39–006 

113TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 113–578 

EXEMPTION FROM PROHIBITIONS FOR ALASKAN NATIVE 

ARTICLES CONTAINING MIGRATORY BIRD PARTS 

SEPTEMBER 8, 2014.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State 

of the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington, from the Committee on Natural 

Resources, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H.R. 3109] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred the 

bill (H.R. 3109) to amend the Migratory Bird Treaty Act to exempt 

certain Alaskan Native articles from prohibitions against sale of 

items containing nonedible migratory bird parts, and for other purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass. 

PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of H.R. 3109 is to amend the Migratory Bird Treaty 

Act to exempt certain Alaskan Native articles from prohibitions 

against sale of items containing nonedible migratory bird parts. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

In 1916, the United States and Great Britain (for Canada) signed 

the Convention for the Protection of Migratory Birds. The goal of 

this agreement was to establish an international framework for the 

protection and conservation of migratory birds. It also established 

the federal government’s authority to manage migratory birds. 

Under the Migratory Bird Treaty, unless permitted by regulation, 

it is unlawful at any time to ‘‘pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, possess, offer for sale, sell, offer to purchase, purchase, deliver for 

shipment, export, import any migratory bird, any part, nest, or egg 

of such bird’’ protected under the Convention. Migratory bird treaties have also been implemented with Mexico in 1936, Japan in 

1972 and Russia in 1976. Congress implemented the provisions of 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
2 

the original treaty with the enactment of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (16 U.S.C. 701 et seq.). 

The term ‘‘migratory bird’’ includes all wild species of crows, 

ducks, falcons, geese, hawks, snipes, woodcocks and mourning and 

white-winged doves. There are 972 avian species protected by the 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) 

regulates most aspects of the taking, possession, transportation, 

sale, purchase, barter, export and import of migratory birds. It has 

promulgated regulations containing restrictions on the ‘‘taking’’ of 

migratory birds, including what species can be hunted, the length 

of hunting seasons, bag limits and the use of live decoys or other 

techniques to hunt migratory birds. 

While the bilateral treaties with Japan and Russia recognized 

the legitimate subsistence needs of indigenous people, the 1916 and 

1936 treaties with Canada and Mexico did not. As a result, federal 

courts prevented the implementation of any subsistence rights because they interpreted the Migratory Bird Treaty Act as requiring 

the federal government to follow the most restrictive provisions of 

any of the four international agreements. 

Under the 1916 Convention with Canada there is a ‘‘closed season’’ from March 10 to September 1 during which no hunting is 

permitted except in extremely limited circumstances. The 1936 

Convention with Mexico established a similar ‘‘closed season’’ for 

ducks. In Alaska, migratory birds have left large areas of northern, 

western and interior regions of the State by mid-September and in 

these areas they generally do not return before March 10. As a consequence, much of the traditional harvest of migratory birds, which 

has occurred for thousands of years in rural Alaska, had occurred 

during the closed portion of the year. 

An effort to update these international treaties was initiated in 

the 1970s and it culminated with the signing of the Protocol between the United States and Canada on December 14, 1995, and 

the Protocol between the United States and Mexico which was 

signed on May 5, 1997. The fundamental goal of these Protocols 

was to allow aboriginal and indigenous peoples to legally hunt protected migratory birds for subsistence and traditional uses in Alaska and Canada. On October 23, 1997, the United States Senate approved the Protocols amending the Migratory Bird Treaties with 

Canada and Mexico. 

Regrettably, when implementing the treaty language, Congress 

failed to clarify that non-edible parts of the harvest migratory bird 

could be sold in commercial products. As a result, FWS issued regulations (50 CFR 92.6) that prohibit the sale or purchase of migratory bird parts, including feathers and parts of birds taken for subsistence. In fact, in 2012, a native Alaskan carver was fined $2,000 

for violating the Migratory Bird Treaty Act for using feathers in his 

handicraft products. 

In 2012, the Alaska Federation of Natives adopted a Resolution 

that urged the State of Alaska and FWS to revise its existing regulations to allow Alaskan natives to sell traditional handicrafts containing feathers or parts of migratory birds. To date, FWS has not 

recommended any changes to its regulations despite the fact that 

non-edible bird parts are routinely discarded. In addition, FWS has 

recently voted not to modify these regulations during a meeting of 

the Alaska Migratory Bird Co-Management Council. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
3 

This legislation would amend the Migratory Bird Treaty Act to 

exempt certain Alaskan Native articles from the prohibitions on 

the sale of items containing nonedible migratory bird parts. It defines the term Alaskan native to include any Indian, Aleut, or Eskimo who resides in Alaska. It stipulates that authentic Alaskan 

native articles or handicrafts include beading, carving, drawing, 

lacing, painting, sewing, stitching and weaving or any combination 

thereof. Finally, the exemption will not apply to any handicraft 

containing any part of a migratory bird that was taken in a wasteful manner. This exception is consistent with a similar provision in 

the Marine Mammal Protection Act. 

