27836 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 20 

[Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2018–0030; 

FF09M21200–189–FXMB1231099BPP0] 

RIN 1018–BD10 

Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed 

2019–20 Migratory Game Bird Hunting 

Regulations (Preliminary) With 

Requests for Indian Tribal Proposals; 

Notice of Meetings 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; availability of 

supplemental information. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service (hereinafter the Service or we) 

proposes to establish annual hunting 

regulations for certain migratory game 

birds for the 2019–20 hunting season. 

We annually prescribe outside limits 

(frameworks) within which States may 

select hunting seasons. This proposed 

rule provides the regulatory schedule, 

announces the Service Migratory Bird 

Regulations Committee (SRC) and 

Flyway Council meetings, describes the 

proposed regulatory alternatives for the 

2019–20 duck hunting seasons, and 

requests proposals from Indian tribes 

that wish to establish special migratory 

game bird hunting regulations on 

Federal Indian reservations and ceded 

lands. Migratory bird hunting seasons 

provide opportunities for recreation and 

sustenance; aid Federal, State, and tribal 

governments in the management of 

migratory game birds; and permit 

harvests at levels compatible with 

migratory game bird population status 

and habitat conditions. 

DATES: 

Comments: You may comment on the 

general harvest strategy and the 

proposed regulatory alternatives for the 

2019–20 season until July 18, 2018. 

Following subsequent Federal Register 

documents, you will be given an 

opportunity to submit comments on the 

proposed frameworks by January 15, 

2019. Tribes must submit proposals and 

related comments on or before 

December 1, 2018. 

Meetings: The SRC will conduct a 

meeting on July 10, 2018, to identify 

and discuss preliminary issues 

concerning the 2019–20 migratory bird 

hunting regulations. The meeting will 

commence at approximately 11:00 a.m. 

EDT. The SRC will meet to consider and 

develop proposed regulations for the 

2019–20 migratory game bird hunting 

seasons on October 16–17, 2018. 

Meetings on both days are open to the 

public and will commence at 

approximately 8:30 a.m. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on the proposals by one of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments 

on Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2018– 

0030. 

• U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public 

Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–HQ– 

MB–2018–0030; Division of Policy, 

Performance, and Management 

Programs; U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, MS: BPHC; 5275 Leesburg Pike, 

Falls Church, VA 22041. 

We will not accept emailed or faxed 

comments. We will post all comments 

on http://www.regulations.gov. This 

generally means that your entire 

submission—including any personal 

identifying information—will be posted 

on the website. See the Public 

Comments section, below, for more 

information. 

Meetings: The July 10, 2018, SRC 

meeting will be available to the public 

via teleconference in the Rachel Carson 

conference room at 5275 Leesburg Pike, 

Falls Church, VA 22041. The October 

16–17, 2018, SRC meeting will be at the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 5600 

American Boulevard, Bloomington, MN 

55437. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron 

W. Kokel at: Division of Migratory Bird 

Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Department of the Interior, MS: 

MB, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, 

VA 22041; (703) 358–1714. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

New Process for the Annual Migratory 

Game Bird Hunting Regulations 

As part of DOI’s retrospective 

regulatory review, 3 years ago we 

developed a schedule for migratory 

game bird hunting regulations that is 

more efficient and provides hunting 

season dates earlier than was possible 

under the old process. The new process 

makes planning easier for the States and 

all parties interested in migratory bird 

hunting. Beginning in the summer of 

2015, with the development of the 

2016–17 hunting seasons, we started 

promulgating our annual migratory 

game bird hunting regulations using a 

new schedule that combines the 

previously used early- and late-season 

regulatory processes into a single 

process. We make decisions for harvest 

management based on predictions 

derived from long-term biological 

information and established harvest 

strategies and, therefore, can establish 

migratory bird hunting seasons earlier 

than the system we used for many years. 

Under the new process, we develop 

proposed hunting season frameworks 

for a given year in the fall of the prior 

year. We then finalize those frameworks 

a few months later, thereby enabling the 

State agencies to select and publish 

their season dates in early summer. This 

proposed rule is the first in a series of 

proposed and final rulemaking 

documents for the establishment of the 

2019–20 hunting seasons. 

Background and Overview 

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. Under the 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 

703–712), the Secretary of the Interior is 

authorized to determine when ‘‘hunting, 

taking, capture, killing, possession, sale, 

purchase, shipment, transportation, 

carriage, or export of any * * * bird, or 

any part, nest, or egg’’ of migratory game 

birds can take place, and to adopt 

regulations for this purpose. These 

regulations are written after giving due 

regard to ‘‘the zones of temperature and 

to the distribution, abundance, 

economic value, breeding habits, and 

times and lines of migratory flight of 

such birds’’ and are updated annually 

(16 U.S.C. 704(a)). This responsibility 

has been delegated to the Service as the 

lead Federal agency for managing and 

conserving migratory birds in the 

United States. However, migratory game 

bird management is a cooperative effort 

of State, Tribal, and Federal 

governments. 

