Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### Fish and Wildlife Service 

          - 50 CFR Part 20 
          - RIN 1018-AV12 

# AGENCY:

Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. 

# ACTION:

Final rule. 

# SUMMARY:

This rule prescribes the hunting seasons, hours, areas, and daily bag and possession limits of mourning, white-winged, and white-tipped doves; band-tailed pigeons; rails; moorhens and gallinules; woodcock; common snipe; sandhill cranes; sea ducks; early (September) waterfowl seasons; migratory game birds in Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands; and some extended falconry seasons. Taking of migratory birds is prohibited unless specifically provided for by annual regulations. This rule permits taking of designated species during the 2007-08 season. 

# DATES:

This rule is effective on September 1, 2007. 

# ADDRESSES:

                            You may inspect comments received on the migratory bird hunting regulations during normal business hours at the Service's office in room 4107, Arlington Square Building, 4501 N. Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Virginia. You may obtain copies of referenced reports from the address above or from the Division of Migratory Bird Management's Web site at                             *http://www.fws.gov/​migratorybirds/​reports/​reports.html.*

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert Blohm, Chief, or Ron W. Kokel, Division of Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, (703) 358-1714. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Regulations Schedule for 2007 

                        On April 11, 2007, we published in the                         **Federal Register**                         (72 FR 18328) a proposal to amend 50 CFR part 20. The proposal provided a background and overview of the migratory bird hunting regulations process, and dealt with the establishment of seasons, limits, proposed regulatory alternatives for the 2007-08 duck hunting season, and other regulations for hunting migratory game birds under §§ 20.101 through 20.107, 20.109, and 20.110 of subpart K. Major steps in the 2007-08 regulatory cycle relating to open public meetings and                         **Federal Register**                         notifications were also identified in the April 11 proposed rule. On June 8, 2007, we published in the                         **Federal Register**                         (72 FR 31789) a second document providing supplemental proposals for early- and late-season migratory bird hunting regulations and the regulatory alternatives for the 2007-08 duck hunting season. The June 8 supplement also provided detailed information on the 2007-08 regulatory schedule and announced the Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee (SRC) and Flyway Council meetings.                     

                        On June 20 and 21, 2007, we held open meetings with the Flyway Council Consultants at which the participants reviewed information on the current status of migratory shore and upland game birds and developed recommendations for the 2007-08 regulations 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. In addition, we reviewed and discussed preliminary information on the status of waterfowl as it relates to the development and selection of the regulatory packages for the 2007-08 regular waterfowl seasons. On July 23, 2007, we published in the                         **Federal Register**                         (72 FR 40194) a third document specifically dealing with the proposed frameworks for early-season regulations. On August 28, 2007, we published a fourth document in the                         **Federal Register**                         which contained final frameworks for early migratory bird hunting seasons from which wildlife conservation agency officials from the States, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands selected early-season hunting dates, hours, areas, and limits.                     

                        On August 1-2, 2007, we held open meetings with the Flyway Council Consultants at which the participants reviewed the status of waterfowl and developed recommendations for the 2007-08 regulations for these species. Proposed hunting regulations were discussed for late seasons. We published proposed frameworks for the 2007-08 late-season migratory bird hunting regulations in a late August 2007                         **Federal Register**                        .                     

The final rule described here is the sixth in the series of proposed, supplemental, and final rulemaking documents for migratory game bird hunting regulations and deals specifically with amending subpart K of 50 CFR part 20. It sets hunting seasons, hours, areas, and limits for mourning, white-winged, and white-tipped doves; band-tailed pigeons; rails; moorhens and gallinules; woodcock; common snipe; sandhill cranes; sea ducks; early (September) waterfowl seasons; mourning doves in Hawaii; migratory game birds in Alaska, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands; youth waterfowl hunting day; and some extended falconry seasons. 

## National Environmental Policy Act 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. We published a notice of availability in the                         **Federal Register**                         on June 16, 1988 (53 FR 22582). We published our Record of Decision on August 18, 1988 (53 FR 31341). Annual NEPA considerations are covered under a separate Environmental Assessment (EA), “Duck Hunting Regulations for 2007-08,” and an August 2007, Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). Copies of the EA and FONSI are available upon request from the address indicated under                         **ADDRESSES.**

                        In a notice published in the September 8, 2005,                         **Federal Register**                         (70 FR 53376), we announced our intent to develop a new Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the migratory bird hunting program. Public scoping meetings were held in the spring of 2006, as detailed in a March 9, 2006,                         **Federal Register**                         (71 FR 12216). A scoping report summarizing the scoping comments and scoping meetings is available either at the address indicated under                         **ADDRESSES**                         or on our Web site at                         *http://www.fws.gov/​migratorybirds.*

