used to discuss issues related to duck harvest
management are: (A) Harvest Strategy Considerations, (B) Framework
Dates, (C) Season Length, (D) Closed Seasons, (E) Bag Limits, (F) Zones
and Split Seasons, and (G) Special Seasons/Species Management.
Categories containing substantial recommendations are discussed below.
A. Harvest Strategy Considerations
On March 13, 1997, the Service published for public comment
recommendations from the Adaptive Harvest Management (AHM) technical
working group regarding modification of the regulatory alternatives for
duck hunting (62 FR 12054). If adopted, significant changes from the
alternatives utilized in 1996-97 would include: (1) addition of a
``very restrictive'' alternative; (2) additional days and a higher
total-duck daily bag limit in the ``moderate'' and ``liberal''
alternatives; and (3) an increase in the daily bag limit of hen
mallards in the ``moderate'' and ``liberal'' alternatives.
Council Recommendations: All four Flyway Councils generally
endorsed the regulatory alternatives recommended by the AHM technical
working group that were identified in the March 13, 1997, Federal
Register. However, some modifications were recommended and are
identified below.
The Atlantic Flyway Council endorsed the four regulatory
alternatives for the Atlantic Flyway, with the exception of the total
duck bag limit and hen mallard bag limit restrictions (see further
discussion in E. Bag Limits).
The Upper- and Lower-Region Regulations Committees of the
Mississippi Flyway Council endorsed the regulatory packages for the
Mississippi Flyway for the 1997-98 season, with the Lower-Region
Regulations Committee also recommending an experimental framework
closing date (see further discussion in B. Framework Dates).
The Central Flyway Council endorsed the regulatory packages with
the exception of recommending a harvest strategy for pintails and an
earlier framework opening date for northern states (see further
discussions in B. Framework Dates and G. Special Seasons/Species
Management, ii. Pintails).
The Pacific Flyway Council endorsed the working group's recommended
alternatives with several modifications. The Council recommended minor
changes in season length and the hen mallard bag limit and adoption of
an interim pintail harvest strategy (see further discussion in C.
Season Length, E. Bag Limits and G. Special Seasons/Species Management,
ii. Pintails).
Written Comments: The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
(Minnesota) and the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources supported
the packages proposed by the AHM technical working group, although both
stated that the packages provide little additional benefit to hunters
in northern States. Minnesota noted that AHM brings more science,
better decisions and less politics into the regulations-setting
process. Minnesota also expressed support for the working group's
recommended ``liberal'' alternative despite their belief that it
essentially changes the allocation of harvest, providing additional
opportunity to mid-latitude and southern States while limiting
Minnesota hunter opportunities due to typical freeze-up dates.
The Missouri Department of Conservation (Missouri) supported the
working group's recommendations and further supported any change among
the various options that provided a consistent, science-based approach
to waterfowl management. Missouri further commented that the strengths
of AHM are the shared objectives and improved use of available
information and that State and region-specific proposals generated
outside the AHM process jeopardize this improved waterfowl management
decision-making process.
The North American Waterfowl Federation (NAWF) supported the
development and implementation of AHM in setting waterfowl regulations
but did not support the liberalizations proposed by the working group
regarding increases in season lengths and bag limits. NAWF believed
that extensive changes were premature and did not provide adequate
consideration for population impacts. NAWF pointed out that several
species of waterfowl had not yet reached population goals and that
additional harvest did not appear justified. NAWF was also not aware of
any initiative or substantial interest among the duck hunting public
for an expansion of hunting opportunities and questioned whether the
interests of hunters were being represented.
The Delta Wildlife Foundation and the Delta Outfitters Association
of Mississippi and the Alabama Waterfowl Association expressed support
for the recommendations of the Lower-Region Regulations Committee of
the Mississippi Flyway Council.
The Louisiana Wildlife Federation supported the establishment of a
``more'' or ``most'' liberal alternative for those years when duck
reproduction was high and the population could support additional
harvest.
Several individuals from Louisiana fully supported the working
group's recommendations.
Several individuals from Alabama expressed support for the
recommendations of the Lower Region Regulations Committee of the
Mississippi Flyway Council.
An individual from Minnesota questioned the AHM process, citing the
fact that harvest had increased each year under AHM. He further
questioned the need for a ``super-liberal'' alternative and believed
that States would be unwilling to actually use the ``conservative''
alternative.
Individuals from Tennessee and Louisiana expressed support for the
``liberal'' alternative.
Several individuals from Minnesota and one individual from
Louisiana suggested keeping the ``liberal''
[[Page 31300]]
alternative at 50 days with a 5-bird daily bag limit. Another commenter
requested longer (i.e., 60 to 70 days) seasons and 4-bird daily bag
limits.