The Service develops migratory game 

bird hunting regulations by establishing 

the frameworks, or outside limits, for 

season lengths, bag limits, and areas for 

migratory game bird hunting. 

Acknowledging regional differences in 

hunting conditions, the Service has 

administratively divided the Nation into 

four Flyways for the primary purpose of 

managing migratory game birds. Each 

Flyway (Atlantic, Mississippi, Central, 

and Pacific) has a Flyway Council, a 

formal organization generally composed 

of one member from each State and 

Province in that Flyway. The Flyway 

Councils, established through the 

Association of Fish and Wildlife 

Agencies, also assist in researching and 

providing migratory game bird 

management information for Federal, 

State, and Provincial governments, as 

well as private conservation entities and 

the general public. 

The process for adopting migratory 

game bird hunting regulations, located 

in title 50 of the Code of Federal 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2018 / Proposed Rules 27837 

Regulations (CFR) at part 20, is 

constrained by three primary factors. 

Legal and administrative considerations 

dictate how long the rulemaking process 

will last. Most importantly, however, 

the biological cycle of migratory game 

birds controls the timing of datagathering activities and thus the dates 

on which these results are available for 

consideration and deliberation. 

For the regulatory cycle, Service 

biologists gather, analyze, and interpret 

biological survey data and provide this 

information to all those involved in the 

process through a series of published 

status reports and presentations to 

Flyway Councils and other interested 

parties. Because the Service is required 

to take abundance of migratory game 

birds and other factors into 

consideration, the Service undertakes a 

number of surveys throughout the year 

in conjunction with Service Regional 

Offices, the Canadian Wildlife Service, 

and State and Provincial wildlifemanagement agencies. To determine the 

appropriate frameworks for each 

species, we consider factors such as 

population size and trend, geographical 

distribution, annual breeding effort, 

condition of breeding and wintering 

habitat, number of hunters, and 

anticipated harvest. After frameworks 

are established for season lengths, bag 

limits, and areas for migratory game bird 

hunting, States may select season dates, 

bag limits, and other regulatory options 

for the hunting seasons. States may 

always be more conservative in their 

selections than the Federal frameworks, 

but never more liberal. 

Service Migratory Bird Regulations 

Committee Meetings 

The SRC will conduct an open 

meeting on July 10, 2018, to discuss 

preliminary issues for the 2019–20 

regulations, and on October 16–17, 

2018, to review information on the 

current status of migratory game birds 

and develop 2019–20 migratory game 

bird regulations recommendations for 

these species. In accordance with 

Departmental policy, these meetings are 

open to public observation. You may 

submit written comments to the Service 

on the matters discussed. See DATES and 

ADDRESSES for information about these 

meetings. 

Announcement of Flyway Council 

Meetings 

Service representatives will be 

present at the individual meetings of the 

four Flyway Councils this August and 

September. Although agendas are not 

yet available, these meetings usually 

commence at 8 a.m. on the days 

indicated. 

Atlantic Flyway Council: September 

27–28, 2018; Hotel 1620 Plymouth 

Harbor, 180 Water Street, Plymouth, 

MA. 

Mississippi Flyway Council: August 

23–24, 2018; Radisson Hotel Winnipeg 

Downtown, 288 Portage Avenue, 

Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. 

Central Flyway Council: August 30– 

31, 2018; Elk Ridge Resort and 

Conference Centre, Waskesiu Lake, 

Saskatchewan, Canada. 

Pacific Flyway Council: September 28, 

2018; Drury Inn and Suites, Flagstaff, 

AZ. 

Notice of Intent To Establish Open 

Seasons 

This document announces our intent 

to establish open hunting seasons and 

daily bag and possession limits for 

certain designated groups or species of 

migratory game birds for 2019–20 in the 

contiguous United States, Alaska, 

Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin 

Islands, under §§ 20.101 through 20.107, 

20.109, and 20.110 of subpart K of 50 

CFR part 20. For the 2019–20 migratory 

game bird hunting season, we will 

propose regulations 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). We describe these proposals 

under Proposed 2019–20 Migratory 

Game Bird Hunting Regulations 

(Preliminary) in this document. We 

annually publish definitions of flyways 

and management units, and a 

description of the data used in and the 

factors affecting the regulatory process 

(see May 30, 2017, Federal Register (82 

FR 24786) for the latest definitions and 

descriptions). 

Regulatory Schedule for 2019–20 

This document is the first in a series 

of proposed, supplemental, and final 

rulemaking documents for migratory 

game bird hunting regulations. We will 

publish additional supplemental 

proposals for public comment in the 

Federal Register as population, habitat, 

harvest, and other information become 

available. Major steps in the 2019–20 

regulatory cycle relating to open public 

meetings and Federal Register 

notifications are illustrated in the 

diagram at the end of this proposed rule. 

All publication dates of Federal 

Register documents are target dates. All 

sections of this and subsequent 

documents outlining hunting 

frameworks and guidelines are 

organized under numbered headings. 

