19318 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 28, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Parts 25 and 32 

[FWS–R3–NSR–2009–0007; 32579–1261– 

0000–4A] 

RIN 1018–AW48 

2009–2010 Hunting and Sport Fishing 

Regulations for the Upper Mississippi 

River National Wildlife and Fish Refuge 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service (Service or we) proposes to 

amend the regulations for the Upper 

Mississippi River National Wildlife and 

Fish Refuge (refuge) that pertain to 

existing programs for migratory game 

bird hunting, upland game hunting, and 

big game hunting. These changes would 

take effect with the 2009–2010 season, 

would implement portions of the 

Comprehensive Conservation Plan 

(CCP) for the refuge approved in 2006, 

and would amend other regulations. We 

also propose amendments to part 25 

reflecting recent OMB approval of new 

hunting and fishing application forms 

and activity reports for national wildlife 

refuges. 

DATES: We will accept comments on or 

before May 28, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by one of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• U.S. mail or hand delivery: Public 

Comments Processing, Attn: RIN 1018- 

AW48; Division of Policy and Directives 

Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 

222; Arlington, VA 22203. 

We will not accept e-mail or faxes. We 

will post all comments on http:// 

www.regulations.gov. This generally 

means that we will post any personal 

information you provide us (see the 

Public Comments section below for 

more information). For information on 

this specific refuge’s public use 

programs and the conditions that apply 

to them or for copies of compatibility 

determinations for any refuge(s), contact 

individual the programs at the 

addresses/phone numbers given in 

‘‘Available Information for Specific 

Districts of the Refuge’’ under 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Don 

Hultman, (507) 452–4232; Fax (507) 

452–0851. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Upper 

Mississippi River National Wildlife and 

Fish Refuge (refuge) encompasses 

240,000 acres in a more-or-less 

continuous stretch of 261 miles of 

Mississippi River floodplain in 

Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, and 

Illinois. The refuge was established by 

Congress in 1924 to provide a refuge 

and breeding ground for migratory 

birds, fish, other wildlife, and plants. 

The refuge is perhaps the most 

important corridor of habitat in the 

central United States due to its species 

diversity and abundance and is the most 

visited refuge in the United States with 

3.7 million annual visitors. 

Approximately 187,000 acres of the 

refuge is open to all hunting, and 

approximately 140,000 acres of surface 

water is open to year-round fishing. 

On July 11, 2006, we published a 

notice of availability of our Final 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 

and CCP (71 FR 39125), and we 

accepted public comments on the Final 

EIS for 30 days. On August 24, 2006, the 

Regional Director of the Midwest Region 

of the Fish and Wildlife Service signed 

the Record of Decision that documented 

the selection of Alternative E, the 

Preferred Alternative presented in the 

Final EIS. We published a notice of 

availability of that Record of Decision 

on November 2, 2006 (71 FR 64553). 

In accordance with the Record of 

Decision, we prepared a CCP based on 

Alternative E. The CCP was approved 

on October 24, 2006. The National 

Wildlife Refuge System Administration 

Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd–668ee, as 

amended by the National Wildlife 

Refuge Improvement Act of 1997), 

requires the Secretary of the Interior 

(Secretary) to manage each refuge in a 

manner consistent with a completed 

CCP. The Final EIS and CCP are 

available at http://www.fws.gov/ 

midwest/planning/uppermiss/. 

We completed hunting and fishing 

regulations in 2007 to implement the 

goals, objectives, and strategies 

described in the CCP pertaining to 

hunting and fishing and related uses. 

We published a proposed rule in the 

Federal Register on June 28, 2007 (72 

FR 35380) and a final rule was effective 

on September 7, 2007 (72 FR 51534). 

This proposal would make four 

changes to existing refuge regulations 

(see our final rule of September 7, 2007 

(72 FR 51534) for more details on 

closure restrictions). It would modify 

the refuge’s Waterfowl Hunting Closed 

Areas and/or No Hunting Zones in 

refuge Pool 4; add a new No Hunting 

Zone in Pool 5A as scheduled in the 

CCP; make permanent an interim No 

Hunting or Trapping Zone on the 

recently acquired Mathy Tract (75 acres) 

on Brice Prairie near Pool 7 which 

would be used as a future office and 

visitor contact facility; and add an 

additional regulation on the immediate 

retrieval of waterfowl taken during 

hunting that would be applicable 

refuge-wide. 

