[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 57 (Friday, March 24, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15642-15648]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7304]
[[Page 15641]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part IV
Department of the Interior
_______________________________________________________________________
Fish and Wildlife Service
_______________________________________________________________________
50 CFR Part 20
Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 1995 /
Proposed Rules
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 15642]]
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 20
RIN 1018-AC79
Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed 1995-1996 Migratory Game Bird
Hunting Regulations (Preliminary) With Requests for Indian Tribal
Proposals
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (hereinafter the Service)
proposes to establish annual hunting regulations for certain migratory
game birds. The Service also requests proposals from Indian tribes that
wish to establish special migratory bird hunting regulations. These
regulations will permit the taking of the designated species during the
1995-96 season. The Service annually prescribes outside limits
(frameworks) within which States may select hunting seasons. The
Service has also employed guidelines to establish special migratory
bird hunting regulations on Federal Indian reservations and ceded
lands. These seasons provide hunting opportunities for recreation and
sustenance; aid Federal, State, and tribal governments in the
management of migratory game birds; and are designed to permit harvests
at levels compatible with migratory bird population and habitat
conditions.
DATES: Tribal proposals and related comments should be submitted by
June 2, 1995. The comment period for proposed early-season frameworks
will end on July 21, 1995; and for proposed late-season frameworks on
September 4, 1995. The public hearing for early-season frameworks will
be held on June 22, 1995, at 9 a.m. The public hearing for late-season
frameworks will be held on August 3, 1995, at 9 a.m.
ADDRESSES: Both public hearings will be held in the Auditorium,
Department of the Interior Building, 1849 C Street NW., Washington, DC.
Written comments on the proposals and notice of intention to testify at
either hearing may be mailed 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. Comments
received will be available for public inspection during normal business
hours in room 634, Arlington Square Building, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive,
Arlington, Virginia.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on tribal
proposals contact Keith A. Morehouse, and for all other issues
regarding annual migratory bird hunting regulations contact Ron W.
Kokel. Both Dr. Morehouse and Mr. Kokel may be contacted at: 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 (703) 358-1714.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For administrative purposes, this document
consolidates the notice of intent and request for tribal proposals with
the preliminary proposals for the annual regulations-development
process. The remaining proposed and final rulemaking documents will be
published separately. For inquiries on tribal guidelines and proposals,
please contact the following personnel.
--Region 1 - Brad Bortner, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 911 N.E.
11th Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97232-4181; (503) 231-6164.
--Region 2 - Jeff Haskins, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box
1306, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103; (505) 766-8048.
--Region 3 - Steve Wilds, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Federal
Building, One Federal Drive, Fort Snelling, Minnesota 55111-4056; (612)
725-3313.
--Region 4 - Frank Bowers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1875 Century
Boulevard, Room 324, Atlanta, Georgia 30345; (404) 679-4000.
--Region 5 - George Haas, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 300 Westgate
Center Drive, Hadley, Massachusetts 01035-9589; (413) 253-8576.
--Region 6 - John Cornely, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box
25486, Denver Federal Center, Denver, Colorado 80225; (303) 236-8676.
--Region 7 - Robin West, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1011 East
Tudor Road, Anchorage, Alaska 99503; (907) 786-3423.
Notice of Intent To Establish Open Seasons
This notice announces the intention of the Director, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, to establish open hunting seasons and daily bag and
possession limits for certain designated groups or species of migratory
game birds for 1995-1996 in the contiguous United States, Alaska,
Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands, under Secs. 20.101 through
20.107, 20.109, and 20.110 of subpart K of 50 CFR part 20.
``Migratory game birds'' are those bird species so designated in
conventions between the United States and several foreign nations for
the protection and management of these birds. All other birds
designated as migratory (under 10.13 of Subpart B of 50 CFR Part 10) in
the aforementioned conventions may not be hunted. For the 1995-96
hunting season, regulations will be proposed for certain designated
members of the avian families Anatidae (ducks, geese, and swans);
Columbidae (doves and pigeons); Gruidae (cranes); Rallidae (rails,
coots, moorhens, and gallinules); and Scolopacidae (woodcock and
snipe). These proposals are described under Proposed 1995-96 Migratory
Game Bird Hunting Regulations (Preliminary) in this document.