These headings are: 

1. Ducks 

A. General Harvest Strategy 

B. Regulatory Alternatives 

C. Zones and Split Seasons 

D. Special Seasons/Species Management 

i. September Teal Seasons 

ii. September Teal/Wood Duck Seasons 

iii. Black Ducks 

iv. Canvasbacks 

v. Pintails 

vi. Scaup 

vii. Mottled Ducks 

viii. Wood Ducks 

ix. Youth Hunt 

x. Mallard Management Units 

xi. Other 

2. Sea Ducks 

3. Mergansers 

4. Canada Geese 

A. Special Early Seasons 

B. Regular Seasons 

C. Special Late Seasons 

5. White-Fronted Geese 

6. Brant 

7. Snow and Ross’s (Light) Geese 

8. Swans 

9. Sandhill Cranes 

10. Coots 

11. Moorhens and Gallinules 

12. Rails 

13. Snipe 

14. Woodcock 

15. Band-Tailed Pigeons 

16. Doves 

17. Alaska 

18. Hawaii 

19. Puerto Rico 

20. Virgin Islands 

21. Falconry 

22. Other 

Later sections of this and subsequent 

documents will refer only to numbered 

items requiring your attention. 

Therefore, it is important to note that we 

will omit those items requiring no 

attention, so remaining numbered items 

will be discontinuous, making the list 

appear incomplete. 

The proposed regulatory alternatives 

for the 2019–20 duck hunting seasons 

are contained at the end of this 

document. We plan to publish final 

regulatory alternatives in late-August. 

We plan to publish proposed season 

frameworks in mid-December 2018. We 

plan to publish final season frameworks 

in late February 2019. 

Review of Public Comments 

This proposed rulemaking contains 

the proposed regulatory alternatives for 

the 2019–20 duck hunting seasons. This 

proposed rulemaking also describes 

other recommended changes or specific 

preliminary proposals that vary from the 

2018–19 regulations and issues 

requiring early discussion, action, or the 

attention of the States or tribes. We will 

publish responses to all proposals and 

written comments when we develop 

final frameworks for the 2019–20 

season. We seek additional information 

and comments on this proposed rule. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS2
27838 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

Consolidation of Rulemaking 

Documents 

For administrative purposes, this 

document consolidates the notice of our 

intent to establish open migratory game 

bird hunting seasons and the request for 

tribal proposals with the preliminary 

proposals for the annual hunting 

regulations-development process. We 

will publish the remaining proposed 

and final rulemaking documents 

separately. For inquiries on tribal 

guidelines and proposals, tribes should 

contact the following personnel: 

Region 1 (Idaho, Oregon, Washington, 

Hawaii, and the Pacific Islands)— 

Nanette Seto, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, 911 NE 11th Avenue, Portland, 

OR 97232–4181; (503) 231–6164. 

Region 2 (Arizona, New Mexico, 

Oklahoma, and Texas)—Scott Carleton, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 500 Gold 

Avenue SW, Albuquerque, NM 87102; 

(505) 248–6639. 

Region 3 (Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, 

Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, 

and Wisconsin)—Tom Cooper, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, 5600 American 

Blvd. West, Suite 990, Bloomington, MN 

55437–1458; (612) 713–5101. 

Region 4 (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, 

Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, 

Mississippi, North Carolina, Puerto 

Rico, Virgin Islands, South Carolina, 

and Tennessee)—Laurel Barnhill, U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, 1875 Century 

Boulevard, Room 324, Atlanta, GA 

30345; (404) 679–4000. 

Region 5 (Connecticut, Delaware, 

Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New 

Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, 

Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, 

Virginia, and West Virginia)—Pam 

Toschik, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

300 Westgate Center Drive, Hadley, MA 

01035–9589; (413) 253–8610. 

Region 6 (Colorado, Kansas, Montana, 

Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, 

Utah, and Wyoming)—Brian Smith, U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 

25486, Denver Federal Building, 

Denver, CO 80225; (303) 236–8145. 

Region 7 (Alaska)—Eric Taylor, U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, 1011 East 

Tudor Road, Anchorage, AK 99503; 

(907) 786–3423. 

Region 8 (California and Nevada)— 

Amedee Brickey, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, 2800 Cottage Way, Sacramento, 

CA 95825–1846; (916) 414–6480. 

Requests for Tribal Proposals 

Background 

Beginning with the 1985–86 hunting 

season, we have employed guidelines 

described in the June 4, 1985, Federal 

Register (50 FR 23467) to establish 

special migratory game bird hunting 

regulations on Federal Indian 

reservations (including off-reservation 

trust lands) and ceded lands. We 

developed these guidelines in response 

to tribal requests for our 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, season 

length, and 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, tribal regulations 

established under the guidelines must 

be consistent with the annual March 11 

to August 31 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 

applicable to those tribes that have 

reserved hunting rights on Federal 

Indian reservations (including offreservation trust lands) and ceded lands. 

