[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 57 (Friday, March 22, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 11805-11806]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7025]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 20
RIN 1018-AD74
Migratory Bird Hunting: Regulations Regarding the Prohibition
Against Artificially Altering or Manipulating Natural Vegetation in
Moist Soil Areas To Attract Waterfowl for Hunting Purposes
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of intent and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The principal purpose of this action is to notify the public
and invite comments regarding promulgation of a separate rulemaking
that will govern the manner in which, or if at all, natural vegetation
in moist soil areas may be altered or manipulated artificially to
attract waterfowl for hunting purposes. Previously, the subject
regulations [Sec. 20.21(i)] had been part of the ongoing review of 50
CFR Part 20, but henceforth will be considered separately.
DATES: Comments on this proposal must be received by June 20, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Comments regarding this notice should be addressed to:
Director (FWS/NAWWO), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 110 ARLSQ, 1849 C
ST., NW., Washington, DC 20240. Comments received on this notice will
be available for public inspection during normal business hours in Room
110, Arlington Square Building, 4401 No. Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA
22203.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dr. Byron K. Williams, Executive Director, or Dr. Keith A. Morehouse,
Wildlife Biologist, North American Waterfowl and Wetlands Office, 703/
358-1784; Faxform 703/358-2282.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Service is currently undertaking review
and revision of the migratory bird hunting regulations contained in 50
CFR Part 20; there have been two earlier notices regarding this review
(56 FR 57872; 58 FR 63488). Publication of the proposed rule that
incorporates and/or takes into consideration comments submitted as part
of that review will occur soon.
In the Part 20 review process, the Service has received many
comments concerning waterfowl baiting. In particular, many commenters
have expressed the need for changes in regulations addressing
manipulation of natural vegetation in moist soil areas to attract
waterfowl for hunting. Based on these comments, the Service proposes
opening for further review and comment only the particular waterfowl
baiting that occurs with natural vegetation in moist soil areas.
However, it would not be judicious to treat a single concern of
waterfowl baiting in isolation. Thus, the Service further proposes to
remove the entire waterfowl aspect of the baiting regulations from the
broader review of migratory bird hunting regulations and treat it as a
separate rulemaking. Subsequently, the additional review of the
manipulation of natural vegetation on moist soil areas will be
incorporated with other aspects of waterfowl baiting in a single,
proposed rulemaking.
Waterfowl baiting has been an issue for years, possibly extending
back to the inception of the regulations and there is a wide diversity
of opinion on the subject. Some see the baiting regulations as highly
definitive and clear; others believe that they lack definition and
subject to broad, individual interpretation. The concern is how and
whether to consider changing the waterfowl baiting regulations to allow
for management (i.e., mowing or other artificial manipulation) of
natural vegetation for waterfowl habitat. There are four key issues:
(1) What are the potential impacts on available habitat? Supporters
of a regulatory change suggest that the regulations as currently
enforced impose unnecessary economic burdens on landowners (e.g., by
altering otherwise cost-effective mowing schedules). As a result, some
groups argue that the current baiting regulations will lead to loss of
waterfowl habitats as landowners transfer these lands to other uses.
Though such losses may occur, at present there is no way to determine
their magnitude and importance.
(2) What are the potential impacts on waterfowl populations?
Waterfowl harvest is likely to increase; however, the magnitude of the
increase and resulting impacts on populations are open to speculation
since little or no evidence exists to support a position.
(3) What are the potential impacts on law enforcement? Any change
must be enforceable by law enforcement personnel and clearly define
what constitutes ``natural vegetation.'' Hunters must be able to
clearly recognize what is lawful and what is not lawful, so that law
enforcement agents are not in the position of certifying areas as legal
for hunting, or trying to enforce rules that are unclear and subject to
wide individual interpretation.
(4) What is the effect on existing law? Courts have interpreted the
current baiting regulations in a number of decisions. These judicial
opinions add to the ability of those concerned with the regulations to
determine accurately the scope of their prohibitions. Any change to the
regulations would render some of this existing case law inapplicable
and, therefore, would at least temporarily increase the degree of
uncertainty associated with the regulations.
The Service is not offering strategies or options to resolve the
issue at this time. The intent of this notice is to apprise the public
that the Service is beginning a process to review and may propose to
change the baiting regulations as they apply to natural vegetation
manipulation and waterfowl hunting. At a later date, the Service will
provide more detail on the nature of the process and how the Service
proposes to involve the public.
You may at any time submit preliminary comments regarding whether
revision of the waterfowl baiting regulations is desirable. However,
the Service does plan to publish a proposed rule during which specific
comments will be solicited. In addition, the Service will consider in
future proposed rulemakings any comments received in response to
previous notices (referenced earlier in this section) pertaining to
waterfowl baiting and moist soil management.
In summary, the principal purpose of this action is to notify the
public and invite any comments regarding promulgation of separate
rulemakings that will govern the manner in which, or if at all, natural
vegetation in moist soil areas may be altered or manipulated
artificially to attract waterfowl for hunting purposes.
NEPA Consideration
Pursuant to the requirements of section 102(2)(C) of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4332(C)), and the
Council on Environmental Quality's regulation for implementing NEPA (40
CFR 1500-1508), the Service will comply with NEPA prior to adopting a
final rule.
Endangered Species Act Considerations
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), as amended (16
U.S.C. 1531-1543; 87 Stat. 884), provides that, ``The Secretary shall
review other programs
[[Page 11806]]
administered by him and utilize such programs in furtherance of the
purposes of this Act'' (and) 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 * * *''
Consequently, the Service will initiate Section 7 consultation under
the ESA for the final rulemaking to change, if appropriate, the
waterfowl baiting regulations. When completed, the results of the
Service's consultation under Section 7 of the ESA may be inspected at,
and will be available from, the North American Waterfowl and Wetlands
Office, Suite 110, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Virginia 22203.
Authorship
The primary author of this notice is Dr. Keith A. Morehouse, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, North American Waterfowl and Wetlands
Office, Arlington, Virginia.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 20
Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Transportation, Wildlife.
The regulation(s) that eventually may be promulgated to govern
baiting are authorized under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (July 3,
1918), as amended (16 U.S.C. 703-711); the Fish and Wildlife
Improvement Act of 1978 (November 8, 1978), as amended (16 U.S.C. 712);
and the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 (August 8, 1956), as amended (16
U.S.C. 742 a-d and e-j).
Dated: March 15, 1996.
George T. Frampton,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 96-7025 Filed 3-21-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-55-M
