[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 173 (Wednesday, September 6, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 53936-53940]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-22721]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 20

RIN 1018-AG22


Migratory Bird Hunting; Approval of Tungsten-Matrix Shot as 
Nontoxic for Hunting Waterfowl and Coots

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service or we) amends 50 
CFR 20.21(j) to grant final approval of tungsten-matrix shot as 
nontoxic for hunting waterfowl and coots. Acute toxicity studies reveal 
no adverse effects over a 30-day period on mallards (Anas 
platyrhynchos) dosed with tungsten-matrix shot. Reproductive/chronic 
toxicity testing over a 150-day period indicated that tungsten-matrix 
administered to adult mallards did not adversely affect them or the 
offspring they produced. We also remove 50 CFR Subpart M (Part 20--
Migratory Bird Hunting)--Criteria and Schedule for Implementing 
Nontoxic Shot Zones for the 1987-88 and Subsequent Waterfowl Hunting 
Season because implementation of nontoxic shot zones in the United 
States was completed in 1991.

DATES: This rule takes effect September 6, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Environmental Assessment are available by 
writing to the Chief, Division of Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Suite 634, Arlington, VA 
22203.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jon Andrew, Chief, Division of 
Migratory Bird Management, (703) 358-1714.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (Act) 
(16 U.S.C. 703-712 and 16 U.S.C. 742 a-j) implements migratory bird 
treaties between the United States and Great Britain for Canada (1916 
and 1996 as amended), Mexico (1936 and 1972 as amended), Japan (1972 
and 1974 as amended), and Russia (then the Soviet Union, 1978). These 
treaties protect certain migratory birds from take, except as permitted 
under the Act. The Act authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to 
regulate take of migratory birds in the United States. Under this 
authority, the Fish and Wildlife Service controls the hunting of 
migratory game birds through regulations in 50 CFR part 20.
    The purpose of this rule is to allow the hunting public to use 
tungsten-

[[Page 53937]]