Definitions of waterfowl flyways and mourning dove management units, as
well as a description of the data used in and the factors affecting the
regulatory process, were published in the March 14, 1990, Federal
Register (55 FR 9618).
Regulatory Schedule for 1995-1996
This is the first in a series of proposed and final rulemaking
documents for migratory game bird hunting regulations. Proposals
relating to the harvest of migratory game birds that may be initiated
after publication of this proposed rulemaking will be made available
for public review in supplemental proposed rulemakings to be published
in the Federal Register. Also, additional supplemental proposals will
be published for public comment in the Federal Register as population,
habitat, harvest, and other information become available.
Because of the late dates when certain portions of these data
become available, it is anticipated that comment periods on some
proposals will necessarily be abbreviated. Special circumstances that
limit the amount of time which the Service can allow for public comment
are involved in the establishment of these regulations. Specifically,
two considerations compress the time in which the rulemaking process
must operate: the need, on one hand, to establish final rules at a time
early enough in the summer to allow resource agencies to select and
publish season dates and bag limits prior to the hunting seasons and,
on the other hand, the lack of current data on the status of most
migratory game birds until later in the summer.
Because the process is strongly influenced by the times when
information is available for consideration, the overall regulations
process is divided into two segments. Early seasons are those seasons
that generally open prior to October 1, and [[Page 15643]] include
seasons in Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands. Late
seasons are those seasons opening in the remainder of the United States
about October 1 and later, and include most of the waterfowl seasons.
Major steps in the 1995-1996 regulatory cycle relating to public
hearings and Federal Register notifications are illustrated in the
accompanying diagram. Dates shown relative to publication of Federal
Register documents are target dates.
Sections of this and subsequent documents which outline hunting
frameworks and guidelines are organized under numbered headings. These
headings are:
1. Ducks
2. Sea Ducks
3. Mergansers
4. Canada Geese
5. White-fronted Geese
6. Brant
7. Snow and Ross's (Light) Geese
8. Tundra Swans
9. Sandhill Cranes
10. Coots
11. Moorhens and Gallinules
12. Rails
13. Snipe
14. Woodcock
15. Band-tailed Pigeons
16. Mourning Doves
17. White-winged and White-tipped Doves
18. Alaska
19. Hawaii
20. Puerto Rico
21. Virgin Islands
22. Falconry
23. Other
Later sections of this and subsequent documents will refer only to
numbered items requiring attention. Therefore, items requiring no
attention will be omitted and the remaining numbered items will be
discontinuous and appear incomplete.
Public Hearings
Two public hearings pertaining to 1995-1996 migratory game bird
hunting regulations are scheduled. Both hearings will be conducted in
accordance with 455 DM 1 of the Departmental Manual. On June 22, a
public hearing will be held at 9 a.m. in the Auditorium of the
Department of the Interior Building, 1849 C Street NW., Washington, DC.
This hearing is for the purpose of reviewing the status of migratory
shore and upland game birds. Proposed hunting regulations will be
discussed 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. On August 3, a public
hearing will be held at 9 a.m. in the Auditorium of the Department of
the Interior Building, address above. This hearing is for the purpose
of reviewing the status and proposed regulations for waterfowl not
previously discussed at the June 22 public hearing. The public is
invited to participate in both hearings. Persons wishing to make a
statement at these hearings should write to the address indicated under
the caption ADDRESSES.
Requests for Tribal Proposals
Background
Beginning with the 1985-86 hunting season, the Service has employed
guidelines described in the June 4, 1985, Federal Register (50 FR
23467) to establish special migratory bird hunting regulations on
Federal Indian reservations (including off-reservation trust lands) and
ceded lands. The guidelines were developed in response to tribal
requests for Service recognition of their reserved hunting rights, and
for some tribes, recognition of their authority to regulate hunting by
both tribal and nontribal members throughout their reservations. The
guidelines include possibilities for: (1) on-reservation hunting by
both tribal and nontribal members, with hunting by nontribal members on
some reservations to take place within Federal frameworks, but on dates
different from those selected by the surrounding State(s); (2) on-
reservation hunting by tribal members only, outside of usual Federal
frameworks for season dates and length, and for daily bag and
possession limits; and (3) off-reservation hunting by tribal members on
ceded lands, outside of usual framework dates and season length, with
some added flexibility in daily bag and possession limits. In all
cases, the regulations established under the guidelines would have to
be consistent with the annual March 10 to September 1 closed season
mandated by the 1916 Convention Between the United States and Great
Britain (for Canada) for the Protection of Migratory Birds
(Convention). The guidelines are capable of application to those tribes
that have reserved hunting rights on Federal Indian reservations
(including off-reservation trust lands) and ceded lands. They also
apply to the establishment of migratory bird hunting regulations for
nontribal members on all lands within the exterior boundaries of
reservations where tribes have full wildlife management authority over
such hunting, or where the tribes and affected States otherwise have
reached agreement over hunting by nontribal members on non-Indian
lands.