An individual from Minnesota urged support for a 30- to 40-day
season and a 3- to 5-bird daily bag limit, depending on water
conditions.
The California Waterfowl Association supported the addition of a
``very restrictive'' alternative and the working group's recommendation
for extended season lengths under the ``moderate'' and ``liberal''
alternatives.
An individual from Kansas strongly supported the addition of a
``very restrictive'' alternative as a management tool.
An individual from Oregon was concerned about potential increases
in mallard harvest given the population status of mallards and recent
season liberalizations.
Several individuals from Ohio, California, and Pennsylvania opposed
all increases in either daily bag limits or season lengths on moral
grounds, with some calling for overall reductions in hunting
opportunities.
Service Response: Comments received to date regarding the
recommendations of the AHM technical working group generally have been
favorable. Therefore, the Service is proposing to adopt most of the
recommendations of the AHM working group. Minor differences between the
working group's recommendations and the Service's proposal are noted
under C. Season Lengths, E. Bag Limits, and G. Special Seasons/Species
Management, ii. Pintails. The Service notes a number of comments
suggesting some hunters may not be interested in more liberal
regulations, even though they may be biologically acceptable.
For the 1997-98 regular duck hunting season, the Service proposes
the four regulatory alternatives detailed in the accompanying table.
Alternatives are specified for each Flyway and are designated as ``VERY
RES'' for the very restrictive, ``RES'' for the restrictive, ``MOD''
for the moderate, and ``LIB'' for the liberal alternative. The Service
will publish final regulatory alternatives in July and propose a
specific regulatory alternative when survey data on waterfowl
population and habitat status are available. Public comments will be
accepted until June 27, 1997, and should be sent to the address under
the caption ADDRESSES.
B. Framework Dates
Council Recommendations: The Lower-Region Regulations Committee of
the Mississippi Flyway Council recommended the Service allow an
experimental January 31 framework closing date, as long as it does not
affect regulations/framework packages in non-participatory States.
The Central Flyway Council recommended a framework opening date of
the Saturday nearest September 23 in North Dakota, South Dakota,
Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, and Nebraska.
Written Comments: The State of North Dakota provided a concurrent
resolution urging the Service to adopt a framework opening date of
September 20.
The Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources
recommended a framework closing date of January 31 under the
``liberal'' and ``moderate'' alternatives. In lieu of this option, they
suggested an experimental season of 3 to 5 years for a limited number
of States in order to determine any resulting detrimental effects from
the later framework closing date.
Senators Trent Lott and Thad Cochran of Mississippi urged support
for extending the framework closing date to January 31 in Mississippi
with the same number of days and bag limit as other States in the
Mississippi Flyway.
The Mississippi State Senate provided a concurrent resolution
urging the Mississippi U.S. Congressional delegation to express to the
Service the need and support for a duck hunting framework closing date
of January 31 for the Mississippi Flyway. The resolution stated that
peak duck populations in Mississippi occur from late December through
January, a January 31 framework closing date would not adversely impact
the survival rate of ducks, and Mississippi hunters were denied the
same opportunity to hunt ducks afforded to hunters in the northern and
central portions of the Mississippi Flyway.
The City of Grenada, Mississippi, urged consideration of a season
ending after the first week in February so as to allow Mississippi
hunters the same hunting opportunities afforded other States in the
Mississippi Flyway.
The Mississippi Wildlife Federation expressed support for a later
framework closing date in January, citing the fact that Mississippi
overwinters the third largest number of waterfowl in the Mississippi
Flyway, but only ranks 11th out of 14 States in the Flyway in waterfowl
harvest.
One hundred and twenty-six individual commenters and 107
petitioners from Mississippi recommended a framework closing date
extension to January 31. Most commenters believed the majority of
waterfowl do not arrive in Mississippi until mid- to late-January after
the current season closes. Further, many cited the opinion that due to
the Service's unfair frameworks policy, southern waterfowlers are not
given the same hunting opportunities as those given to hunters in
northern States.
Twenty-two individuals and eleven petitioners from Mississippi
recommended a framework closing date extension to February 9. One
individual from Mississippi recommended a season running through the
middle of February.
Three individuals from Alabama urged the Service to consider
extending the framework closing date to at least January 31.
The Louisiana Wildlife Federation supported modifying the framework
closing date to allow hunting through the last weekend in January,
provided that the late-season disturbance was not shown to be an
impediment to the overall population or to achieving the NAWMP goals.
Several individuals from Louisiana recommended a duck hunting
season closing the end of January.