matrix shot for hunting waterfowl and coots. Accordingly, we propose to 
amend 50 CFR 20.21, which describes illegal hunting methods for 
migratory birds. Paragraph (j) of Sec. 20.21 pertains to prohibited 
types of shot. In accordance with Sec. 20.21(j)(2), tungsten-matrix 
shot (95.9 parts tungsten: 4.1 parts polymer with 1 percent residual 
lead) is legal as nontoxic shot for waterfowl and coot hunting for the 
1999-2000 hunting season only. We amend Sec. 20.21(j) to allow 
permanent use of tungsten-matrix shot in the formulation described 
above.
    Since the mid-1970s, we have sought to identify shot that does not 
pose a significant toxic hazard to migratory birds or other wildlife. 
Currently, only steel, bismuth-tin, tungsten-iron, and tungsten-polymer 
shot are approved as nontoxic. We previously granted temporary approval 
for tungsten-matrix shot during the 1998-99 (December 8, 1998; 63 FR 
67619) and 1999-2000 (August 19, 1999; 64 FR 45400) migratory bird 
hunting seasons. Compliance with the use of nontoxic shot has increased 
over the last few years. We believe that compliance will continue to 
increase with the approval and availability of other nontoxic shot 
types.
    Kent Cartridge Company has requested that we permanently approve 
tungsten-matrix shot as nontoxic for hunting waterfowl and coots. 
Kent's candidate shot is fabricated from what is described in their 
application as a mixture of powdered metals in a plastic polymer matrix 
whose density is comparable to that of lead. All component metals are 
present in their elemental form, not as compounds. The shot material 
being considered has a density of 10.8 grams/cm\3\ and is composed of 
approximately 95.9 percent tungsten and 4.1 percent plastic polymers.
    Kent's application for tungsten-matrix includes a description of 
the shot, a toxicological report (Thomas 1997), results of a 30-day 
toxicity study (Wildlife International, Ltd. 1998), and results of a 
150-day reproductive/chronic toxicity study (Gallagher et al. 2000). 
The toxicological report incorporates toxicity information (a synopsis 
of acute and chronic toxicity data for mammals and birds, potential for 
environmental concern, and toxicity to aquatic and terrestrial 
invertebrates, amphibians, and reptiles) and information on 
environmental fate and transport (shot alteration, environmental half-
life, and environmental concentration).
    Toxicity Information: The toxicity of the plastic polymers in 
tungsten-matrix is negligible due to their insolubility. There is 
considerable difference between the toxicity of soluble and insoluble 
compounds of tungsten. Elemental tungsten, as found in tungsten-matrix 
shot, is virtually insoluble and is expected to be relatively nontoxic. 
Even though most toxicity tests reviewed were based on soluble tungsten 
compounds rather than elemental tungsten, there appears to be no basis 
for concern of toxicity to wildlife for tungsten-matrix shot via 
ingestion by fish or mammals (Bursian et al. 1996a, Bursian et al. 
1996b; Bursian et al. 1999; Gigiema 1983; Karantassis 1924; Patty 1982; 
Industrial Medicine 1946).
    Environmental Fate and Transport: Elemental tungsten is insoluble 
in water and, therefore, does not weather and degrade in the 
environment. Tungsten is very stable with acids and does not easily 
form compounds with other substances. Preferential uptake by plants in 
acidic soil suggests uptake of tungsten when it has formed compounds 
with other substances rather than when it is in its elemental form 
(Kabata-Pendias and Pendias 1984).
    Environmental Concentration: The estimated environmental 
concentration (EEC) for a terrestrial ecosystem was calculated based on 
69,000 shot per hectare (Pain 1990), assuming complete erosion of shot 
material in 5 centimeters of soil. The EECs for tungsten and the two 
polymers found in tungsten-matrix are 25.7 milligram/kilogram (mg/kg), 
4.2 mg/kg, and 0.14 mg/kg, respectively. The EEC for an aquatic 
ecosystem was calculated assuming complete erosion of the shot in 1 
foot of standing water. The EECs in water for tungsten and the two 
plastic polymers found in tungsten-matrix shot are 4.2 milligram/liter 
(mg/L), 0.2 mg/L, and 0.02 mg/L, respectively.
    Effects on Birds: An extensive literature review contained in the 
application provided information on the toxicity of elemental tungsten 
to waterfowl and other birds. Ringelman et al. (1993) orally dosed 20 
8-week-old game-farm mallards with 12-17 (1.03 g average weight) 
tungsten-bismuth-tin pellets and monitored them for 32 days for 
evidence of intoxication. No birds died during the trial, and gross 
lesions were not observed during the postmortem examinations. 
Examination of tissues did not reveal any evidence of toxicity or 
tissue damage, and tungsten was not detectable in kidney or liver 
samples. The authors concluded that tungsten-bismuth-tin shot presented 
virtually no potential for acute toxicity in mallards.
    Kraabel et al. (1996) assessed the effects of embedded tungsten-
bismuth-tin shot on mallards and concluded that tungsten-bismuth-tin 
was not acutely toxic when implanted in muscle tissue. Inflammatory 
reactions to tungsten-bismuth-tin shot were localized and had no 
detectable systemic effects on mallard health.
    Ringelman et al. (1992) conducted a 32-day acute toxicity study 
that involved dosing game-farm mallards with a shot alloy of tungsten-
bismuth-tin (39 percent tungsten, 44.5 bismuth, and 16.5 tin). No dosed 
birds died during the trial, and behavior was normal. Examination of 
tissues post-euthanization revealed no toxicity or damage related to 
shot exposure. This study concluded that ``* * * tungsten-bismuth-tin 
shot presents virtually no potential for acute intoxication in mallards 
under the conditions of this study.''
    Nell (1981) fed laying chickens (Gallus domesticus) 0.4 or 1.0 
grams/kg tungsten (contained in an unspecified salt compound) in a 
commercial mash for 5 months to assess reproductive performance. Weekly 
egg production was normal, and hatchability of fertile eggs was not 
affected. Exposure of chickens to large doses of tungsten either 
through injection or by feeding resulted in an increased tissue 
concentration of tungsten (Nell 1981). The loss of tungsten from the 
liver occurred in an exponential manner with a half-life of 27 hours. 
Death due to tungsten occurred when tissue concentrations increased to 
25 milligram/gram of liver. Due to the insoluble nature of elemental 
tungsten contained in tungsten-matrix shot, it is not expected that 
such high levels of tungsten could be attained through ingestion of 
tungsten-matrix shot.
    The two plastic polymers used in tungsten-matrix shot act as a 
physical matrix in which the tungsten is distributed as ionically bound 
fine particles. Most completely polymerized nylon materials are 
physiologically inert, regardless of the toxicity of the monomer from 
which they are made (Peterson 1977). A literature review did not reveal 
studies in which either of the two polymers were evaluated for toxicity 
in birds.
    New Acute Toxicity Studies: Kent contracted with Wildlife 
International Ltd. to conduct an acute toxicity study of tungsten-
matrix. The acute toxicity test is a short-term (30-day) study where 
ducks are dosed with shot and fed commercially available duck food. 
Survival, body weight, blood chemistry (hematocrit), bone (femur), and 
organ analysis are recorded.
    Kent's 30-day dosing study (Wildlife International Ltd. 1998) 
included four