Tribes usually have the authority to regulate migratory bird
hunting by nonmembers on Indian-owned reservation lands, subject to
Service approval. The question of jurisdiction is more complex on
reservations that include lands owned by non-Indians, especially when
the surrounding States have established or intend to establish
regulations governing hunting by non-Indians on these lands. In such
cases, the Service encourages the tribes and States to reach agreement
on regulations that would apply throughout the reservations. When
appropriate, the Service will consult with a tribe and State with the
aim of facilitating an accord. The Service also will consult jointly
with tribal and State officials in the affected States where tribes may
wish to establish special hunting regulations for tribal members on
ceded lands. As explained in previous rulemaking documents, it is
incumbent upon the tribe and/or the State to put forward a request for
consultation as a result of the proposal being published in the Federal
Register. The Service will not presume to make a determination, without
being advised by a tribe or a State, that any issue is/is not worthy of
formal consultation.
One of the guidelines provides for the continuation of harvest of
migratory game birds by tribal members on reservations where it is a
customary practice. The Service does not oppose this harvest, provided
it does not take place during the closed season required by the
Convention, and it is not so large as to adversely affect the status of
the migratory bird resource. For several years, the Service has reached
annual agreement with tribes (for example, in Minnesota, the Mille Lacs
Band of Chippewa Indians) for hunting by tribal members on their lands
or on lands where they have reserved hunting rights. The Service will
continue to consult with tribes that wish to reach a mutual agreement
on hunting regulations for on-reservation hunting by tribal members.
The guidelines should not be viewed as inflexible. Nevertheless,
the Service believes that they provide appropriate opportunity to
accommodate the reserved hunting rights and management authority of
Indian tribes while ensuring that the migratory bird resource receives
necessary protection. The conservation of this important international
resource is paramount. Use of the guidelines is not required if a tribe
wishes to observe the hunting regulations established by the State(s)
in which the reservation is located.
[[Page 15644]] Details Needed in Tribal Proposals
Tribes that wish to use the guidelines to establish special hunting
regulations for the 1995-96 hunting season must submit a proposal that
includes: (1) the requested hunting season dates and other details
regarding regulations to be observed; (2) harvest anticipated under the
requested regulations; (3) methods that will be employed to measure or
monitor harvest (mail-questionnaire survey, bag checks, etc.); (4)
steps that will be taken to limit level of harvest, where it could be
shown that failure to limit such harvest would seriously impact the
migratory bird resource; and (5) tribal capabilities to establish and
enforce migratory bird hunting regulations.
A tribe that desires the earliest possible opening of the waterfowl
season should specify this in the proposal, rather than request a date
that might not be within the final Federal frameworks. Similarly,
unless a tribe wishes to set more restrictive regulations than Federal
regulations will permit, the proposal should request the same daily bag
and possession limits and season length for ducks and geese that
Federal regulations are likely to permit the States in the Flyway in
which the reservation is located.
Tribal Proposal Procedures
Pertinent details in proposals received from tribes will be
published for public review in later Federal Register documents.
Because of the time required for Service and public review, Indian
tribes that desire special migratory bird hunting regulations for the
1995-96 hunting season should submit their proposals as soon as
possible, but no later than June 2, 1995. Tribal inquiries regarding
the guidelines and proposals should be directed to the appropriate
Service Regional Office listed under the caption Supplementary
Information. Tribes that request special hunting regulations for tribal
members on ceded lands should send a courtesy copy of the proposal to
officials in the affected State(s).