COMMITTEE ACTION

H.R. 3109 was introduced on September 17, 2013, by Congressman Don Young (R–AK). The bill was referred to the Committee 

on Natural Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans and Insular Affairs. On 

July 23, 2014, the Subcommittee held a hearing on the bill. On 

July 30, 2014, the Full Natural Resources Committee met to consider the bill. The Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans and 

Insular Affairs was discharged by unanimous consent. No amendments were offered and the bill was adopted and ordered favorably 

reported to the House of Representatives by unanimous consent. 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII 

of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee on 

Natural Resources’ oversight findings and recommendations are reflected in the body of this report. 

COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII 

1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of 

the House of Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the Committee of the costs which would be incurred in carrying out this bill. However, clause 3(d)(2)(B) of that rule provides 

that this requirement does not apply when the Committee has included in its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the bill prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. Under clause 

3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 

section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has received the following cost estimate for this bill from the 

Director of the Congressional Budget Office: 

H.R. 3109—A bill to amend the Migratory Bird Treaty Act to exempt certain Alaskan Native articles from prohibitions against 

sale of items containing nonedible migratory bird parts, and for 

other purposes 

H.R. 3109 would amend the Migratory Bird Treaty Act to allow 

Alaskan Natives to make and sell traditional handicrafts such as 

masks, jewelry, clothing, and hunting equipment that are made 

from parts of migratory birds, particularly feathers. CBO estimates 

that implementing the bill would not have a significant effect on 

the federal budget. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
4 

Because enacting the legislation could reduce revenues and associated direct spending from civil and criminal penalties, pay-asyou-go procedures apply. However, CBO estimates that any such 

effects would be negligible. 

H.R. 3109 contains no intergovernment or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform act and would 

not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal governments. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Jeff LaFave. The estimate was approved by Peter H. Fontaine, Assistant Director for 

Budget Analysis. 

2. Section 308(a) of Congressional Budget Act. As required by 

clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, 

this bill does not contain any new budget authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in revenues or tax expenditures. Because enacting the legislation could reduce revenues and associated 

direct spending from civil and criminal penalties, pay-as-you-go 

procedures apply. However, CBO estimates that any such effects 

would be negligible. 

3. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by 

clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or objective 

of this bill is to amend the Migratory Bird Treaty Act to exempt 

certain Alaskan Native articles from prohibitions against sale of 

items containing nonedible migratory bird parts. 

EARMARK STATEMENT

This bill does not contain any Congressional earmarks, limited 

tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined under clause 9(e), 

9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Representatives. 

COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104–4 

This bill contains no unfunded mandates. 

COMPLIANCE WITH H. RES. 5 

Directed Rule Making. The Chairman does not believe that this 

bill directs any executive branch official to conduct any specific 

rule-making proceedings. 

Duplication of Existing Programs. This bill does not establish or 

reauthorize a program of the federal government known to be duplicative of another program. Such program was not included in 

any report from the Government Accountability Office to Congress 

pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111–139 or identified in the 

most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance published pursuant to the Federal Program Information Act (Public Law 95–220, 

as amended by Public Law 98–169) as relating to other programs. 

PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW

This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or tribal law. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
5 

as reported, are shown as follows (new matter is printed in italic 

and existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in 

roman): 

MIGRATORY BIRD TREATY ACT 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 2. (a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(c) EXEMPTION FOR AUTHENTIC ALASKAN NATIVE ARTICLES OF

HANDICRAFT OR CLOTHING.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provisions of 

this Act, nothing in this Act prohibits possession, offering for 

sale, sale, offering to barter, barter, offering to purchase, purchase, delivery for shipment, shipment, causing to be shipped, 

delivered for transportation, transport or causing to be transported, carrying or causing to be carried, or receiving for shipment, transportation, or carriage, any authentic Alaskan Native 

article of handicraft or clothing on the basis that it contains a 

nonedible migratory bird part. 

(2) LIMITATION.—This subsection shall not apply with respect 

to any handicraft or clothing containing any part of a migratory bird that was taken in a wasteful manner. 

(3) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection: 

(A) ALASKAN NATIVE.—The term ‘‘Alaskan Native’’ means 

any Indian, Aleut, or Eskimo who resides in Alaska. 

(B) AUTHENTIC ALASKAN NATIVE ARTICLE OF HANDICRAFT

OR CLOTHING.—The term ‘‘authentic Alaskan Native article 

of handicraft or clothing’’— 

(i) means any item that is— 

(I) composed wholly or in some significant respect of natural materials; and 

(II) produced, decorated, or fashioned by an 

Alaskan Native, in the exercise of traditional Alaskan Native handicrafts, without the use of any 

pantograph or other mass copying device; and 

(ii) includes any weaving, carving, stitching, sewing, 

lacing, beading, drawing, or painting described in 

clause (i), or any combination thereof. 

* * * * * * * 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING