[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 243 (Monday, December 20, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 75892-75895]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-27775]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 21

RIN 1018-AT63


Migratory Bird Permits; Determination That the State of 
Connecticut Meets Federal Falconry Standards

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: We propose to add the State of Connecticut to the list of 
States whose falconry laws meet or exceed Federal falconry standards. 
We have reviewed the Connecticut falconry regulations and have 
determined that they are in compliance with the regulations governing 
falconry. This action will enable citizens to apply for Federal and 
State falconry permits and to practice falconry in Connecticut.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed rule no later than 
January 19, 2005.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by RIN 1018-AT63, by any 
of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Agency Web Site: http://migratorybirds.fws.gov. Follow the 
links to submit a comment.
     E-mail: [email protected].
     Fax: 703-358-2217.
     Mail: Chief, Division of Migratory Bird Management, U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Mail Stop MBSP-
4107, Arlington, Virginia 22203-1610. You may inspect comments during 
normal business hours at the same address.
     Hand Delivery/Courier: Division of Migratory Bird 
Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4501 North Fairfax Drive, 
Room 4091, Arlington, Virginia 22203-1610.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include Regulatory 
Information Number (RIN) 1018-AT63 at the beginning. All comments 
received, including any personal information provided, will be 
available for public inspection at the above (``Hand Delivery/
Courier'') address. For detailed instructions on submitting comments 
and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the ``Public 
Participation'' heading in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 
this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Millsap, Chief, Division of 
Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 703-358-
1714; Dr. George Allen, Wildlife Biologist, 703-358-1825; or Diane 
Pence, Regional Migratory Bird Coordinator, Hadley, Massachusetts, 413-
253-8577.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Fish and Wildlife Service is the Federal agency with the 
primary responsibility for managing migratory birds. Our authority is 
based on the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) (16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.), 
which implements conventions with Great Britain (for Canada), Mexico, 
Japan, and the Soviet Union (Russia). Raptors (birds of prey) are 
afforded Federal protection by the 1972 amendment to the Convention for 
the Protection of Migratory Birds and Game Animals, February 7, 1936, 
United States--Mexico, as amended; the Convention between the United 
States and Japan for the Protection of Migratory Birds in Danger of 
Extinction and Their Environment, September 19, 1974; and the 
Convention Between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet 
Socialist Republics (Russia) Concerning the Conservation of Migratory 
Birds and Their Environment, November 26, 1976.
    The taking and possession of raptors for falconry are strictly 
prohibited except as permitted under regulations implementing the MBTA. 
Raptors also may be protected by State regulations. Regulations 
governing the issuance of permits for migratory birds are authorized by 
the MBTA and subsequent regulations. They are in title 50, Code of 
Federal Regulations, parts 10, 13, 21, and (for eagle falconry) 22.
    Regulations in 50 CFR part 21 provide for review and approval of 
State falconry laws by the Fish and Wildlife Service. A list of States 
whose falconry laws are approved by the Service is found in 50 CFR 
21.29(k). The practice of falconry is authorized in those States. As 
provided in 50 CFR 21.29(a) and (c), the Director has reviewed 
certified copies of the falconry regulations

[[Page 75893]]

adopted by the State of Connecticut and has determined that they meet 
or exceed Federal falconry standards. Federal falconry standards 
contained in 50 CFR 21.29(d) through (i) include permit requirements, 
classes of permits, examination procedures, facilities and equipment 
standards, raptor marking restrictions, and raptor taking restrictions. 
Connecticut regulations also meet or exceed all restrictions or 
conditions found in 50 CFR 21.29(j), which include requirements on the 
number, species, acquisition, and marking of raptors. Therefore, we are 
proposing that the State of Connecticut be listed under Sec.  21.29(k) 
as a State that meets Federal falconry standards. Inclusion of 
Connecticut in this list would eliminate the current restriction that 
prohibits falconry in that State.

Why Is This Rulemaking Needed?

    The need for the proposed changes to 50 CFR 21.29(k) arose from the 
desire of the State of Connecticut to institute a falconry program for 
the benefit of citizens interested in the sport of falconry. 
Accordingly, the State promulgated regulations that we have concluded 
meet the Federal requirements protecting migratory birds. The proposed 
changes to 50 CFR 21.29(k) are necessary to allow persons in the State 
of Connecticut to practice falconry under the regulations the State 
submitted for approval.