Public Comments Solicited
The policy of the Department of the Interior is, whenever
practicable, to afford the public an opportunity to participate in the
rulemaking process. Accordingly, interested persons are invited to
submit written comments, suggestions, or recommendations regarding the
proposed regulations. Promulgation of final migratory game bird hunting
regulations will take into consideration all comments received by the
Service. Such comments, and any additional information received, may
lead to final regulations that differ from these proposals. Interested
persons are invited to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
written comments to the address indicated under the caption ADDRESSES.
Comments received on the proposed annual regulations will be
available for public inspection during normal business hours at the
Service's office in room 634, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Arlington,
Virginia. Specific comment periods will be established for each series
of proposed rulemakings. All relevant comments will be accepted through
the closing date of the comment period on the particular proposal under
consideration. The Service will consider, but possibly may not respond
in detail to, each comment. As in the past, the Service will summarize
all comments received during the comment period and respond to them
after the closing date.
Flyway Council Meetings
Departmental representatives will be present at the following
winter meetings of the various Flyway Councils:
DATE: March 25, 1995
--National Waterfowl Council, 3:30 p.m.
DATE: March 26, 1995
--Atlantic Flyway Council, 9:00 a.m.
--Mississippi Flyway Council, 8:00 a.m.
--Central Flyway Council, 8:00 a.m.
--Pacific Flyway Council, 10:00 a.m.
The Council meetings will be held at the Minneapolis Hilton and
Towers, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
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 the Environmental Protection Agency on June 9, 1988.
Notice of Availability was published in the Federal Register on June
16, 1988 (53 FR 22582). The Service's Record of Decision was published
on August 18, 1988 (53 FR 31341). In addition, an August 1985
environmental assessment entitled ``Guidelines for Migratory Bird
Hunting Regulations on Federal Indian Reservations and Ceded Lands'' is
available from the Service at the address indicated under the caption
ADDRESSES.
Endangered Species Act Consideration
Prior to issuance of the 1995-96 migratory game bird hunting
regulations, consideration will be given to provisions of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543;
hereinafter the Act) to ensure that hunting is not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of any species designated as endangered or
threatened or modify or destroy its critical habitat and is consistent
with conservation programs for those species. Consultations under
section 7 of this Act may cause changes to be made to proposals in this
and future supplemental proposed rulemaking documents.
Regulatory Flexibility Act and the Paperwork Reduction Act
This document was reviewed under Executive Order 12866.
These regulations have a significant economic impact on substantial
numbers of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Therefore, in accordance with Office of Management
and Budget instructions, a Final Regulatory Impact Analysis (FRIA) was
prepared in 1981 and revised in 1990. Although a FRIA is no longer
required, the economic analysis contained in the FRIA has been reviewed
and the Service has determined that it meets the requirements of
Executive Order 12866. This analysis was updated for 1995. The FRIA
update included waterfowl hunter and harvest information from the 1993-
94 season. The summary of the 1995 update follows:
``New information which can be compared to that appearing in the
1990 Final Regulatory Impact Analysis (FRIA) includes estimates of the
1993 fall flight of ducks from surveyed areas, and hunter activity and
harvest information from the 1993-94 hunting season. Decreased
production in prairie Canada and increased production from the
northcentral U.S. resulted in a total 1993 fall flight of ducks similar
(-5 percent) to that predicted in 1992. Because the status of ducks has
not yet fully recovered from the drought of the 1980's, hunting
regulations were developed that maintained the reduced hunting
opportunity established in the 1988-89 season. There were no
significant changes in hunter activity between the 1992-93 and the
1993-94 seasons. Hunter numbers decreased by 1 percent and waterfowl
hunters spent an average of 3 percent more days hunting, resulting in a
2 percent increase in the total number of hunting days. Many
nonregulatory factors, however, influence hunter participation. There
was essentially no change in the total duck harvest between the 1992-93
and the 1993-94 seasons.''
Copies of the updated analysis are available upon request from the
Office [[Page 15645]] of Migratory Bird Management. The address is
indicated under the caption ADDRESSES.
These regulations contain no information collections subject to
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). However, the Service
does utilize information acquired through other various information
collections in the formulation of these regulations. These information
collection requirements have been approved by OMB and assigned
clearance numbers 1018-0005, 1018-0006, 1018-0008, 1018-0009, 1018-
0010, 1018-0015, 1018-0019, and 1018-0023.