[[Page 53938]]

treatment and one control group of game-farm mallards. Treatment groups 
were exposed to one of three different types of shot: eight No. 4 
steel, eight No. 4 lead, or eight No. 4 tungsten-matrix; whereas the 
control group received no shot. The two tungsten-matrix treatment 
groups (one group with a deficient diet, one group with a balanced 
diet) each consisted of 16 birds (8 males and 8 females); whereas 
remaining treatment and control groups consisted of 6 birds each (3 
males and 3 females). All tungsten-matrix-dosed birds survived the test 
and showed no overt signs of toxicity or treatment-related effects on 
body weight. There were no differences in hematocrit or hemoglobin 
concentration between the tungsten-matrix treatment group and either 
the steel shot or control groups. No histopathological lesions were 
found during gross necropsy. In general, no adverse effects were seen 
in mallards given eight No. 4 size tungsten-matrix shot and monitored 
over a 30-day period. Tungsten was found to be below the limit of 
detection in all samples of femur, gonad, liver, and kidney from 
treatment groups.
    New Reproductive/Chronic Toxicity Study: Kent contracted with 
Wildlife International Ltd. to conduct a reproductive/chronic toxicity 
study of tungsten-matrix. The reproductive/chronic toxicity study is a 
long-term (150-day) study where ducks are dosed with shot and fed 
commercially available duck food. Survival, body weight, blood 
hematocrit, bone (femur), organ analysis, and reproductive performance 
are recorded.
    The chronic toxicity/reproductive study revealed no adverse effects 
when mallards were dosed with eight No. 4 size tungsten-matrix shot and 
monitored over a 150-day period (Gallagher et al. 2000). At initiation 
of the test (day 0), and on days 31, 60, and 90, 21 male and 21 female 
adult mallards were orally dosed with 8 No. 4 tungsten-matrix shot. On 
the same days, 22 male and 22 female adult mallards were dosed with 8 
No. 4 steel shot (negative control group). An additional four male and 
four female mallards were dosed with a single No. 4 lead shot (positive 
control group). Two lead-dosed birds (one female, one male) died from 
lead toxicosis on days 10 and 17, respectively, during the study; 
whereas no mortalities occurred in the other test groups. Hematological 
and biochemical results from blood samples collected during tests 
revealed no biologically meaningful differences between the tungsten-
matrix group and the steel shot control group. Low, but measurable, 
levels of tungsten were found in the livers of males from the tungsten-
matrix group and in the femurs of females from all treatment groups. 
For all treatment groups, levels of tungsten were below the limit of 
detection in egg yolks and whites, and all tissues collected from 
offspring. Liver and kidney tissues collected for histopathological 
examination revealed no treatment-related abnormalities.
    No significant differfences occurred in egg production, fertility, 
or hatchability of eggs from birds dosed with tungsten-matrix when 
compared to steel-dosed ducks. No differences occurred in survival and 
body weight of ducklings from birds dosed with tungsten-matrix when 
compared to ducklings from steel-dosed ducks. Blood measurements of 
ducklings from tungsten-matrix-dosed ducks were similar to measurements 
from ducklings from steel-dosed ducks. Overall, results of the 150-day 
study indicated that tungsten-matrix shot repeatedly administered to 
adult mallards did not adversely affect them, or the offspring they 
produced.