Changes in the Regulations Governing Falconry

    We propose to add the State of Connecticut to the list of States 
with approved falconry regulations that will enable citizens to 
practice falconry in the State.
    Clarity of This Regulation. Executive Order 12866 requires each 
agency to write regulations that are easy to understand. We invite your 
comments on how to make this rule easier to understand, including 
answers to questions such as the following: (1) Are the requirements in 
the rule clearly stated? (2) Does the rule contain technical language 
or jargon that interferes with its clarity? (3) Does the format of the 
rule (grouping and order of sections, use of headings, paragraphing, 
etc.) aid or reduce its clarity? (4) Would the rule be easier to 
understand if it were divided into more (but shorter) sections? (A 
``section'' appears in bold type and is preceded by the symbol ``Sec.  
'' and a numbered heading; for example, ``Sec.  21.29 Falconry 
standards and falconry permitting.'') (5) Does the description of the 
rule in the ``Supplementary Information'' section of the preamble help 
you to understand the proposed rule? What else could we do to make the 
rule easier to understand?
    Send a copy of any comments that concern how we could make this 
rule easier to understand to: Office of Regulatory Affairs, Department 
of the Interior, Room 7229, 1849 C Street NW., Washington, DC 20240. 
You also may e-mail comments to [email protected].
    Regulatory Planning and Review. In accordance with the criteria in 
Executive Order 12866, this rule is not a significant regulatory 
action.
    a. This rule will not have an annual economic effect of $100 
million or more or adversely affect an economic sector, productivity, 
jobs, the environment, or other units of government. A cost-benefit and 
economic analysis is not required. This rule will affect a limited 
number of potential falconers in Connecticut.
    b. This rule will not create inconsistencies with other agencies' 
actions. The rule deals solely with governance of falconry in 
Connecticut. No other Federal agency has any role in regulating 
falconry.
    c. This rule will not materially affect entitlements, grants, user 
fees, loan programs, or the rights and obligations of their recipients. 
There are no entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs 
associated with the regulation of falconry.
    d. This rule will not raise novel legal or policy issues. This rule 
simply adds Connecticut to the list of States with approved falconry 
regulations.

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as 
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 
(SBREFA) of 1996), whenever an agency is required to publish a notice 
of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make 
available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that 
describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small 
businesses, small organizations, and small government jurisdictions). 
However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of 
an agency certifies the rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. SBREFA amended 
the Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal agencies to provide a 
statement of the factual basis for certifying that a rule will not have 
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. We have examined this rule's potential effects on small 
entities as required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act, and have 
determined that this action will not have a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities because the change will 
merely approve the falconry regulations for Connecticut and allow the 
practice of falconry there. This determination is based on the fact 
that we are simply adding one State to the list of States with approved 
falconry regulations. This rule will have no significant economic 
effect on a substantial number of small entities, and no regulatory 
flexibility analysis is required.
    This rule is not a major rule under SBREFA, 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
    a. This rule does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 
million or more. Approval of the Connecticut regulations will have only 
a very small effect on the economy. We estimate that 20 individuals 
would obtain falconry permits as a result of this rule, and many of the 
expenditures of those permittees would accrue to small businesses. The 
maximum number of birds allowed by a falconer is three, so the maximum 
number of birds likely to be possessed is 60. Some birds would be taken 
from the wild, but others could be purchased. Using one of the more 
expensive birds, the northern goshawk, as an estimate, the cost to 
procure a single bird is less than $5,000, which, with an upper limit 
of 60 birds, translates into $300,000. Expenditures for building 
facilities would be less than $32,000 for 60 birds, and for care and 
feeding less than $60,000. These expenditures, totaling less than 
$400,000, represent an upper limit of potential economic impact from 
the addition of Connecticut to the list of approved States.
    b. This rule will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for 
consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government 
agencies, or geographic regions. The practice of falconry does not 
significantly affect costs or prices in any sector of the economy.
    c. This rule will not have significant adverse effects on 
competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the 
ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based 
enterprises. Falconry is an endeavor of private individuals. Neither 
regulation nor practice of falconry significantly affects business 
activities.
    Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. In accordance with the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).

[[Page 75894]]

    a. This rule will not ``significantly or uniquely'' affect small 
governments. A Small Government Agency Plan is not required. Falconry 
is an endeavor of private individuals. Neither regulation nor practice 
of falconry affects small government activities in any significant way.
    b. This rule will not produce a Federal mandate of $100 million or 
greater in any year, i.e., it is not a ``significant regulatory 
action'' under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
    Takings. In accordance with Executive Order 12630, the rule does 
not have significant takings implications. A takings implication 
assessment is not required. This rule does not contain a provision for 
taking of private property.
    Federalism. This rule does not have sufficient Federalism effects 
to warrant preparation of a Federalism assessment under Executive Order 
13132. It will not interfere with the State's ability to manage itself 
or its funds.
    Civil Justice Reform. In accordance with Executive Order 12988, the 
Office of the Solicitor has determined that the rule does not unduly 
burden the judicial system and meets the requirements of sections 3(a) 
and 3(b)(2) of the Order.
    Paperwork Reduction Act. We examined these regulations under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. OMB has approved the information 
collection requirements of the Migratory Bird Permits Program and 
assigned clearance number 1018-0022, which expires 7/31/2007. This 
regulation does not change or add to the approved information 
collection. Information from the collection is used to document take of 
wild raptors for use in falconry and to document transfers of birds 
held for falconry between permittees. A Federal 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.
    National Environmental Policy Act. We have analyzed this rule in 
accordance with the criteria of the National Environmental Policy Act 
(NEPA) and Part 516 of the Department of the Interior Manual (DM). This 
rule does not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting 
the quality of the human environment, and does not require the 
preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement or an Environmental 
Assessment (EA). We prepared an EA in July 1988 to support 
establishment of simpler, less restrictive regulations governing the 
use of most raptors in falconry. You can obtain a copy of the EA by 
contacting us at the address in the ADDRESSES section. This rule simply 
adds Connecticut to the list of States with approved falconry 
regulations. In the last five years we have added several States to the 
list of those with approved falconry regulations. Those additions 
generated few public or agency comments. We view this action as a 
routine action with precedent. Therefore, the action is categorically 
excluded under Department of the Interior NEPA procedures as an 
``amendment to an approved action when such changes have no or minor 
potential environmental impact'' (516 DM 6, Appendix 1.4 (A)(1)).
    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), Executive Order 13175, and 512 DM 2, we have evaluated 
potential effects on Federally recognized Indian tribes and have 
determined that there are no potential effects. This rule will not 
interfere with the Tribes' ability to manage themselves or their funds 
or to regulate falconry on tribal lands.
    Energy Supply, Distribution or Use (Executive Order 13211). On May 
18, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13211 on regulations 
that significantly affect energy supply, distribution, and use. 
Executive Order 13211 requires agencies to prepare Statements of Energy 
Effects when undertaking certain actions. Because this rule only 
affects the practice of falconry in the United States, it is not a 
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, and will not 
significantly affect energy supplies, distribution, or use. Therefore, 
this action is not a significant energy action and no Statement of 
Energy Effects is required.