Authorship
The primary authors of this proposed rule are Keith A. Morehouse
and Ron W. Kokel, Office of Migratory Bird Management, (703) 358-1714.
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 1995-96
hunting season 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 10, 1995.
George T. Frampton, Jr.,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
Proposed 1995-1996 Migratory Game Bird Hunting Regulations
(Preliminary)
Pending current information on populations, harvest, and habitat
conditions, and receipt of recommendations from the four Flyway
Councils; specific framework proposals (including opening and closing
dates, seasons lengths, and bag limits) may be deferred. Unless
otherwise specified, no change from the final 1994-95 frameworks of
August 17 and September 27, 1994, (59 FR 42474 and 49304) is proposed.
Specific preliminary proposals that vary from the 1994-95 frameworks
and issues requiring early discussion, action, or the attention of the
States or tribes are contained below:
1. Ducks
A. General Harvest Strategy
Despite the large volume of information available on hunter
activity, duck harvest levels, and population status, the annual
process of setting duck hunting regulations has often been
characterized by a lack of consensus among managers on an appropriate
harvest strategy. The Service believes there are three fundamental
reasons for the annual debate over setting duck hunting regulations:
(1) harvest-management objectives have not always been clearly stated
or agreed upon, (2) a large number of regulatory options has hindered
our assessment of their effects; and (3) management of an
international, migratory resource is difficult and the complex
relationship between harvest and population status could be more fully
understood. To address these difficulties, the Service is developing a
more formal and objective decision-making process. This process
requires clear identification of harvest-management objectives, a
limited number of regulatory options, and alternative, yet credible,
hypotheses regarding the influence of harvest on duck populations.
Using these elements, a harvest strategy can be developed to help
managers better understand the effects of hunting, while also providing
maximum harvest opportunities consistent with long-term resource
conservation goals. The Service proposes to implement some aspects of
this process for the 1995-96 hunting season, with broader
implementation to occur over the next few years.
This year, as part of the implementation process, the Service
proposes a duck harvest-management objective that balances hunting
opportunities with the desire to achieve waterfowl population goals
identified in the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (hereinafter
the Plan). Under this harvest-management objective, the relative
importance of hunting opportunity increases as populations approach the
goals in the Plan (e.g. 8.1 million mallards). Thus, hunting
opportunity would be maximized when the population is at or above
goals. Additionally, while the Service believes that the Plan's
population goals would tend to exert a conservative influence on
overall duck harvest management, other factors, such as habitat, also
need to be considered.
For the 1995-96 season, the Service proposes that three regulatory
options be considered: restrictive, moderate, or liberal seasons. Each
regulatory option or ``package'' would contain Flyway-specific season
lengths, bag limits, and framework opening and closing dates, mutually
agreed upon by the Service and Flyway Councils. Public comment would
also be solicited. Several reasons exist for considering discrete
regulatory ``packages.'' First, the Service believes that regulatory
changes should be of sufficient magnitude to cause measurable changes
in duck harvest rates. Minor changes (i.e., ``tinkering'') in
regulations that have little or no consequential overall impact on
waterfowl resources and harvest can confuse both hunters and the
public. Second, waterfowl managers must have adequate time to evaluate
proposed regulatory options. This evaluation involves a determination
of expected duck harvest rates and resource impacts. Frequently,
adequate time for a thorough evaluation is not available when new
regulatory options are introduced late in the regulations-setting
process. Introducing prescriptive regulatory options or packages early
in the regulations-setting process allows managers to carefully and
thoroughly evaluate the expected resource impacts.
An equally important component of the regulatory packages is
guidelines for their use. Flyway Councils and waterfowl managers must
know when, and under what conditions, to use each regulatory package.
These guidelines are currently being developed and will be proposed by
the Service and made available for public comment. The guidelines will
specify the particular regulatory package appropriate for various
combinations of duck population size and wetland conditions on the
breeding grounds. For example, liberal hunting regulations would be
proposed when population levels were high (relative to Plan goals),
breeding-habitat conditions were exceptionally good, or both. The
Service believes it is important that these guidelines be consistent
with the goal of maximum sustainable hunting opportunities and the
desire to achieve population levels specified in the Plan.