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (Minnesota) expressed
serious concerns about the proposals to extend framework opening and
closing dates stating that the proposed changes would alter the current
distribution of duck harvest within and among Flyways. Minnesota
commented that shifting hunting opportunity further to the south
through a framework extension would be unacceptable to Minnesota and
would allow a reallocation of harvest by default.
The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (Wisconsin) did not
support modification of the frameworks at this time. Wisconsin stated,
however, that if the Service were to seriously consider changing the
framework closing date, it must also consider changes to the framework
opening date. Wisconsin believed that extending the framework date to
the end of January without modifying the opening framework dates would
only serve to widen the gap in hunting opportunities currently offered
in the Mississippi Flyway. Wisconsin further recommended that the
Service establish a timetable and a process to allow a thorough
discussion of the implications of framework modification for all
Flyways.
Although supporting the working group's recommended packages, the
Missouri Department of Conservation (Missouri) believed the 1996-97
regulations provided excellent hunting opportunity and would prefer
retaining these options rather than any additional wholesale changes in
frameworks. Missouri was concerned that the potential biological
impacts of
[[Page 31301]]
framework extensions had not been adequately considered and that a
rigorous evaluation would be necessary. Missouri further believed that
this was not a high priority for AHM at this time and questioned
whether issues of harvest allocation should even be a part of the AHM
process, stating that these issues were largely social, not technical.
Several individuals from Tennessee and Louisiana expressed strong
opposition to extending the framework closing date past January 20,
citing concerns for the conditions of the ducks and the lack of hunting
opportunity later in January.
The California Waterfowl Association expressed concerns about the
impacts of either earlier framework opening dates or later framework
closing dates.
Individuals in Pennsylvania and Iowa believed the season in their
respective States closed too early.
Individuals in California and Oregon expressed support for
extending the hunting season.
Service Response: In 1995, the Service established AHM framework
opening and closing dates of the Saturday nearest October 1 to the
Sunday nearest January 20 for the Pacific, Central, and Mississippi
Flyways, and fixed dates of October 1 to January 20 for the Atlantic
Flyway (60 FR 50045). In 1996, the Service denied requests for a
January 31 closing date in Mississippi, but recognized that the
suitability of all aspects of the regulatory alternatives, including
framework dates, should be investigated by the AHM technical working
group. All four Flyway Councils, in joint recommendations dated July
28, 1996, assigned a high priority to refining the AHM regulatory
alternatives and asked the technical working group to draft
recommendations prior to the 1997 regulatory cycle. In the fall of
1996, the technical working group circulated a questionnaire to all
States seeking input regarding concerns with the current regulatory
alternatives. Fifty-four percent of States nationwide believed the
current framework dates of approximately October 1 to January 20 were
satisfactory, while 32 percent believed the dates were too constrained.
Overall, States ranked framework dates as the sixth most important
regulatory issue, after issues involving season lengths, bag limits,
and the number of regulatory alternatives. The Service recognizes that
questionnaires received from Central and Mississippi Flyway States
indicated a somewhat higher level of dissatisfaction with established
framework dates than the national average.
After extensive deliberation and consideration of input by States
and Flyway Councils, the AHM technical working group recommended no
change in framework dates from those established in 1995 (62 FR 12054).
The Service's Migratory Bird Regulations Committee reviewed the working
group's recommendations with the Flyway Council Regulations Consultants
at the January 23, 1997, meeting and there were no indications that
framework dates of approximately October 1 to January 20 would not be
satisfactory to most States. On April 22, 1997, representatives from
the Service met with Flyway Council Chairmen and Regulations
Consultants to consider the Flyway Councils recommendations for the AHM
regulatory alternatives. Representatives from the Atlantic, Central,
and Pacific Flyway Councils, and from the Upper-Region Regulations
Committee of the Mississippi Flyway Council, agreed that framework
dates should not be extended beyond those currently in use for the
1997-98 season; however, the representatives agreed the issue should be
reviewed further by the AHM working group and all four Flyway Councils.
Therefore, the Service has adopted the working group's recommendation
for framework dates of approximately October 1 to January 20 for all
AHM regulatory alternatives as its formal proposal.