Nontoxic Shot Approval

    The nontoxic shot approval process contains a tiered review system 
and outlines three conditions for approval of shot types. The first 
condition for nontoxic shot approval is toxicity testing. Based on the 
results of the toxicological report and the toxicity tests discussed 
above, we conclude that tungsten-matrix shot does not pose a 
significant danger to migratory birds or other wildlife.
    The second condition for approval is testing for residual lead 
levels. Any shot with lead levels equal to or exceeding 1 percent will 
be considered toxic and, therefore, illegal. We have determined that 
the maximum environmentally acceptable level of lead in any nontoxic 
shot is trace amounts of 1 percent, and we have incorporated this 
requirement in the new approval process. Kent has documented that 
tungsten-matrix meets this requirement.
    The third condition for approval involves law enforcement. In the 
August 18, 1995 Federal Register (60 FR 43314), we indicated our 
position that a noninvasive field detection device to distinguish lead 
from other shot types was an important component of the nontoxic shot 
approval process. At that time, we stated that final approval of 
bismuth-tin shot would be contingent upon the development and 
availability of a noninvasive field detection device (60 FR 43315). We 
incorporated a requirement for a noninvasive field detection device in 
the revised nontoxic shot approval process published on December 1, 
1997 (62 FR 63608). The most common electronic field testing device 
used by wildlife law enforcement officers can distinguish shells 
containing tungsten-matrix from shells containing lead. Therefore, the 
tungsten-matrix application meets the final condition for approval.
    As stated previously, this rule amends 50 CFR 20.21(j) by approving 
tungsten-matrix shot as nontoxic for hunting waterfowl and coots. It is 
based on the toxicological report, acute toxicity study, and the 
reproductive/chronic toxicity study submitted by Kent. Results of these 
studies indicate the absence of any deleterious effects of tungsten-
matrix shot when ingested by captive-reared mallards. This rule also 
amends Sec. 20.21(j) by removing paragraph (3), which pertains to the 
legal use of tin shot during the 1999-2000 hunting season. Because the 
1999-2000 hunting season is over, this regulation is no longer in 
effect.
    This rule further amends 50 CFR part 20, by removing and reserving 
subpart M-Criteria and Schedule for Implementing Nontoxic Shot Zones 
for the 1987-1988 and Subsequent Waterfowl Hunting Season. A need for 
this Subpart no longer exists, as implementation of nontoxic shot zones 
in the United States was completed in 1991. Nontoxic shot zones are 
defined in Sec. 20.108 for the purpose of hunting waterfowl, coots, and 
certain other species as being the contiguous 48 United States, and the 
States of Alaska and Hawaii, the Territories of Puerto Rico and the 
Virgin Islands, and the territorial waters of the United States.

Public Comments and Responses

    The July 26, 2000, proposed rule published in the Federal Register 
(65 FR 45957) invited public comments from interested parties. The 
closing date for receipt of all comments was August 25, 2000. During 
this 30-day comment period, we received two comments.
    The Wildlife Legislative Fund of America encouraged the Service to 
give final approval for tungsten-matrix shot. They believe that 
approval of tungsten-matrix would help fulfill the objective of making 
lead shot substitutes available to hunters.
    Kent Cartridge Company (Kent) supported prompt final approval of 
tungsten-matrix shot.
    Service Response: We agree that providing another nontoxic shot 
option for hunting waterfowl and coots likely will improve hunter 
compliance, thereby reducing the amount of lead shot in the 
environment.

[[Page 53939]]

Effective Date

    Under the Administrative Procedures Act (5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.), the 
Service waives the required 30-day period before the rule becomes 
effective. This rule relieves a restriction within the terms of 5 
U.S.C. 553(d)(1). In addition, the Service finds that ``good cause'' 
exists, within the terms of 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to make this rule will 
take effect immediately upon publication. It is in the best interest of 
migratory birds and their habitats to grant final approval for 
tungsten-matrix shot as nontoxic for hunting waterfowl and coots. It is 
in the best interest of small retailers who have stocked tungsten-
matrix shot for the current season. We believe another nontoxic shot 
option likely will improve hunter compliance, thereby reducing the 
amount of lead shot in the environment.