In setting annual hunting regulations for ducks, the Service
considers not only biological, but sociological, recreational, and
economic impacts. The proposed process described above is intended to
improve our understanding of the biological impacts of hunting by
making more efficient use of harvest and population data from current
waterfowl monitoring programs, while simultaneously pursuing
traditional harvest and population objectives. The Service will
continue to rely on the established process of public input for
considering non-biological impacts. [[Page 15646]]
Specific details of this year's proposed regulatory ``packages''
for each Flyway, guidelines for the use of these regulatory packages,
and a general description of the harvest management objective and the
alternative hypotheses of duck population dynamics that were considered
in this proposed process will be available for public comment on March
24, 1995, by writing to the address under the caption ADDRESSES.
Additional information regarding specific population goals identified
in the North American Waterfowl Management Plan will be available as
well at the address provided above.
F. Zones and Splits
In 1990, the Service determined that the use of zones and split
seasons was an acceptable means by which States could redistribute
harvest opportunities and established a long-term strategy for the use
of zones and split-season options for duck seasons (55 FR 38901-38902).
This long-term strategy contained guidelines that limited selection of
zone/split options available to States to 5-year intervals. The 1995-96
season will be the final year of the 5-year assessment period and the
Service reminds those States that made changes during the last open
season in 1990 that a review of pertinent data (e.g. estimates of
harvest, hunter numbers and success) will be required at the end of
this year's hunting season. This review does not have to be the result
of a rigorous experimental design, but nonetheless should assist the
Service in ascertaining whether major changes occurred as a result of
zone/split regulations. As a matter of information for preparation of
proposals for 1996-97, the Service does not anticipate any changes in
the existing guidelines governing zone and split options for the
upcoming open season.
Temporary Zone in the Southern San Joaquin Valley of California. In
1994, the Service allowed the State of California to continue this zone
on a temporary basis. The Service acknowledges that the Southern San
Joaquin Valley Zone appears to provide economic incentives for
maintaining privately-managed wetlands, especially during recent years
when season lengths have been relatively short. Accordingly, the
Service will consider allowing this zone to continue on a temporary
basis during the final year of the 5-year moratorium on zone changes
pending review of harvest and hunter participation information.
G. Special Seasons/Species Management
i. Canvasback Management
In 1994, the Service re-opened the hunting season on canvasbacks.
Based on population levels, expected production, and projected harvest
estimates, the Service believed that a season in all Flyways with a 1-
bird daily bag limit was warranted. The Service is aware of the high
harvest potential for this species and will evaluate last season's
canvasback harvest. For this year, the Service will defer a decision on
canvasback hunting until the 1994-95 harvest and 1995 spring population
status information are available. The Service proposes no change in the
process employed for deciding on regulations governing the harvest of
canvasbacks.
ii. September Teal Seasons
In 1990, the Service established a strategy for the use of shooting
hours which stated that shooting hours would begin at sunrise unless
States could demonstrate that the impact of presunrise shooting hours
on nontarget duck species was negligible. During the 1993-94 teal
seasons, several Mississippi and Central Flyway States conducted
evaluations of shooting hours for teal seasons. In 1994, the Service
allowed those States in the Mississippi and Central Flyways that had
conducted evaluations of presunrise shooting hours for teal to begin
shooting hours at one-half hour before sunrise, since the evaluations
demonstrated that the attempted harvest of non-target species was no
different between pre- and post-sunrise periods in those States. The
Service notes, however, that final reports of the evaluations are still
needed from the Mississippi and Central Flyway States and believes that
comprehensive final reports are necessary for completion of the
evaluations. The Service has not yet received these reports and
requests that they be submitted prior to the June regulations meetings.
iii. September Teal/Wood Duck Seasons
Since these seasons were last reviewed in the early 1980s, the
Service requests that Florida, Kentucky, and Tennessee provide an
update of recovery and survival rates, harvest estimates, and
derivations of banded birds harvested during these seasons. Preferably,
these reports should be submitted prior to this summer's Flyway
meetings. The Service will make a full assessment of these seasons
pending the completion of the cooperative Wood Duck Initiative final
report due in 1996.