The proposed retrieval regulation 

resulted from discussions we had with 

State law enforcement personnel and 

was endorsed by 33 of 35 participants 

at a public waterfowl hunting workshop 

in February 2007. This regulation is 

designed to reduce the loss of downed 

waterfowl by adding a time element 

(i.e., ‘‘immediately’’) to existing State 

retrieval regulations and to reduce the 

crippling loss of waterfowl by 

discouraging hunters from shooting at 

birds that are beyond effective shotgun 

range. The proposed change in Pool 5A 

is the addition of a 24-acre Fountain 

City Bay No Hunting Zone 

encompassing a backwater bay adjacent 

to Merrick State Park, Wisconsin. This 

new zone, identified in the CCP, is 

designed to reduce conflicts with park 

users and will also provide a resting and 

feeding area for migrating puddle ducks 

such as mallards and blue-winged teal. 

The most significant of the proposed 

changes above is the modification of the 

Waterfowl Hunting Closed Areas in Pool 

4 of the refuge, a change described and 

scheduled for the 2009–2010 season in 

the CCP. This pool currently has 6,884 

acres designated as closed areas, and 

under this proposal the acreage will 

drop to 3,500 acres designated as closed 

areas or no hunting zones. The entire 

Nelson-Trevino closed area will be open 

to hunting (3,773 acres), and a new 

closed area will be established that 

encompasses Big Lake (2,210 acres). The 

current Peterson Lake closed area of 

3,111 acres will be reduced to 1,290 

acres and also divided into more 

recognizable subunits, namely Peterson 

Lake closed area (572 acres), Rieck’s 

Lake closed area (499 acres), and Buffalo 

River no hunting zone (219 acres). 

These proposed changes, although 

resulting in more acreage open to 

hunting in Pool 4, are predicted to 

dramatically improve the effectiveness 

of Pool 4 in providing waterfowl secure 

resting and feeding areas based on an 

analysis completed for the Final EIS and 

CCP. An effective system of strategically 

located waterfowl closed areas on the 

261-mile-long refuge is critical to 

waterfowl using the Mississippi Flyway, 

and allows hunting to remain 

compatible. The Service will monitor 

the effectiveness of the modification to 

Pool 4 and will make future changes if 

warranted by waterfowl use surveys. 


erowe on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 28, 2009 / Proposed Rules 19319 

Finally, we propose corrections to 

some acreage figures for the ‘‘No Entry 

– Sanctuary,’’ ‘‘Area Closed,’’ ‘‘Area 

Closed – No Motors,’’ ‘‘No Hunting 

Zone’’ and ‘‘No Hunting or Trapping 

Zone’’ listings in the respective sections 

of this proposed rule to reflect increased 

accuracy based on actual signing and 

mapping in the field and subsequent 

Geographic Information System or GIS 

analysis since we published the 2007– 

08 Hunting and Fishing final rule. These 

are considered administrative changes 

since the corrections match the areas 

shown on maps provided to the public 

since 2007. We have summarized these 

administrative changes below: 

No Entry – Sanctuary Areas 

Pool Slough, Pool 9, Minnesota/Iowa, 

from 1,112 to 1,126 acres 

Spring Lake, Pool 13, Illinois, from 

3,686 to 3,697 acres 

Areas Closed and Areas Closed – No 

Motors 

Big Lake, Pool 4, Wisconsin, from 

2,626 to 2,210 acres 

Peterson Lake, Pool 4, Wisconsin, 

from 672 to 572 acres 

Spring Lake, Pool 5, Wisconsin, from 

243 to 254 acres 

Polander Lake, Pool 5A, Minnesota/ 

Wisconsin, from 1,907 to 1,873 acres 

Lake Onalaska, Pool 7, Wisconsin, 

from 7,369 acres to 7,366 acres 

Wisconsin Islands, Pool 8, Minnesota/ 

Wisconsin, from 6,510 to 6,538 acres 

Wisconsin River Delta, Pool 10, 

Wisconsin, from 1,406 to 1,414 acres 

12-Mile Island, Pool 11, Iowa, from 

1,145 to 1,139 acres 

Kehough Slough, Pool 12, Illinois, 

from 343 to 333 acres 

Pleasant Creek, Pool 13, Iowa, from 

2,067 to 2,191 acres 

Elk River, Pool 13, Iowa, from 1,237 

to 1,248 acres 

Beaver Island, Pool 14, Iowa, from 717 

to 864 acres 

No Hunting or No Hunting or Trapping 

Zones 

Upper Halfway Creek Marsh, Pool 7, 

Wisconsin, from 141 to 143 acres 

Goose Island, Pool 8, Wisconsin, from 

986 to 984 acres 

Goetz Island Trail, Pool 11, Iowa, 

from 32 to 31 acres 

Crooked Slough Backwater, Pool 13, 

Illinois, from 2,467 to 2,453 acres 

Crooked Slough Proper, Pool 13, 

Illinois, from 192 to 270 acres 

The National Wildlife Refuge System 

Administration Act of 1966 authorizes 

the Secretary to allow uses of refuge 

areas, including hunting and/or sport 

fishing, upon a determination that such 

uses are compatible with the purposes 

of the refuge and National Wildlife 

Refuge System (Refuge System) mission. 