Are There Environmental Consequences of the Proposed Action?

    The environmental impacts of this action are extremely limited.
    Socioeconomic. We do not expect this action to have discernible 
socioeconomic impacts.
    Raptor populations. This rule does not significantly alter the 
conduct of falconry in the United States. We believe that there only 
about 10 falconers or individuals interested in being falconers in 
Connecticut, and take of raptors for falconry in the State will be 
prohibited by the State falconry regulations. Therefore, this rule will 
have a negligible effect on raptor populations.
    Endangered and Threatened Species. The regulation change will not 
affect threatened or endangered species in Connecticut for the reasons 
set forth below.

Is This Rule in Compliance With Endangered Species Act Requirements?

    Yes. Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as 
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that ``The Secretary [of the 
Interior] shall review other programs administered by him and utilize 
such programs in furtherance of the purposes of this Act.'' It further 
states that the Secretary must ``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 * * * '' 
The Division of Threatened and Endangered Species concurred with our 
finding that the revised regulations will not affect listed species.
    Author. The author of this rulemaking is Dr. George T. Allen, U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, 4401 
North Fairfax Drive, Mail Stop MBSP-4107, Arlington, Virginia 22203-
1610.
    Public Participation. You may submit written comments on this rule 
to the location identified in the ADDRESSES section, or you may submit 
electronic comments to any of the electronic comments addresses listed 
in the ADDRESSES section. We must receive your comments before the date 
listed in the DATES section. All comments will become part of the 
Administrative Record for the review of the approval. When submitting 
electronic or written comments, refer to the file number RIN 1018-AT63.
    When submitting your electronic comment, please include your name 
and return address in your message, identify it as comments on the 
falconry regulations change, and submit your message as an ASCII file. 
Do not use special characters or any encryption. If you do not receive 
a confirmation from the system that we have received your electronic 
comments, you can contact us directly at 703-358-1714.
    When submitting written comments, please include your name and 
return address in your letter and identify it as comments on the 
falconry regulations change. To facilitate our compilation of the 
Administrative Record for this action, you must submit written comments 
on 8\1/2\ inch by 11 inch paper.
    All comments on the proposed rule will be available for public 
inspection during normal business hours at Room 4091 at the Fish and 
Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management,

[[Page 75895]]

4501 North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Virginia 22203-1610. The complete 
file for this proposed rule is available, by appointment, during normal 
business hours at the same address. You may call 703-358-1825 to make 
an appointment to view the files.
    Our practice is to make comments, including names and home 
addresses of respondents, available for public review during regular 
business hours. An individual respondent may request that we withhold 
his or her home address from the rulemaking record, which we will honor 
to the extent allowable by law. There also may be circumstances in 
which we would withhold from the rulemaking record a respondent's 
identity, as allowable by law. If you wish us to withhold your name 
and/or address, you must state this prominently at the beginning of 
your comment. We will make all submissions from organizations or 
businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as 
representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, available 
for public inspection in their entirety. We will not consider anonymous 
comments.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 21

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

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, we propose to amend part 
21, subpart C, subchapter B, chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations, as set forth below:

PART 21--MIGRATORY BIRD PERMITS

    1. The authority citation for part 21 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 703-712; Pub. L. 106-108; 16 U.S.C. 668a.


Sec.  21.29  [Amended]

    2. Amend Sec.  21.29 by adding to paragraph (k) the word 
``Connecticut,'' between the words ``*Colorado,'' and ``*Delaware,''.

    Dated: December 10, 2004.
Craig Manson,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 04-27775 Filed 12-17-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P