4. Canada Geese
A. Special Seasons
The Service is currently reviewing the existing procedures for
establishing and evaluating special Canada goose seasons in the
Atlantic and Mississippi Flyways with the intent of streamlining and
simplifying the process. Possible changes the Service is considering
include the elimination of the experimental-status requirement for
special seasons conducted between the 1st and 15th of September.
However, States not participating in the Migratory Bird Harvest
Information Program would continue to be responsible for monitoring
hunter activity and harvest during these special seasons. For seasons
held after September 15, the Service anticipates that current
requirements for special Canada goose seasons will continue.
B. Regular Seasons
In the Atlantic Flyway, the Service and the Flyway Council will
cooperatively conduct an assessment of the just concluded 3-year
harvest-reduction program. It is likely that further adjustments to
regular season harvest regulations will be proposed.
The Service also remains concerned about the status of the Southern
James Bay and Dusky Canada goose populations. The Service will
carefully review and consider all harvest regulations to ensure that
these populations are not impacted.
5. White-fronted Geese
In 1994, the Service denied the Pacific Flyway Council's request
for liberalization of seasons and limits on white-fronted geese in
Washington, Oregon, and California because the population objective had
not been attained and because a Flyway harvest strategy had not been
completed. Given that the most recent 3-year average index of Pacific
Flyway white-fronted geese is 283,600, with the 1994 fall count being
324,800, the Service now believes some liberalization is warranted,
provided a suitable harvest strategy is developed beforehand.
8. Tundra Swans
In 1990 and 1991, the Service agreed to experimentally increase the
number of permits available to North and South Dakota (1,000 each) for
tundra swan hunting. The additional permits were also experimentally
allocated for the 1992-94 hunting seasons. An assessment of these
experimental [[Page 15647]] seasons in the form of a final report
should be submitted to the Service by these States by June 1, 1995. The
final report should contain biological information collected during
these experimental seasons that would address the objectives identified
in the Memorandum of Understanding between the Service and each State.
These objectives include: (1) to determine the fall distribution,
chronology of migration, and identification of major concentration
areas of tundra swans in each State; (2) to determine the number of
tundra swans harvested by permittees in each State; and (3) to evaluate
hunter activity and success, hunting methods and harvest locations and
estimate crippling losses associated with the hunting of tundra swans.
To properly address these objectives the Service encourages these
States to follow the evaluation guidelines in the ``Eastern Population
Tundra Swan Sport Hunting Plan'' that was completed in 1988, which
specifies that evaluation procedures should include an annual harvest
survey and a minimum of 2 years of population survey information.
In 1994, the Service restricted seasons and hunt areas in Utah and
required that Montana, Utah, and Nevada measure the accidental take, if
any, of trumpeter swans by tundra swan hunters. Pending reports on the
occurrence and take of trumpeter swans in the hunt areas, possible
additional changes may be warranted. The Service believes tundra swan
hunting in these three States is warranted but seasons may be further
modified to minimize, but not preclude, the accidental take of
trumpeter swans.
14. Woodcock
The Service is concerned with the gradual long-term declines in
woodcock populations in both the Eastern and Central Management
Regions. Although habitat changes appear to be the primary factor in
the declines, adjustment of harvest opportunities may be appropriate in
light of current population trends. The Service and the Flyway Councils
should continue their ongoing review of the status of woodcock and
cooperatively develop a harvest-management strategy.
15. Band-tailed Pigeons
The Service supports the continuation of seasons on both the
Coastal and Interior populations. However, the Service remains
concerned about the long-term decline in the Coastal population and
continues to support restrictive harvest regulations. As in 1993 and
1994, all States having band-tailed pigeon hunting seasons must again
require either participation in the nationwide Migratory Bird Harvest
Information Program or require band-tailed pigeon hunters to obtain
mandatory State permits to provide sampling frames for obtaining more
precise estimates of band-tailed pigeon harvest. Those States not
participating in the Harvest Information Program will be required to
conduct a harvest survey and provide the results to the Service by June
1 of each year. The Service will continue to closely monitor population
and harvest information from both populations and will evaluate this
information in June prior to making any decisions regarding the 1995-96
seasons. Indian tribes also should consider this situation when
proposing harvest regulations for this species.
BILLING CODE 4310-55-F
[[Page 15648]]
[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TP24MR95.013
[FR Doc. 95-7304 Filed 3-23-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