References

Bursian, S.J., M.E. Kelly, R.J. Aulerich, D.C. Powell, and S. 
Fitzgerald. 1996a. Thirty-day dosing test to assess the toxicity of 
tungsten-iron shot in game-farm mallards. Report to Federal 
Cartridge Co. 77 pp.
Bursian, S.J., M.E. Kelly, R.J. Aulerich, D.C. Powell, and S. 
Fitzgerald. 1996b. Thirty-day dosing test to assess the toxicity of 
tungsten-polymer shot in game-farm mallards. Report to Federal 
Cartridge Co. 71 pp.
Bursian, S.J., R.M. Mitchell, R.J. Tempelman, R.J. Aulerich, and 
S.D. Fitzgerald. 1999. Chronic dosing study to assess the health and 
reproductive effects of tungsten-iron and tungsten-polymer shot on 
game-farm mallards. Report to Federal Cartridge Co. 115 pp.
Gallagher, S.P., J.B. Beavers, R. Van Hoven, M. Jaber. 2000. 
Tungsten-matrix shot: A chronic exposure study with the mallard 
including reproductive parameters. Wildlife International, Ltd. 
Project No. 475-102. Easton, Maryland. 324 pp.
Gigiema I. Sanitariya. 1983. Mezhdunarodnaya Kniga. Moscow, USSR. 
48(7):71.
Industrial Medicine. 1946. 15:482.
Kabata-Pendias, A. and H. Pendias. 1984. Trace elements in soil and 
plants. CRC Press, Inc. Boca Raton, FL.
Karantassis, T. 1924. On the toxicity of compounds of tungsten and 
molybdenum. Ann. Med. 28:1541-1543.
Kraabel, F.W., M.W. Miller, D.M. Getzy, and J.K. Ringleman. 1996. 
Effects of embedded tungsten-bismuth-tin shot and steel shot on 
mallards. J. Wildl. Dis. 38(1):1-8.
Nell, J.A., E.F. Annison, and D. Balnave. 1981. The influence of 
tungsten on the molybdenum status of poultry. Br. Poult. Sci. 
21:193-202.
Pain, D.J. 1990. Lead shot ingestion by waterbirds in the Carmarque, 
France: an investigation of levels and interspecific difference. 
Environ. Pollut. 66:273-285.
Patty's Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology. 1982. Wiley Interscience. 
Wiley & Sons, Inc. NY, NY. Third Ed.
Peterson, J.E. 1977. Industrial Health. Prentice-Hall, Englewood 
Cliffs, NJ.
Ringelman, J.K., M.W. Miller, and W.F. Andelt. 1992. Effects of 
ingested tungsten-bismuth-tin shot on mallards. CO Div. Wildl., Fort 
Collins, 24 pp.
Ringelman, J.K., M.W. Miller, and W.F. Andelt. 1993. Effects of 
ingested tungsten-bismuth-tin shot on captive mallards. J. Wildl. 
Manage. 57:725-732.
Thomas, V. G. 1997. Application for approval of tungsten-matrix shot 
as non-toxic for the hunting of migratory birds. 39 pp.
Wildlife International, Ltd. 1998. Tungsten-matrix shot: An oral 
toxicity study with the mallard. Project No. 475-101. 162 pp.

NEPA Consideration

    In compliance with the requirements of section 102(2)(C) of the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U. S. C. 4332(C)), and 
the Council on Environmental Quality's regulation for implementing NEPA 
(40 CFR 1500-1508), we prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) for 
approval of tungsten-matrix shot in August 2000. The EA is available to 
the public at the location indicated under the ADDRESSES caption. Based 
on review and evaluation of the information in the EA, we have 
determined that amending 50 CFR 20. 21(j) to provide final approval of 
tungsten-matrix shot as nontoxic for waterfowl and coot hunting would 
not be a major Federal action that would significantly affect the 
quality of the human environment.