They also may be applied to the 

establishment of migratory game bird 

hunting regulations for nontribal 

members on all lands within the 

exterior boundaries of reservations 

where tribes have full wildlifemanagement 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 game bird hunting by 

nonmembers on Indian-owned 

reservation lands, subject to our 

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 migratory bird 

hunting by non-Indians on these lands. 

In such cases, we encourage the tribes 

and States to reach agreement on 

regulations that would apply throughout 

the reservations. When appropriate, we 

will consult with a tribe and State with 

the aim of facilitating an accord. We 

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. It is 

incumbent upon the tribe and/or the 

State to request consultation as a result 

of the proposal being published in the 

Federal Register. We will not presume 

to make a determination, without being 

advised by either a tribe or a State, that 

any issue is or is not worthy of formal 

consultation. 

One of the guidelines provides for the 

continuation of tribal members’ harvest 

of migratory game birds on reservations 

where such harvest is a customary 

practice. We do 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 game bird resource. Since the 

inception of these guidelines, we have 

reached annual agreement with tribes 

for migratory game bird hunting by 

tribal members on their lands or on 

lands where they have reserved hunting 

rights. We will continue to consult with 

tribes that wish to reach a mutual 

agreement on hunting regulations for 

on-reservation hunting by tribal 

members. Tribes should not view the 

guidelines as inflexible. We believe that 

they provide appropriate opportunity to 

accommodate the reserved hunting 

rights and management authority of 

Indian tribes while also ensuring that 

the migratory game 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. 

Details Needed in Tribal Proposals 

Tribes that wish to use the guidelines 

to establish special hunting regulations 

for the 2019–20 migratory game bird 

hunting season should submit a 

proposal that includes: (1) The 

requested migratory game bird hunting 

season dates and other details regarding 

the proposed regulations; (2) Harvest 

anticipated under the proposed 

regulations; and (3) Tribal capabilities to 

enforce migratory game bird hunting 

regulations. For those situations where 

it could be shown that failure to limit 

Tribal harvest could seriously impact 

the migratory game bird resource, we 

also request information on the methods 

employed to monitor harvest and any 

potential steps taken to limit level of 

harvest. 

A tribe that desires the earliest 

possible opening of the migratory game 

bird season for nontribal members 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2018 / Proposed Rules 27839 

should specify this request in its 

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 for nontribal members, the 

proposal should request the same daily 

bag and possession limits and season 

length for migratory game birds that 

Federal regulations are likely to permit 

the States in the Flyway in which the 

reservation is located. 

Tribal Proposal Procedures 

We will publish details of tribal 

proposals for public review in later 

Federal Register documents. Because of 

the time required for review by us and 

the public, Indian tribes that desire 

special migratory game bird hunting 

regulations for the 2019–20 hunting 

season should submit their proposals no 

later than December 1, 2018. Tribes 

should direct inquiries regarding the 

guidelines and proposals to the 

appropriate Service Regional Office 

listed above under the caption 

Consolidation of Rulemaking 

Documents. Tribes that request special 

migratory game bird 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 

The Department of the Interior’s 

policy is, whenever practicable, to 

afford the public an opportunity to 

participate in the rulemaking process. 

Accordingly, we invite interested 

persons to submit written comments, 

suggestions, or recommendations 

regarding the proposed regulations. 

Before promulgation of final migratory 

game bird hunting regulations, we will 

take into consideration all comments we 

receive. Such comments, and any 

additional information we receive, may 

lead to final regulations that differ from 

these proposals. 

You may submit your comments and 

materials concerning 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. 

Finally, we will not consider handdelivered comments that we do not 

receive, or mailed comments that are 

not postmarked, by the date specified in 

DATES. We will post all comments in 

their entirety—including your personal 

identifying information—on http://

www.regulations.gov. Before including 

your address, phone number, email 

address, or other personal identifying 

information in your comment, you 

should be aware that your entire 

comment—including your personal 

identifying information—may be made 

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. Comments and materials we 

receive, as well as supporting 

documentation we used in preparing 

this proposed rule, will be available for 

public inspection on http://

www.regulations.gov, or by 

appointment, during normal business 

hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Division of Migratory Bird 

Management, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls 

Church, VA 22041. 

For each series of proposed 

rulemakings, we will establish specific 

comment periods. We will consider, but 

may not respond in detail to, each 

comment. As in the past, we will 

summarize all comments we receive 

during the comment period and respond 

to them after the closing date in any 

final rules. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) Consideration 

The programmatic document, 

‘‘Second Final Supplemental 

Environmental Impact Statement: 

Issuance of Annual Regulations 

Permitting the Sport Hunting of 

Migratory Birds (EIS 20130139),’’ filed 

with the Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) on May 24, 2013, 

addresses NEPA compliance by the 

Service for issuance of the annual 

framework regulations for hunting of 

migratory game bird species. We 

published a notice of availability in the 

Federal Register on May 31, 2013 (78 

FR 32686), and our Record of Decision 

on July 26, 2013 (78 FR 45376). We also 

address NEPA compliance for waterfowl 

hunting frameworks through the annual 

preparation of separate environmental 

assessments, the most recent being 

‘‘Duck Hunting Regulations for 2018– 

19,’’ with its corresponding May 2018, 

finding of no significant impact. 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 address 

indicated under the caption FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

Endangered Species Act Consideration 

Before issuance of the 2019–20 

migratory game bird hunting 

regulations, we will comply with 

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 the Act 

may cause us to change proposals in 

this and future supplemental proposed 

rulemaking documents. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

(Executive Orders 12866 and 13563) 

Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 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 

reviewed this rule and has determined 

that this rule is significant because it 

would have an annual effect of $100 

million or more on the economy. 