In considering requests for either earlier or later framework
dates, such as those described above, the Service will focus on the
following issues:
(1) Possible changes in the size of the harvest. Experience with
hunting seasons opening more than a few days before October 1 or
closing similarly after January 20 is limited. Mississippi experimented
with a January 31 closing date during 1979-84, and Iowa was permitted
an opening date for a small portion of their regular duck season of
approximately September 20 during 1979-87 and 1994-96 in lieu of an
early teal season. In both States, harvests of mallards and total ducks
were higher in years with a framework extension, relative to
surrounding States where a framework extension was not available. If
results from these States are representative, then proposals to extend
framework dates in the Central and Mississippi Flyways would be
expected to increase the harvest of midcontinent mallards by 13 percent
(10% range of error). This increase would be in addition to the 20
percent increase in mallard harvest expected from the proposed increase
in season length under the ``liberal'' alternative. The Service
predicts that adoption of the Central and Mississippi Flyway proposals
would lead to a more conservative harvest strategy for all States,
whether or not they could take advantage of the extended framework
dates. The Service also predicts more frequent changes in regulations
and more variability in population size of midcontinent mallards if the
Central and Mississippi Flyway proposals were adopted.
(2) Re-allocation of hunting opportunity and harvest within and
among Flyways. Based on the survey conducted by the AHM technical
working group, most States are satisfied with the distribution of
hunting opportunity within and among Flyways. Nationwide, concerns
regarding allocation of hunting opportunity among States ranked last
among those concerns with the current AHM regulatory alternatives.
Also, all Flyway Councils passed a joint recommendation (July 28, 1996)
asking the Service to maintain traditional allocations of hunting
opportunity among Flyways when considering changes to the AHM
regulatory alternatives. The Service agrees with the Flyway Councils
that resolving outstanding disputes over allocation will require
development of an appropriate framework for discussion and that
progress is unlikely prior to the 1997 hunting season. (3) The
potential for negative physiological impacts on ducks.
The Service reiterates its long-standing concerns that hunting
disturbance in late winter may interfere with pair-bonding and inhibit
nutrient acquisition necessary for successful migration and
reproduction (61 FR 50664). Information from a recent study of late-
winter mate loss among captive-reared mallards by Mississippi State
University has not alleviated these concerns because these preliminary
study results cannot necessarily be applied to free-ranging mallards or
other species.
The Service does not wish to prejudge a discussion about allocation
of duck hunting opportunity, but is confused about public comments that
hunters in the southern Mississippi Flyway are not afforded the same
hunting opportunities as their northern counterparts. States of the
southern Mississippi Flyway collectively enjoy hunter success (as
measured by seasonal duck harvest per hunter) that is higher than that
in any region of the country. Moreover, hunter success in the
Mississippi Flyway is about twice as high in southern States as in
northern and mid-latitude States, and this discrepancy has been
increasing steadily over time. The State of Mississippi has the fourth
highest
[[Page 31302]]
hunter success in the country, after Louisiana, California, and
Arkansas.
In summary, the Service is not proposing at this time to extend
framework dates beyond those currently in use. However, the Service
seeks further clarification from the Flyway Councils, States, and the
public regarding the relative importance of this issue and requests
comments concerning the three issues described above. The Service
believes strongly that potential changes to framework dates must be
approached in a methodical and comprehensive manner, and with due
consideration of both biological and sociological impacts.
C. Season Length
Council Recommendations: The Pacific Flyway Council recommended the
``restrictive'' regulatory package for their Flyway be modified from 59
days to 60 days.
Written Comments: The Alabama Department of Conservation and
Natural Resources recommended the ``very restrictive'' alternative be
23 days rather than 20 days to allow for 4 full weekends of hunting.
The California Waterfowl Association supported the addition of 1
day to the ``restrictive'' alternative in the Pacific Flyway.
Several individuals from Minnesota opposed increases in the season
length under the ``liberal'' alternative, arguing that it would only
benefit the southern States in the Mississippi Flyway.
An individual from Louisiana believed that seasons should be
lengthened by 5 to 10 days.
Individuals from Kansas and Washington believed that season lengths
should be extended as opposed to additional birds in the daily bag
limit.
An individual from Oregon believed that season lengths did not need
to be any longer.
An individual from Oregon expressed support for lengthening the
seasons.
Service Response: The Service agrees with the Pacific Flyway
Council's recommendation to modify the ``restrictive'' alternative to
60 days rather than 59 days in the Pacific Flyway. This modification
would allow those States opting to split their seasons into 2 segments
to open on a Saturday and close on a Sunday in each segment as has been
traditional in the Pacific Flyway. The Service notes that this option
becomes increasingly important to States as season length decreases and
would not be a primary consideration under more liberal seasons.
E. Bag Limits
Council Recommendations: The Mississippi, Central, and Pacific
Flyway Councils endorsed the AHM working group's recommendations for
total duck bag limits. The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended a
uniform total duck bag limit of 4 in all Atlantic Flyway regulatory
packages to minimize the frequency of changes.
All Flyway Councils supported the basic mallard daily bag limits as
recommended by the working group in each of the regulatory packages.
