2024-16984. National Wildlife Refuge System; 2024-2025 Station-Specific Hunting and Sport Fishing Regulations

Table 1—Proposed Changes for 2024-2025 Hunting/Sport Fishing Season

Station	State	Migratory bird hunting	Upland game hunting	Big game hunting	Sport fishing
Bayou Teche NWR	Louisiana	E	Already Open	E	Already Open.
Canaan Valley NWR	West Virginia	E	E	E	Already Open.
Des Lacs NWR	North Dakota	Already Closed	Already Open	O	Already Closed.
Green River NWR	Kentucky	N	Already Closed	N	Already Closed.
Horicon NWR	Wisconsin	Already Open	Already Open	Already Open	E.
J. Clark Salyer NWR	North Dakota	Already Open	Already Open	O	Already Open.
Lostwood NWR	North Dakota	Already Closed	Already Open	O	Already Closed.
Trinity River NWR	Texas	O	Already Open	E	Already Open.
Turnbull NWR	Washington	Already Open	Already Closed	E	Already Closed.
Upper Souris NWR	North Dakota	Already Closed	Already Open	O	Already Open.
Valentine NWR	Nebraska	Already Open	E	Already Open	Already Open.
Waccamaw NWR	South Carolina	E	Already Open	Already Open	Already Open.
Key:
N = New station opened for the first time.
O = Opening (New species and/or new activity on a station previously open to other activities)
E = Expansion (Station is already open to the activity: the proposed rule would add new lands/waters, modify areas open to hunting or fishing, extend season dates, add a targeted hunt, modify season dates, modify hunting hours, etc.).

The changes for the 2024-2025 hunting/fishing season noted in the table above are each based on a complete administrative record which, among other detailed documentation, also includes a hunt plan, a compatibility determination, and the appropriate National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) analysis, all of which are subject to a public review and comment process. These supporting documents are available alongside this proposed rule at Docket No. FWS-HQ-NWRS-2024-0034 on https://www.regulations.gov.

The Service remains concerned that lead is an important issue, and we will continue to appropriately evaluate and regulate the use of lead ammunition and tackle on Service lands and waters. The Service has initiated stakeholder engagement to implement a deliberate, open, and transparent process of evaluating the future of lead use on Service lands and waters, working with our State partners, and seeking input and recommendations from the Hunting and Wildlife Conservation Council, other stakeholders, and the public. The best available science, analyzed as part of this proposed rulemaking, indicates that lead ammunition and tackle can have negative impacts on wildlife, and that exposure to lead has negative impacts to human health. Based on the best available science and sound professional judgment, where appropriate, the Service may propose to require the use of lead-free ammunition and tackle on Service lands and waters, as we have done in certain cases already. While the Service continues to evaluate the future of lead use in hunting and fishing on Service lands and waters, we will continue to work with stakeholders and the public to evaluate lead use through the annual rulemaking process. In the interim, we will not allow for any increase in lead use on Service lands and waters. Therefore, this proposed rule does not include any opportunities proposing to increase or authorize the new use of lead. Crab Orchard NWR is proposing to close hunting on 111 acres that are currently open to hunting so that the area can be used for visitor services facilities and activities, which is not expected to impact hunter use rates or lead use. Turnbull, Horicon, and Valentine NWRs are proposing hunting and fishing expansions to species where lead-free ammunition or tackle is already required on the refuges. Trinity River, Bayou Teche, Green River, and Waccamaw NWRs are either proposing to open or expand archery deer hunting or to open or expand migratory bird hunting, which do not involve lead ammunition. Des Lacs, J. Clark Salyer, Lostwood, and Upper Souris NWRs are proposing to open elk hunting that would require the use of lead-free ammunition immediately in the fall 2024 season. In this proposed rule, Canaan Valley NWR is proposing to expand all hunting to the Big Cove Unit and proposing to require the use of lead-free ammunition immediately in the fall 2024 season on the Big Cove Unit.

Fish Advisory

For health reasons, anglers should review and follow State-issued consumption advisories before enjoying recreational sport fishing opportunities on Service-managed waters. You can find information about current fish-consumption advisories on the internet at https://www.epa.gov/​choose-fish-and-shellfish-wisely.

Request for Comments

You may submit comments and materials on this proposed rule by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES . We will not accept comments sent by email or fax or to an address not listed in ADDRESSES. We will not consider hand-delivered comments that we do not receive, or mailed comments that are not postmarked, by the date specified in DATES.

We will post your entire comment on https://www.regulations.gov. Before including personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that we may make your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We will post all hardcopy comments on https://www.regulations.gov.

Required Determinations

Clarity of This Proposed Rule

Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and the Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, require us to write all rules in plain language. This means that each rule we publish must:

(a) Be logically organized;

(b) Use the active voice to address readers directly;

(c) Use clear language rather than jargon;

(d) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and

(e) Use lists and tables wherever possible.

If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us comments by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To better help us revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections or paragraphs that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences are too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful, etc.

Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094)

Executive Order (E.O.) 14094 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 and E.O. 13563 and states that regulatory analysis should facilitate agency efforts to develop regulations that serve the public interest, advance statutory objectives, and are consistent with E.O. 12866, E.O. 13563, and the Presidential Memorandum of January 20, 2021 (Modernizing Regulatory Review). Regulatory analysis, as practicable and appropriate, shall recognize distributive impacts and equity, to the extent permitted by law. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further that regulations must be based on the best available science and that the rulemaking process must allow for public participation and an open exchange of ideas. We have developed this proposed rule in a manner consistent with these requirements.