E.O. 13563 reaffirms the principles of 

E.O. 12866 while calling for 

improvements in the nation’s regulatory 

system to promote predictability, to 

reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, 

most innovative, and least burdensome 

tools for achieving regulatory ends. The 

executive order directs agencies to 

consider regulatory approaches that 

reduce burdens and maintain flexibility 

and freedom of choice for the public 

where these approaches are relevant, 

feasible, and consistent with regulatory 

objectives. 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 rule in a manner consistent with 

these requirements. 

An economic analysis was prepared 

for the 2019–20 season. This analysis 

was based on data from the 2011 

National Hunting and Fishing Survey, 

the most recent year for which data are 

available (see discussion in Regulatory 

Flexibility Act section below). This 

analysis estimated consumer surplus for 

three alternatives for duck hunting 

(estimates for other species are not 

quantified due to lack of data). The 

alternatives are (1) issue restrictive 

regulations allowing fewer days than 

those issued during the 2018–19 season, 

(2) issue moderate regulations allowing 

more days than those in alternative 1, 

and (3) issue liberal regulations 

identical to the regulations in the 2018– 

19 season. For the 2018–19 season, we 

chose Alternative 3, with an estimated 

consumer surplus across all flyways of 

$334–$440 million with a mid-point 

estimate of $387 million. We also chose 

alternative 3 for the 2009–10 through 

2017–18 seasons. We will select 

regulations for the 2019–20 season in 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS2
27840 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

October. The 2019–20 analysis is part of 

the record for this rule and is available 

at http://www.regulations.gov at Docket 

No. FWS–HQ–MB–2018–0030. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The annual migratory bird hunting 

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 costbenefit analysis. This analysis was 

revised annually from 1990 through 

1995. In 1995, the Service issued a 

Small Entity Flexibility Analysis 

(Analysis), which was subsequently 

updated in 1996, 1998, 2004, 2008, 

2013, 2018, and 2019. The primary 

source of information about hunter 

expenditures for migratory game bird 

hunting is the National Hunting and 

Fishing Survey, which is generally 

conducted at 5-year intervals. The 2019 

Analysis is based on the 2011 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 approximately $1.5 billion 

at small businesses in 2019. Copies of 

the Analysis are available upon request 

from the Division of Migratory Bird 

Management (see FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT) or from http://

www.regulations.gov at Docket No. 

FWS–HQ–MB–2018–0030. 

Clarity of the Rule 

We are required by E.O. 12866 and 

12988 and by the Presidential 

Memorandum of June 1, 1998, 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. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

This proposed 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 would have an annual 

effect on the economy of $100 million 

or more. However, because this rule 

would establish hunting seasons, we do 

not plan to defer the effective date 

under the exemption contained in 5 

U.S.C. 808(1). 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

An 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. This rule does not 

contain any new collection of 

information that require approval by 

OMB under the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

OMB has previously approved the 

information collection requirements 

associated with migratory bird surveys 

and the procedures for establishing 

annual migratory bird hunting seasons 

under the following OMB control 

numbers: 

• 1018–0019, ‘‘North American 

Woodcock Singing Ground Survey’’ 

(expires 5/31/2018, and in accordance 

with 5 CFR 1320.10, an agency may 

continue to conduct or sponsor this 

collection of information while the 

submission is pending at OMB). 

• 1018–0023, ‘‘Migratory Bird 

Surveys, 50 CFR 20.20’’ (expires 8/31/ 

2020). Includes Migratory Bird Harvest 

Information Program, Migratory Bird 

Hunter Surveys, Sandhill Crane Survey, 

and Parts Collection Survey. 

• 1018–0171, ‘‘Establishment of 

Annual Migratory Bird Hunting 

Seasons, 50 CFR part 20’’ (expires 06/ 

30/2021) 

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 proposed 

rulemaking would 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 

The Department, in promulgating this 

proposed rule, has determined that this 

proposed rule will not unduly burden 

the judicial system and that it meets the 

requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) 

of E.O. 12988. 

Takings Implication Assessment 

In accordance with E.O. 12630, this 

proposed 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 

would not result in the physical 

occupancy of property, the physical 

invasion of property, or the regulatory 

taking of any property. In fact, this rule 

would allow hunters to exercise 

otherwise unavailable privileges and, 

therefore, reduce restrictions on the use 

of private and public property. 