Endangered Species Act Considerations

    Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1972, as amended 
(16 U. S. C. 1531 et seq. ), provides that Federal agencies shall 
``insure that any action authorized, funded or carried out . . . is not 
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered species 
or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse 
modification of (critical) habitat . . . '' We have completed a Section 
7 consultation under the ESA for this rule. The result of our 
consultation under Section 7 of the ESA is available to the public at 
the location indicated under the ADDRESSES caption.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U. S. C. 601 et seq. ) 
requires the preparation of flexibility analyses for rules that will 
have a significant effect on a substantial number of small entities, 
which includes small businesses, organizations, or governmental 
jurisdictions. This rule proposes to approve an additional type of 
nontoxic shot that may be sold and used to hunt migratory birds; this 
rule would provide one shot type in addition to the existing four that 
are approved. We have determined, however, that this rule will have no 
effect on small entities since the approved shot merely will supplement 
nontoxic shot already in commerce and available throughout the retail 
and wholesale distribution systems. We anticipate no dislocation or 
other local effects, with regard to hunters and others.

Executive Order 12866

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action subject to Office 
of Management and Budget (OMB) review under Executive Order 12866. OMB 
makes the final determination under E. O. 12866.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number. We have examined this regulation 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U. S. C. 3501) and found 
it to contain no information collection requirements. However, we do 
have OMB approval (1018-0067; expires 08/30/2000; renewal submitted) 
for information collection relating to what manufacturers of shot are 
required to provide to us for the nontoxic shot approval process. For 
further information, see 50 CFR 20. 134.

Unfunded Mandates Reform

    We have determined and certify pursuant to the Unfunded Mandates 
Reform 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

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

Takings Implication Assessment

    In accordance with Executive Order 12630, this rule, authorized by 
the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, does not have significant takings 
implications and does not affect any constitutionally protected 
property rights. This rule will not result in the physical occupancy of 
property, the physical invasion of property, or the regulatory taking 
of any property. In fact, this rule allows hunters to exercise 
privileges that would be otherwise unavailable and, therefore, reduces 
restrictions on the use of private and public property.

[[Page 53940]]

Federalism Effects

    Due to the migratory nature of certain species of birds, the 
Federal Government has been given responsibility over these species by 
the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. These rules do not have a substantial 
direct effect on fiscal capacity, change the roles or responsibilities 
of Federal or State governments, or intrude on State policy or 
administration. Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 13132, 
these regulations do not have significant federalism effects and do not 
have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a 
Federalism Assessment.

Government-to-Government Relationship with Tribes

    In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994, 
``Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal 
Governments'' (59 FR 22951) and 512 DM 2, we have evaluated possible 
effects on Federally recognized Indian tribes and have determined that 
there are no effects.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 20

    Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Transportation, Wildlife.


    Accordingly, we are amending part 20, subchapter B, chapter 1 of 
Title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 20--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 20 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 703-712 and 16 U.S.C. 742 a-j.

    2. Section 20.21 is amended by revising paragraph (j) in its 
entirety to read as follows:


Sec. 20.21  What hunting methods are illegal?

* * * * *
    (j) While possessing shot (either in shotshells or as loose shot 
for muzzleloading) other than steel shot, or bismuth-tin (97 parts 
bismuth: 3 parts tin with 1 percent residual lead) shot, or tungsten-
iron (40 parts tungsten: 60 parts iron with 1 percent residual lead) 
shot, or tungsten-polymer (95.5 parts tungsten: 4.5 parts Nylon 6 or 11 
with 1 percent residual lead) shot, or tungsten-matrix (95.9 parts 
tungsten: 4.1 parts polymer with 1 percent residual lead) shot, or such 
shot approved as nontoxic by the Director pursuant to procedures set 
forth in Sec. 20.134, provided that this restriction applies only to 
the taking of Anatidae (ducks, geese, [including brant] and swans), 
coots (Fulica americana) and any species that make up aggregate bag 
limits during concurrent seasons with the former in areas described in 
Sec. 20.108 as nontoxic shot zones.

Subpart M--[Removed and Reserved]

    3. Remove and reserve subpart M, consisting of Secs. 20.140 through 
20.143.

    Dated: August 30, 2000.
Stephen C. Saunders,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 00-22721 Filed 8-31-00; 1:23 pm]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P