E.O. 12866, as reaffirmed by E.O. 13563 and E.O. 14094, provides that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) will review all significant rules. OIRA has determined that this proposed rule is not significant.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA; 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), whenever a Federal 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 that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Thus, for a regulatory flexibility analysis to be required, impacts must exceed a threshold for “significant impact” and a threshold for a “substantial number of small entities.” See 5 U.S.C. 605(b). SBREFA amended the RFA 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.

This proposed rule would open or expand hunting on 12 NWRs. As a result, visitor use for wildlife-dependent recreation on these stations will change. If the stations establishing new programs were a pure addition to the current supply of those activities, it would mean an estimated maximum increase of 1,481 user days (one person per day participating in a recreational opportunity; see table 2). Because the participation trend is flat in these activities, this increase in supply will most likely be offset by other sites losing participants. Therefore, this is likely to be a substitute site for the activity and not necessarily an increase in participation rates for the activity.

Table 2—Estimated Maximum Change in Recreation Opportunities in 2024-2025

[2023 Dollars in thousands]

Station	Additional hunting days	Additional fishing days	Additional expenditures
Bayou Teche NWR	40		$1.6
Canaan Valley NWR	20		0.8
Des Lacs NWR	70		2.8
Green River NWR	144		5.7
Horicon NWR		365	15.1
J. Clark Salyer NWR	70		2.8
Lostwood NWR	70		2.8
Trinity River NWR	300		11.9
Turnbull NWR	272		10.8
Upper Souris NWR	70		2.8
Valentine NWR	60		2.4
Waccamaw NWR	0		0
Total	1,116	365	59.5

To the extent visitors spend time and money in the area of the station that they would not have spent there anyway, they contribute new income to the regional economy and benefit local businesses. Due to the unavailability of site-specific expenditure data, we use the national estimates from the 2016 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife Associated Recreation to identify expenditures for food and lodging, transportation, and other incidental expenses. Using the average expenditures for these categories with the maximum expected additional participation of the Refuge System yields approximately $59,500 in recreation-related expenditures (see table 2, above). By having ripple effects throughout the economy, these direct expenditures are only part of the economic impact of these recreational activities. Using a national impact multiplier for hunting activities (2.51) derived from the report “Hunting in America: An Economic Force for Conservation” and for fishing activities (2.51) derived from the report “Sportfishing in America” yields a total maximum economic impact of approximately $150,000 (2023 dollars) (Southwick Associates, Inc., 2018).

Since we know that most of the fishing and hunting occurs within 100 miles of a participant's residence, then it is unlikely that most of this spending will be “new” money coming into a local economy; therefore, this spending will be offset with a decrease in some other sector of the local economy. The net gain to the local economies will be no more than $149,000 and likely less. Since 80 percent of the participants travel less than 100 miles to engage in hunting and fishing activities, their spending patterns will not add new money into the local economy and, therefore, the real impact will be on the order of about $30,000 annually.

Small businesses within the retail trade industry (such as hotels, gas stations, taxidermy shops, bait-and-tackle shops, and similar businesses) may be affected by some increased or decreased station visitation. A large percentage of these retail trade establishments in the local communities around NWRs qualify as small businesses (see table 3, below). We expect that the incremental recreational changes will be scattered, and so we do not expect that the rule will have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities in any region or nationally. As noted previously, we expect at most $59,500 to be spent in total in the refuges' local economies. The maximum increase will be less than one-tenth of 1 percent for local retail trade spending (see table 3, below). Table 3 does not include entries for those NWRs for which we project no changes in recreation opportunities in 2024-2025; see table 2, above.

Table 3—Comparative Expenditures for Retail Trade Associated With Additional Station Visitation for 2024-2025

[Thousands, 2023 dollars]

Station/county(ies)	Retail trade in 2017 1	Estimated maximum addition from new activities	Addition as (%) of total	Establishments in 2017 1	Establishments with fewer than 10 employees in 2017
Bayou Teche:
St. Mary Parish, LA	$658,214	$2	<0.1	186	145
Canaan Valley:
Grant, WV	133,024	0	<0.1	42	28
Tucker, WV	79,611	0	<0.1	28	20
Des Lacs:
Renville, ND	43,869	3	<0.1	13	11
Green River:
Henderson, KY	825,225	6	<0.1	150	98
Horicon:
Dodge, WI	1,069,734	8	<0.1	232	154
Fond du Lac, WI	2,137,970	8	<0.1	344	207
J. Clark Salyer:
McHenry, ND	39,926	3	<0.1	19	14
Lostwood:
Burke, ND	38,614	1	<0.1	8	4
Mountrail, ND	$228,282	1	<0.1	47	27
Trinity River:
Liberty, TX	1,047,020	12	<0.1	201	143
Turnbull:
Spokane, WA	9,754,429	11	<0.1	1,627	1,036
Upper Souris:
Renville, ND	43,869	1	<0.1	13	11
Ward, ND	1,844,525	1	<0.1	309	169
Valentine:
Cherry, NE	116,107	2	<0.1	43	30
Waccamaw:
Georgetown, SC	1,035,984	0	0	287	206
1  U.S. Census Bureau.