However, the Atlantic and Pacific Flyway Councils recommended
modifications to the hen mallard daily bag limit in the ``liberal''
package. The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended that there be no hen
mallard restrictions and the Pacific Flyway Council recommended a daily
bag limit of 3 hen mallards instead of 2.
Written Comments: The South Carolina Department of Natural
Resources recommended the Service adopt the 6-bird daily bag limit
recommended by the working group and retain hen mallard restrictions
outlined in the ``liberal'' regulations package.
The California Waterfowl Association supported the working group's
recommendation of adding a second hen mallard to the daily bag limits
under the ``moderate'' and ``liberal'' alternatives. They further
recommended adding a third hen mallard under the Pacific Flyway's
``liberal'' alternative.
The Save Hens Alliance did not support an increase in the hen
mallard daily bag limit, indicating that hen restrictions have had a
positive effect on yearly breeding stocks. They further pointed out
that a high percentage of hens surviving until the last few weeks of
the season could be expected to return to breeding areas. As an
alternative, they recommended that an extra drake mallard be added to
the mallard daily bag limit.
The Great Outdoors, L.L.C., urged the Service to not tease the
dedicated duck hunter with regulations that are not sustainable. They
stated that the rebound in duck populations is due to a reversal in
weather patterns, habitat improvements like the Conservation Reserve
Program, and restrictions on season length and bag limits. They further
pointed out that hunters are not requesting these liberalizations in
seasons and believed that liberalizations in the shooting of hens was
not ethical. They also believed that the increased use of zone/split
seasons by States has increased the potential for higher harvests.
Finally, they encouraged the Service to exercise common sense,
restraint, and ethics, which are the foundations upon which
sportsmanship is based.
Several individuals from Louisiana preferred additional birds in
the daily bag limit rather than additional days of season length.
Several individuals from Louisiana and individuals from Kansas,
Minnesota, and California supported the working group's recommendation
of additional days in the ``moderate'' and ``liberal'' alternatives,
but recommended daily bag limits of no more than 5 birds.
Several individuals from Oregon and Louisiana believed that current
bag limits provided plenty of hunter opportunity.
Several individuals from Louisiana recommended a daily bag limit of
1 hen mallard under the ``liberal'' alternative rather than the working
group's recommendation of 2, while another individual supported any
increase in the overall daily bag limit.
An individual from California expressed support for no internal
bag-limit restrictions, while an individual from Oregon recommended
holding bag limits at the ``restrictive'' alternative level.
Service Response: As indicated above, the Service concurs with the
recommendations for regulatory packages drafted by the AHM working
group. The Service supports the Atlantic Flyway Council's request to
have more restrictive bag limits of 4 rather than 6 in the ``moderate''
and ``liberal'' packages, but does not support having a 4-bird daily
bag limit instead of 3 in the ``restrictive'' and ``very restrictive''
packages. Maintaining a 4-bird daily bag limit during restrictive
seasons has the potential to increase harvests at a time when attempts
are being made to reduce harvest.
Regarding mallard hen restrictions, the Service does not support
the changes in hen restrictions recommended by the Atlantic and Pacific
Flyway Councils. Although the role of sex-specific bag limits in
regulating mallard harvests, total mortality, and recruitment is
uncertain, sex-specific bag limits for mallards have been used since
the early 1970's. Lower female (relative to male) bag limits (hen
restrictions) have been used during 1972-96 in the Central Flyway,
since 1976 in the Mississippi Flyway, and beginning in 1985 in the
Atlantic and Pacific Flyways. These differential regulations were
intended to direct harvest pressure away from females and thus increase
annual survival of females relative to males in the population.
Recent analysis of the effects of mallard hen restrictions have
shown
[[Page 31303]]
these restrictions to have been effective in increasing the harvest of
males relative to females. However, the effects of changes in female
mallard bag limits on overall mallard population status and on species
that are similar in appearance to mallards are unknown.
The Service supports the AHM working group's recommendation of a
moderate increase in the female mallard bag limits in the ``moderate''
and ``liberal'' alternatives, but does not support the larger increases
recommended by the Atlantic and Pacific Flyway Councils. The Service
continues to support the use of regulations for mallards that emphasize
protection of females while allowing optimum recreational opportunity
on males. Therefore, the Service believes that it would be premature to
remove hen restrictions without further investigation of the potential
biological and social consequences of such changes. Further, the
Service is concerned about the potential of synergistic effects of
removing hen restrictions on the harvest of similar appearing species
like mottled or black ducks.