Energy Effects—Executive Order 13211 

E.O. 13211 requires agencies to 

prepare Statements of Energy Effects 

when undertaking certain actions. 

While this proposed rule is a significant 

regulatory action under E.O. 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. 

Government-to-Government 

Relationship With Tribes 

In accordance with the President’s 

memorandum of April 29, 1994, 

‘‘Government-to-Government Relations 

with Native American Tribal 

Governments’’ (59 FR 22951), E.O. 

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 this 

proposed rule, we solicit proposals for 

special migratory bird hunting 

regulations for certain tribes on Federal 

Indian reservations, off-reservation trust 

lands, and ceded lands for the 2019–20 

migratory bird hunting season. The 

resulting proposals will be contained in 

a separate proposed rule. By virtue of 

these actions, we have consulted with 

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 Indian tribe may be more 

restrictive than the Federal frameworks 

at any time. The frameworks are 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2018 / Proposed Rules 27841 

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 E.O. 13132, these 

regulations do not have significant 

federalism effects and do not have 

sufficient federalism implications to 

warrant the preparation of a federalism 

summary impact statement. 

Executive Order 13771—Reducing 

Regulation and Controlling Regulatory 

Costs 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3, 

2017) because it is issued with respect 

to routine hunting and fishing activities. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 20 

Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, 

Transportation, Wildlife. 

Authority 

The rules that eventually will be 

promulgated for the 2019–20 hunting 

season are authorized under 16 U.S.C. 

703–711, 712, and 742 a–j. 

Dated: May 11, 2018. 

Susan Combs, 

Senior Advisor to the Secretary, Exercising 

the Authority of the Assistant Secretary for 

Fish and Wildlife and Parks. 

Proposed 2019–20 Migratory Game 

Bird Hunting Regulations (Preliminary) 

Pending current information on 

populations, harvest, and habitat 

conditions, and receipt of 

recommendations from the four Flyway 

Councils, we may defer specific 

regulatory proposals. No changes from 

the 2018–19 frameworks in the 

Mississippi, Central, and Pacific 

Flyways are being proposed at this time. 

Other issues requiring early discussion, 

action, or the attention of the States or 

tribes are contained below: 

1. Ducks 

Categories used to discuss issues 

related to duck harvest management are: 

(A) General Harvest Strategy, (B) 

Regulatory Alternatives, (C) Zones and 

Split Seasons, and (D) Special Seasons/ 

Species Management. Only those 

categories containing substantial 

recommendations are discussed below. 

A. General Harvest Strategy 

We propose to continue using 

adaptive harvest management (AHM) to 

help determine appropriate duckhunting regulations for the 2019–20 

season. AHM permits sound resource 

decisions in the face of uncertain 

regulatory impacts and provides a 

mechanism for reducing that 

uncertainty over time. We use AHM to 

evaluate four alternative regulatory 

levels for duck hunting in the 

Mississippi, Central, and Pacific 

Flyways based on the population status 

of mallards. We are proposing to use 

AHM based on the population status of 

a suite of four species in the Atlantic 

Flyway (see below). We have specific 

hunting strategies for species of special 

concern, such as black ducks, scaup, 

and pintails. 

Mississippi, Central, and Pacific 

Flyways 

The prescribed regulatory alternative 

for the Mississippi, Central, and Pacific 

Flyways is based on the status of 

mallard populations that contribute 

primarily to each Flyway. In the Central 

and Mississippi Flyways, we set 

hunting regulations based on the status 

and dynamics of mid-continent 

mallards. Mid-continent mallards are 

those breeding in central North America 

(Federal survey strata 13–18, 20–50, and 

75–77, and State surveys in Minnesota, 

Wisconsin, and Michigan). In the Pacific 

Flyway, we set hunting regulations 

based on the status and dynamics of 

western mallards. Western mallards are 

those breeding in Alaska and the 

northern Yukon Territory (as based on 

Federal surveys in strata 1–12), and in 

California, Oregon, Washington, and 

British Columbia (as based on State- or 

Province-conducted surveys). 

For the 2019–20 season, we 

recommend continuing to use 

independent optimization to determine 

the optimal regulatory choice for each 

mallard stock. This means that we 

would develop regulations for midcontinent mallards and western 

mallards independently, based upon the 

breeding stock that contributes 

primarily to each Flyway. We detailed 

implementation of this AHM decision 

framework for western and midcontinent mallards in the July 24, 2008, 

Federal Register (73 FR 43290). 

Atlantic Flyway 

Since 2000, the Service has used an 

AHM protocol based on the status of 

eastern mallards to establish the annual 

framework regulations for duck hunting 

seasons in the Atlantic Flyway. This 

protocol assumes that the mallard is an 

appropriate surrogate for other duck 

species in the Atlantic Flyway. By 2010 

it was apparent that the biological 

models used in the AHM protocol were 

performing poorly in terms of accurately 

predicting the following year’s eastern 

mallard breeding population, and this 

performance problem led to a 

comprehensive review of duck harvest 

management in the Atlantic Flyway. 