## Endangered Species Act Consideration 

                        Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543; 87 Stat. 884), provides that, “The Secretary shall review other programs 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, we conducted formal consultations to ensure that actions resulting from these regulations would not likely jeopardize the continued existence of endangered or threatened                               ( print page 50165)                            species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of their critical habitat. Findings from these consultations are included in a biological opinion, which concluded that the regulations are not likely to adversely affect any endangered or threatened species. Additionally, these findings may have caused modification of some regulatory measures previously proposed, and the final frameworks reflect any such modifications. Our biological opinions resulting from this Section 7 consultation are public documents available for public inspection at the address indicated under                         **ADDRESSES**                        .                     

## Executive Order 12866

                        The migratory bird hunting regulations are economically significant and were reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under Executive Order 12866. As such, a cost/benefit analysis was initially prepared in 1981. This analysis was subsequently revised annually from 1990-96, updated in 1998, and updated again in 2004. It is further discussed under the heading Regulatory Flexibility Act. Results from the 2004 analysis indicate that the expected welfare benefit of the annual migratory bird hunting frameworks is on the order of $734 to $1,064 million, with a mid-point estimate of $899 million. Copies of the cost/benefit analysis are available upon request from the address indicated under                         **ADDRESSES**                         or from our Web site at                         *http://www.migratorybirds.gov.*

                        This year, due to limited data availability, we partially updated the 2004 analysis, but restricted our analysis to duck hunting. Results indicate that the total consumer surplus of the annual duck hunting frameworks is on the order of $222 to $360 million, with a mid-point estimate of $291 million. We plan to perform a full update of the analysis in 2008. Copies of the updated analysis are available upon request from the address indicated under                         **ADDRESSES**                         or from our Web site at                         *http://www.fws.gov/​migratorybirds/​reports/​SpecialTopics/​EconomicAnalysis-2007Update.pdf.*

## Regulatory Flexibility Act 

                        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.*). We analyzed the economic impacts of the annual hunting regulations on small business entities in detail as part of the 1981 cost-benefit analysis discussed under Executive Order 12866. This analysis was revised annually from 1990-95. In 1995, the Service issued a Small Entity Flexibility Analysis (Analysis), which was subsequently updated in 1996, 1998, and 2004. The primary source of information about hunter expenditures for migratory game bird hunting is the National Hunting and Fishing Survey, which is conducted at 5-year intervals. The 2004 Analysis was based on the 2001 National Hunting and Fishing Survey and the U.S. Department of Commerce's County Business Patterns, from which it was estimated that migratory bird hunters would spend between $481 million and $1.2 billion at small businesses in 2004. Copies of the Analysis are available upon request from the address indicated under                         **ADDRESSES**                         or from our Web site at                         *http://www.fws.gov/​migratorybirds.*

                        This year, due to limited data availability, we partially updated the 2004 analysis, but restricted our analysis to duck hunting. Results indicate that the duck hunters would spend between $291 million and $473.5 million at small businesses in 2007. We plan to perform a full update of the analysis in 2008 when the full results from the 2006 National Hunting and Fishing Survey is available. Copies of the updated analysis are available upon request from the address indicated under                         **ADDRESSES**                         or from our Web site at                         *http://www.fws.gov/​migratorybirds/​reports/​SpecialTopics/​EconomicAnalysis-2007Update.pdf.*

## Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 

This rule is a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. For the reasons outlined above, this rule has an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more. However, because it establishes hunting seasons, we do not plan to defer the effective date required by 5 U.S.C. 801 under the exemption contained in 5 U.S.C. 808(1). 

## Paperwork Reduction Act 

                        We examined these regulations under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501*et seq.*                         The various recordkeeping and reporting requirements imposed under regulations established in 50 CFR part 20, subpart K, are utilized in the formulation of migratory game bird hunting regulations. Specifically, OMB has approved the information collection requirements of the surveys associated with the Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program and assigned clearance number 1018-0015 (expires 2/29/2008). This information is used to provide a sampling frame for voluntary national surveys to improve our harvest estimates for all migratory game birds in order to better manage these populations. OMB has also approved the information collection requirements of the Sandhill Crane Harvest Survey and assigned clearance number 1018-0023 (expires 11/30/2007). The information from this survey is used to estimate the magnitude and the geographical and temporal distribution of the harvest, and the portion it constitutes of the total population.                     

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. 

## Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

                        We have determined and certify, in compliance with the requirements of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502*et seq.*, that this rulemaking will not impose a cost of $100 million or more in any given year on local or State government or private entities. Therefore, this rule is not a “significant regulatory action” under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.                     

## Civil Justice Reform—Executive Order 12988

In promulgating this rule, we have determined that it will not unduly burden the judicial system and that it meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988. 

## Takings Implication Assessment 

In accordance with Executive Order 12630, this rule, authorized by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, does not have significant takings implications and does not affect any constitutionally protected property rights. This rule will not result in the physical occupancy of property, the physical invasion of property, or the regulatory taking of any property. In fact, these rules allow hunters to exercise otherwise unavailable privileges and, therefore, reduce restrictions on the use of private and public property. 

## Energy Effects—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. While this rule is a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, it is not expected to adversely affect energy supplies, distribution, or use. Therefore, this action is not a significant energy action and no Statement of Energy Effects is required.                               ( print page 50166)    

## Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes 

Due to the migratory nature of certain species of birds, the Federal Government has been given responsibility over these species by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Thus, 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 possible effects on Federally recognized Indian tribes and have determined that there are no effects on Indian trust resources. However, in the April 11 proposed rule (72 FR 18328) we solicited proposals for special migratory bird hunting regulations for certain Tribes on Federal Indian reservations, off-reservation trust lands, and ceded lands for the 2007-08 migratory bird hunting season. The resulting proposals will be contained in a separate proposed rule. By virtue of these actions, we have consulted with all the Tribes affected by this rule. 

## Federalism Effects 

Due to the migratory nature of certain species of birds, the Federal Government has been given responsibility over these species by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. We annually prescribe frameworks from which the States make selections regarding the hunting of migratory birds, and we employ guidelines to establish special regulations on Federal Indian reservations and ceded lands. This process preserves the ability of the States and tribes to determine which seasons meet their individual needs. Any State or tribe may be more restrictive than the Federal frameworks at any time. The frameworks are developed in a cooperative process with the States and the Flyway Councils. This process allows States to participate in the development of frameworks from which they will make selections, thereby having an influence on their own regulations. These rules do not have a substantial direct effect on fiscal capacity, change the roles or responsibilities of Federal or State governments, or intrude on State policy or administration. Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 13132, these regulations do not have significant federalism effects and do not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. 

## Regulations Promulgation 

The rulemaking process for migratory game bird hunting must, by its nature, operate under severe time constraints. However, we intend that the public be given the greatest possible opportunity to comment. Thus, when the preliminary proposed rulemaking was published, we established what we believed were the longest periods possible for public comment. In doing this, we recognized that when the comment period closed, time would be of the essence. That is, if there were a delay in the effective date of these regulations after this final rulemaking, States would have insufficient time to select season dates and limits, to communicate those selections to us, and to establish and publicize the necessary regulations and procedures to implement their decisions. We therefore find that “good cause” exists, within the terms of 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) of the Administrative Procedure Act, and these regulations will, therefore, take effect immediately upon publication. Accordingly, with each conservation agency having had an opportunity to participate in selecting the hunting seasons desired for its State or Territory on those species of migratory birds for which open seasons are now prescribed, and consideration having been given to all other relevant matters presented, certain sections of title 50, chapter I, subchapter B, part 20, subpart K, are hereby amended as set forth below. 

# List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 20

      - Exports
      - Hunting
      - Imports
      - Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
      - Transportation
      - Wildlife

Dated: August 22, 2007. 

Todd Willens, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. 

For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 50, chapter I, subchapter B, part 20, subpart K of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: 

# PART 20—[AMENDED] 

1. The authority citation for part 20 continues to read as follows: 

Authority:16 U.S.C. 703-712 and 16 U.S.C. 742 a-j, Pub. L. 106-108. 
      ( print page 50167)          ( print page 50168)          ( print page 50169)          ( print page 50170)          ( print page 50171)          ( print page 50172)          ( print page 50173)          ( print page 50174)          ( print page 50175)          ( print page 50176)          ( print page 50177)          ( print page 50178)          ( print page 50179)          ( print page 50180)          ( print page 50181)          ( print page 50182)          ( print page 50183)          ( print page 50184)          ( print page 50185)          ( print page 50186)          ( print page 50187)          ( print page 50188)          ( print page 50189)          ( print page 50190)          ( print page 50191)          ( print page 50192)          ( print page 50193)          ( print page 50194)          ( print page 50195)          ( print page 50196)          ( print page 50197)          ( print page 50198)          ( print page 50199)    

BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[FR Doc. 07-4255 Filed 8-29-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C