F. Zones and Split Seasons
Council Recommendations: The Upper-Region Regulations Committee of
the Mississippi Flyway Council recommended the Service allow ``3 zones
and 2-way splits in one or more zones'' as an additional option to the
current zoning process. The Committee also requested that the Service
allow States up to 1 year to choose this option, based on the public-
input process States undertake, before they provide the Service with
their proposal (prior to the 1998-99 regular-duck season).
Written Comments: The Louisiana Wildlife Federation urged the
Service to consider allowing Louisiana to split into north and south
zones for duck hunting.
G. Special Seasons/Species Management
i. Canvasback
Council Recommendations: The Upper-Region Regulations Committee of
the Mississippi Flyway Council recommended the Service continue its use
of the Office of Migratory Bird Management's January 1994 ``Draft--
Canvasback Harvest Management: An Interim Strategy'' to guide the 1997-
98 regulatory decisions on canvasback.
ii. Pintails
Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council, the Upper-
Region Regulations Committee of the Mississippi Flyway Council, and the
Central Flyway Council did not endorse the Pacific Flyway Council's
``Proposed Interim Strategy for Northern Pintail Harvest Regulations''
as circulated for Councils' review in February of this year.
The Central Flyway Council recommended an interim, prescriptive
method for determining pintail daily bag limits based on the breeding
population size. The pintail limit would be 1 with a breeding
population below 3.0 million; 2 with a breeding population between 3.0
and 4.5 million; 3 with a breeding population between 4.5 and 5.6
million; and equal to the overall daily bag limit with a breeding
population above 5.6 million.
The Pacific Flyway Council recommended adoption of a revised
``Proposed Interim Harvest Strategy.'' The Council's revised interim
strategy included several modifications intended to address the
concerns expressed by the other Flyway Councils and by the Service
technical review. The revised interim strategy was presented to the
Service and the other three Flyways at the April 22, 1997, AHM meeting
in Arlington, VA.
The revised strategy is based on a mathematical model of the
continental pintail population, which assumes that:
(1) the size of the continental population can be effectively
monitored through spring surveys in the northcentral U.S., Central
Canada, and Alaska,
(2) mortality due to hunting is additive to natural mortality,
(3) harvest in Canada and Alaska is relatively constant from one
year to the next,
(4) crippling loss is constant and proportional to the size of
the retrieved harvest,
(5) recruitment of young birds can be reasonably predicted based
on the distribution of breeding pintails, and
(6) harvest of pintails can be reasonably predicted based on the
length of the season and pintail bag limit in each Flyway.
The model predicts allowable harvest of pintails in the lower 48
States based on the current size of the pintail breeding population,
anticipated recruitment, anticipated natural mortality, anticipated
mortality due to hunting, and the desired size of the population in the
following spring.
Written Comments: The California Waterfowl Association urged
adoption of a pintail interim AHM model for determining alternative
daily bag limits for the 1997-98 hunting season.
An individual from Louisiana recommended a daily bag limit of 2
pintails, only 1 of which could be a hen, under the ``liberal''
alternative.
An individual from Oregon was concerned about potential increases
in pintail harvest given the population status of pintails.
An individual in Louisiana believed that the pintail season should
be closed since the population had not recovered despite good breeding
conditions.
Service Response: The Service remains concerned about the overall
status of the continental population of northern pintails. The breeding
population of northern pintails was an estimated 2,735,900 in 1996,
which was 38 percent below the 1955-95 average and more than 50 percent
below the population objective established in the North American
Waterfowl Management Plan.
The Service recognizes the value of developing a strategy for
determining pintail hunting regulations that is technically sound and
explicitly promotes growth of the pintail population. The Service
believes that ultimately pintail hunting regulations should be guided
by a formal AHM process. This year, a cooperative effort began to
develop the needed technical foundation for a more formal incorporation
of pintails into the AHM process. The Service recognizes and greatly
appreciates the support for this effort provided by the Flyway Councils
and participating non-governmental organizations. However, since it
likely will require about three more years to complete the development
and implementation of this new process, the Service believes there is
merit in adopting an interim prescriptive strategy for the management
of pintail harvest until the species can be fully addressed by the AHM
process.
In the July 22, 1996, Federal Register (61 FR 37994), the Service
indicated that the adoption of any interim strategy would be dependent
on how the strategy addressed three key concerns: (1) explicit harvest-
management objectives, (2) comprehensive model development for
continental pintails, and (3) a consideration of the regulatory
constraints imposed by the adaptive harvest strategy for mid-continent
mallards. We believe that the strategy recommended by the Pacific
Flyway Council more satisfactorily addresses these elements than does
the strategy recommended by the Central Flyway. Therefore, the Service
proposes to adopt the revised interim harvest strategy proposed by the
Pacific Flyway Council, with the following modifications: (1) the
maximum pintail daily bag limit under any regulatory alternative in any
Flyway would be limited to 3 pintails, and (2) that this interim
strategy will be replaced by a more fully adaptive approach at the
earliest opportunity. Further, we believe the interim pintail harvest
strategy should be thoroughly reviewed in about 3 years, regardless of
[[Page 31304]]
whether a more adaptive approach is available at that time.