Following that review, the Atlantic 

Flyway Council (AFC) determined that 

eastern mallards do not adequately 

represent duck harvest dynamics 

throughout the entire flyway; they do 

not represent the breeding ecology and 

habitat requirements of other important 

Atlantic Flyway duck species because 

their breeding range does not overlap 

with that of other ducks that breed in 

the flyway; and their breeding and/or 

wintering habitat needs differ from 

many of the other duck species in the 

Flyway. Thus, although mallards 

comprise nearly 20 percent of the 

Atlantic Flyway’s duck harvest, the 

status of eastern mallards does not 

necessarily reflect that of other Atlantic 

Flyway duck species. For example, 

mallards in eastern North America have 

declined at an annual rate of 1 percent 

since 1998, whereas over the same time 

period all other duck species in eastern 

North America for which robust 

population estimates are available are 

stable or increasing. 

The AFC decided that a decision 

framework based upon a suite of duck 

species that better represents the habitat 

needs and harvest distribution of ducks 

in the Atlantic Flyway would be 

superior to the current eastern mallard 

AHM framework, and we concur. 

Accordingly, the Service and the AFC 

began working in 2013 to develop a 

multi-stock AHM protocol for setting 

annual duck hunting season frameworks 

for the Atlantic Flyway. 

The multi-stock protocol development 

has now been completed, and we 

propose to adopt it in place of the 

eastern mallard AHM. The protocol is 

based on a suite of four species that 

represents the dynamics of duck harvest 

in the Atlantic Flyway and the various 

habitat types used by waterfowl 

throughout the Atlantic Flyway: Greenwinged teal (Anas crecca), common 

goldeneye (Bucephala clangula), ringnecked duck (Aythya collaris), and 

wood duck (Aix sponsa). These species 

comprise more than 40 percent of the 

Atlantic Flyway’s total duck harvest, 

and they reflect regional variation in 

harvest composition. The selected 

species represent upland nesters in 

boreal and southern Canada (greenwinged teal), over-water nesters in 

boreal Canada (ring-necked duck), 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS2
27842 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

cavity nesters in the United States and 

southern Canada (wood duck), and 

cavity nesters in boreal Canada 

(goldeneye). The most important winter 

waterfowl habitats in the Atlantic 

Flyway (salt marsh, freshwater marsh, 

tidal waters, freshwater ponds and 

lakes, rivers and streams) are important 

to at least one of these four species. 

Species selection was also influenced 

by our need for sufficient time series of 

estimates of annual abundance and 

estimates of harvest rate or annual 

harvest. The proposed protocol has a 

harvest objective of no more than 98 

percent of maximum sustainable longterm yield for any of the four species. 

Regulatory alternatives would be the 

same as those used in the eastern 

mallard AHM, except that the mallard 

bag limit would not be prescribed by the 

optimal regulatory alternative as 

determined by the multi-stock AHM 

protocol. Further details on biological 

models used in the protocol, data 

sources, optimization methods, and 

simulation results are available at http:// 

www.regulations.gov and on our website 

at https://www.fws.gov/birds/index.php. 

Although season length in the 

Atlantic Flyway would be determined 

by the proposed multi-stock protocol, 

the daily bag limit for black ducks will 

still be determined by the international 

black duck AHM harvest strategy. The 

mallard bag limit in the Atlantic Flyway 

will be based on a separate assessment 

of the harvest potential of eastern 

mallards. 

Final 2019–20 AHM Protocol 

We will detail the final AHM protocol 

for the 2019–20 season in the 

supplemental proposed rule, which we 

will publish in late August (see 

Schedule of Biological Information 

Availability, Regulations Meetings and 

Federal Register Publications for the 

2019–20 Seasons at the end of this 

proposed rule for further information). 

We will propose a specific regulatory 

alternative in December for each of the 

Flyways to use for their 2019–20 

seasons after status information 

becomes available in late August 2018. 

B. Regulatory Alternatives 

The basic structure of the current 

regulatory alternatives for AHM was 

adopted in 1997. In 2002, based upon 

recommendations from the Flyway 

Councils, we extended framework dates 

in the ‘‘moderate’’ and ‘‘liberal’’ 

regulatory alternatives by changing the 

opening date from the Saturday nearest 

October 1 to the Saturday nearest 

September 24, and by changing the 

closing date from the Sunday nearest 

January 20 to the last Sunday in 

January. These extended dates were 

made available with no associated 

penalty in season length or bag limits. 

At that time we stated our desire to keep 

these changes in place for 3 years to 

allow for a reasonable opportunity to 

monitor the impacts of framework-date 

extensions on harvest distribution and 

rates of harvest before considering any 

subsequent use (67 FR 12501; March 19, 

2002). 

For 2019–20, we propose to utilize the 

same regulatory alternatives that are in 

effect for the 2018–19 season (see 

accompanying table for specifics of the 

regulatory alternatives) for the 

Mississippi, Central, and Pacific 

Flyways. For the Atlantic Flyway, per 

our discussion above under section A. 

General Harvest Strategy, under the 

proposed multi-stock AHM protocol for 

the Atlantic Flyway, the mallard bag 

limit would not be prescribed by the 

regulatory alternative, but would 

instead be based on a separate 

assessment of the harvest potential of 

eastern mallards. We will propose a 

specific mallard bag limit for the 

Atlantic Flyway in December. 

Alternatives are specified for each 

Flyway and are designated as ‘‘RES’’ for 

the restrictive, ‘‘MOD’’ for the moderate, 

and ‘‘LIB’’ for the liberal alternative. 

Comments on the proposed alternatives 

will be accepted until July 18, 2018. 

Following receipt of public input, we 

will finalize the regulatory alternatives 

for each of the Flyways for the 2019–20 

seasons in late-August 2018. 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS2

EP14JN18.000</GPH>daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS2

PROPOSED REGULA TORY ALTERNATIVES FOR DUCK HUNTING DURING THE 

ATLANTIC FLYWAY MISSISSIPPI FLYWAY CENTRAL FLYWAY (a) P

RES I MOD I LIB RES I MOD I LIB RES I MOD I LIB RES 

Beg1nn1ng 1/2 hr. 1/2 hr 1/2 hr. 1/2 hr 1/2 hr. 1/2 hr. 1/2 hr 1/2 hr. 1/2 hr. 1/2 hr

Shooting before before before before before before before before before before 

Time sunnse sunrise sunrise sunrise sunrise sunrise sunnse sunrise sunrise sunrise 

Ending 

Shooting Sunset Sunset Sunset Sunset Sunset Sunset Sunset Sunset Sunset Sunse

T1me 

Opening Oct 1 Sat nearest Sat nearest Sat nearest Sat nearest Sat nearest Sat nearest Sat nearest Sat nearest Sat nea

Date Sept 24 Sept 24 Oct 1 Sept 24 Sept 24 Oct1 Sept 24 Sept 24 Oct 1 

Closing Jan. 20 Last Sunday Last Sunday Sun. nearest Last Sunday Last Sunday Sun. nearest Last Sunday Last Sunday Sun. near

Date in Jan. in Jan. Jan. 20 in Jan. 1n Jan. Jan. 20 in Jan. in Jan. Jan. 2

Season 30 45 60 30 45 60 39 60 74 60 

Length (1n days) 

Daily Bag 3 6 6 3 6 6 3 6 6 4 

Species/Sex Limits within the Overall Daily Bag Limit 

Mallard (Total/Female) (d) (d) (d) 2/1 4/1 4/2 3/1 5/1 5/2 3/1 

(a) In the High Plains Mallard Management Unit, all regulations would be the same as the remainder of the Central Flyway, with the exception of season length. Additio

be allowed under the various alternatives as follows: restrictive- 12, moderate and liberal - 23. Under all alternatives, additional days must be on or after the Saturd

December 10. 

(b) In the Columbia Basin Mallard Management Unit, all regulations would be the same as the remainder of the Pacific Flyway, the exception of season length. Un

except the liberal an additional 7 days would be allowed. 

(c) In Alaska, framework dates, bag limits, and season length would be different from the remainder of the Pacific Flyway. The bag limit (depending on the area) would 

alternative, and 7-10 under the moderate and liberal alternatives. Under all alternatives, season length would be 107 days and framework dates would be Sep. 1 -Ja

(d) Under the proposed multi-stock AHM protocol for the Atlantic Flyway, the mallard bag limit would not be prescribed by the regulatory alternative. 
BILLING CODE 4333–15–C 

[FR Doc. 2018–12773 Filed 6–13–18; 8:45 am] 


EP14JN18.001</GPH>daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS2

SCHEDULE OF BIOLOGICAL INFORMATION AVAILABILITY, REGULATIONS 

FEDERAL REGISTER PUBLICATIONS FOR THE 2019-20 SEASO

SURVEY & ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE MEETING SCHEDULE FEDE

March- June, 2018 I II 

SPRING POPULATION SURVEYS I PROPOSED 

'II WIT

I July 10, 2018- Falls Church, VA I 

SRC Meeting 

August 15, 2018 I II 

WATERFOWL STATUS REPORT I II SUP

August 20, 2018 

AHM REPORT w'OPTIMAL ALTERNATIVES, 

WE BLESS and CRANE STATUS 

INFORMATION, DOVE and WOODCOCK I August 15- September 30, 2018 REGULA TORY ALTERNATIVES, and Flyway Tech And Council Meetings I 

HUNTER ACTr\/ITY and HARVEST REPORT 

I October 16-17, 2018- Bloomington, MN SRC Regulatory Meeting I 

PROPOS

December 15, 2018- January31, 2019 

FALL and WINTER SURVEY 

INFORMATION for CRANES 

and WATERFOWL I March 2019 (at North Am. Coni) Flyway Council Mtgs I 

II II RNALII 

ALL HUN

(Se

I September 1, 2019 and later ALL HUNTING SEASONS I