The technical details of the Pacific Flyway Proposal are available
by writing directly to MBMO at the address indicated under the caption
ADDRESSES.
iii. September Teal Seasons
Council Recommendations: The Lower-Region Regulations Committee of
the Mississippi Flyway Council recommended the continuance of the
experimental September teal/wood duck seasons in Kentucky and Tennessee
for the 1997-98 season with no change from the 1996-97 season
frameworks.
The Central Flyway Council recommended a 3-year experimental teal
harvest strategy in the Central Flyway based on the breeding population
of blue-winged teal. When the 3-year running average breeding
population of blue-winged teal is 4.7 million or greater, the Council's
recommended harvest strategy would consist of two changes to the
current September teal season frameworks. First, in those Central
Flyway States currently allowed a September teal season, an additional
7 days of hunting (for a total of 16 days) and 1 additional teal (for a
total of 5 teal) would be allowed. Second, for Central Flyway
production States, the recommended harvest strategy would provide for a
season of up to 7 days, beginning no earlier than September 20, and a
daily bag limit of 4 ducks, 3 of which must be teal. The Council
further recommended that the Service work with the States to
cooperatively develop an experimental design and criteria to adequately
evaluate the proposed expansion of teal harvest.
iv. September Duck Seasons
Council Recommendations: The Upper-Region Regulations Committee of
the Mississippi Flyway Council recommended that Iowa be allowed to open
the second segment of their split duck season no earlier than October
10, instead of October 15.
v. High Plains Mallard Management Unit
Council Recommendations: The Central Flyway Council recommended
minor administrative changes to the High Plains Mallard Management Unit
boundary in North Dakota and South Dakota for boundary clarification
and wetland development.
vi. Youth Hunt
Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended
the continuance of the youth waterfowl hunt day and requested the
Service announce their intent in June. The Council further recommended
that ducks, coots, mergansers, moorhens, brant and snow geese be open
to harvest on the special day and requested clarification of whether
youth may participate in other open migratory bird hunting seasons on
that day.
The Upper-Region Regulations Committee of the Mississippi Flyway
Council recommended that youth waterfowl hunt day bag limits be the
same as the regular-season bag limits and include ducks, geese, and
coots, with framework dates 14 days outside the regular duck-season
framework dates instead of 10.
The Lower-Region Regulations Committee of the Mississippi Flyway
Council recommended the inclusion of geese and coots in a 2-day youth
waterfowl hunting season, with framework dates 14 days outside of the
regular duck-season framework dates instead of 10.
The Pacific Flyway Council recommended the continuation of the
youth hunt allowing States to select outside the general season and
frameworks.
4. Canada Geese
A. Special Seasons
Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended a
3-year experimental September Canada goose season in New Jersey with a
framework closing date of the first Saturday in October.
The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended an experimental framework
closing date of October 5 for the Long Island, New York, 1997 September
Canada Goose Season.
The Pacific Flyway Council recommended expansion of the Washington
September Canada goose hunt zone to include all of Washington for 7
consecutive days. The Council also recommended the establishment of a
new 9-day season, with a 2-bird daily bag and possession limit, in
Humboldt County, California. Harvest of up to 200 birds would be
controlled through a regulated permit system.
B. Regular Seasons
Council Recommendations: The Upper-Region Regulations Committee of
the Mississippi Flyway Council recommended Iowa be allowed to open its
regular Canada goose season on September 27, 1997, rather than on the
Saturday nearest October 1 (October 4, 1997).
7. Snow and Ross's (Light) Geese
Council Recommendations: The Lower-Region Regulations Committee of
the Mississippi Flyway Council recommended the Service follow the
regulatory changes for snow goose harvest endorsed by the Arctic Goose
Joint Venture Management Board.
The Central Flyway Council recommended the Service extend light
goose hunting in the Rainwater Basin region of Nebraska to March 10.
9. Sandhill Cranes
Council Recommendations: The Central Flyway and Pacific Flyway
Councils recommended that in Montana, sandhill cranes in Wheatland
County and that portion of Sweet Grass County north of I-90 be
delineated as Rocky Mountain Population sandhill cranes. Thus,
management of these cranes, including harvest, would be guided by the
Rocky Mountain Population Sandhill Crane Management Plan, rather than
the Mid-Continent Population Sandhill Crane Management Plan.
17. White-Winged and White-Tipped Doves
Council Recommendations: The Central Flyway Council recommended
removing the restriction of no more than 6 white-winged doves in the
aggregate daily bag limit during the regular mourning dove season in
Texas.
18. Alaska
Council Recommendations: The Pacific Flyway Council recommended an
experimental tundra swan season in the Kotzebue Sound region of
Alaska's GMU 23, which would be consistent with the Pacific Flyway
Management Plan's harvest and permit guidelines for Western Population
of [Tundra] swans, and current guidelines for conductive experimental
seasons (3-year evaluation). The recommended season framework would be
September 1 - October 31 with a 3-swan per season limit (by sequential
permit) and a maximum of 300 permits in the GMU.
The Pacific Flyway Council recommended an increase in Alaska's dark
goose daily bag and possession limit from 4 and 8 to 6 and 12,
respectively in GMU 9(D) and the Unimak Island portion of Unit 10.
The Pacific Flyway Council recommended an increase in Alaska's
falconry bag limits to 6 daily and 12 in possession for migratory birds
in the aggregate. Restrictive species limits would not be applied.
22. Falconry
Written Comments: The North American Falconers Association urged
the Service to examine all possible means by which falconers might be
afforded safe access to the expanding
[[Page 31305]]
hunting potential reflected in the AHM working group's recommended
alternatives. In particular, they were concerned that the potential
``liberal'' alternative (i.e., 107-day season) under consideration in
the Pacific Flyway allows no opportunity for special falconry seasons
under current regulations. Further, they can envision other similar
season expansions in other Flyways.
Service Response: Under the Migratory Bird Treaty (1916), sport
hunting seasons are set at a maximum of 107 days. However, most regular
hunting seasons are much shorter than that permitted by the Treaty.
Thus, the Service has utilized special ``extended'' falconry seasons
which allow falconers the opportunity to hunt when gun hunters are not
afield. The Service recognizes that as some regular hunting seasons
become longer due to increases in certain migratory bird populations
and overall decreasing hunter numbers, seasons approach, and in some
cases, meet, the Treaty's mandated 107-day season limit. While the
Service also recognizes the special concerns of falconers relative to
the safety of their birds, we do not believe the provisions of the
Treaty allow for any latitude regarding sport season length and methods
of take.
23. Other
A. Compensatory Days
Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council requested the
Service grant compensatory days for States in their Flyway that are
closed to waterfowl hunting statewide on Sunday by State law. The
Council's requested compensatory days would apply to waterfowl seasons
only and not to other migratory game birds. The compensatory request
includes the States of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland,
Massachusetts, New Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and
West Virginia.
Public Comment Invited
The Service intends that adopted final rules be as responsive as
possible to all concerned interests, and therefore desires to obtain
the comments and suggestions of the public, other concerned
governmental agencies, non-governmental organizations, and other
private interests on these proposals. Such comments, and any additional
information received, may lead to final regulations that differ from
these proposals.
Special circumstances are involved in the establishment of these
regulations which limit the amount of time that 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, the Service believes
that to allow comment periods past the dates specified is contrary to
the public interest.
Comment Procedure
The policy of the Department of the Interior, whenever practical,
affords the public an opportunity to participate in the rulemaking
process. 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 relevant comments received. The
Service will attempt to acknowledge received comments, but substantive
response to individual comments may not be provided.
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, hunting regulations are designed, among other
things, to remove or alleviate chances of conflict between seasons for
migratory game birds 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. It is possible that the findings from the consultations, which
will be included in a biological opinion, may cause modification of
some regulatory measures proposed in this document. The final
frameworks will reflect any modifications. The Service's biological
opinions resulting from its consultation under Section 7 are public
documents and are 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.
Regulatory Flexibility Act; Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 and the
Paperwork Reduction Act
In the Federal Register dated March 13, 1997, the Service reported
measures it had undertaken to comply with requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act and the Executive Order. These included
preparing a Small Entity Flexibility Analysis (Analysis) in 1996 to
document the significant beneficial economic effect on a substantial
number of small entities. The Analysis estimated that migratory bird
hunters would spend between $254 and $592 million at small businesses
in 1996. 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.
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 1997-98
hunting season are authorized under 16 U.S.C. 703-712 and 16 U.S.C. 742
a-j.
Dated: May 30, 1997.
Donald J. Barry,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
BILLING CODE 4310-55-F
[[Page 31306]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP06JN97.020
[FR Doc. 97-14882 Filed 6-5-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C