The action also must be in accordance 

with provisions of all laws applicable to 

the areas, developed in coordination 

with the appropriate State fish and 

wildlife agency(ies), and consistent with 

the principles of sound fish and wildlife 

management and administration. These 

requirements ensure that we maintain 

the biological integrity, diversity, and 

environmental health of the Refuge 

System for the benefit of present and 

future generations of Americans. 

The Secretary is required to prepare a 

CCP for each refuge and shall manage 

each refuge consistent with the CCP. 

Each CCP must identify and describe 

the refuge’s purposes; fish, wildlife, and 

plant populations; cultural resources; 

areas for administrative or visitor 

facilities; significant problems affecting 

resources and actions necessary; and 

opportunities for compatible wildlifedependent recreation. Each CCP must 

also be developed through consultation 

with the States, other Federal agencies, 

and the public, and be coordinated with 

applicable State conservation plans. 

Each CCP is guided by the 

overarching requirement that refuges are 

to be managed to fulfill their purposes 

for which established and the mission of 

the Refuge System. In addition, the 

National Wildlife Refuge System 

Improvement Act requires that the 

Refuge System be administered to 

provide for the conservation of fish, 

wildlife, and plants and their habitats; 

and to ensure their biological integrity, 

diversity, and environmental health. 

We developed the CCP for the refuge 

in accordance with all requirements and 

in accordance with the consultation and 

public involvement provisions of the 

National Wildlife Refuge System 

Improvement Act. This includes new 

compatibility determinations for 

hunting and fishing, which are 

referenced and listed in Appendix E of 

the Final EIS (which includes 

recreational and commercial fishing, 

migratory bird and big game hunting, 

wildlife observation and photography). 

We based these compatibility 

determinations on all changes 

anticipated in the CCP, including the 

changes included in this proposed rule, 

and remain valid as approved in 2006. 

We then developed this proposed rule 

to complete implementation of the 

hunting- and fishing-related portions of 

the CCP. Even after we enact the 

proposed changes, opportunities for 

waterfowl hunting on the 240,000-acre 

refuge will remain abundant with 

49,239 acres closed to waterfowl or 

other hunting compared to a pre-CCP 

total of 48,099 acres. 

Plain Language Mandate 

In this proposed rule, we comply with 

a Presidential mandate to use plain 

language in regulations. As examples, 

we use ‘‘you’’ to refer to the reader and 

‘‘we’’ to refer to the Service, the word 

‘‘allow’’ instead of ‘‘permit’’ when we 

do not require the use of a permit for an 

activity, and we use active voice 

whenever possible (i.e., ‘‘We allow 

hunting of upland game on designated 

areas’’ vs. ‘‘Upland game hunting in 

designated areas is allowed’’). 

Statutory Authority 

The National Wildlife Refuge System 

Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 

668dd–668ee, as amended by the 

National Wildlife Refuge System 

Improvement Act of 1977 [Improvement 

Act]) (Administration Act) and the 

Refuge Recreation Act of 1962 (16 

U.S.C. 460k–460k–4) (Recreation Act) 

govern the administration and public 

use of refuges. In addition, the 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C 

703–711) grants authority for 

management of migratory birds and the 

closing of any areas to migratory bird 

hunting. 

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act 

(MBTA) designates the protection of 

migratory birds as a Federal 

responsibility. The MBTA enables the 

setting of seasons, and other regulations 

including the closing of areas, Federal 

and non-Federal, to the hunting of 

migratory birds. You can find 

regulations stemming from the MBTA 

pertaining to migratory bird hunting in 

50 CFR part 20. 

This document proposes to codify in 

the Code of Federal Regulations 

amended hunting and sport fishing 

regulations that are applicable to the 

Upper Mississippi River National 

Wildlife and Fish Refuge. We are 

proposing these amended regulations to 

implement the refuge CCP, better inform 

the general public of the regulations at 

the refuge, increase understanding and 

compliance with these regulations, and 

make enforcement of these regulations 

more efficient. In addition to finding 

these regulations in 50 CFR part 32, 

visitors will find them reiterated in 

literature distributed by the refuge and 

posted on signs at major access points. 

Visitors will also find the boundaries of 

closed areas or other restricted-use areas 

referenced in this document marked by 

specific signs. 

Information Collection Changes 

On January 15, 2009, OMB approved 

the use of nine new hunting and fishing 

application forms and activity reports 

for use on national wildlife refuges 


erowe on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
19320 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 28, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

(control #1018–0140). We are also 

proposing to amend 50 CFR 25.23 to 

reflect the addition of these forms to 

those already used on national wildlife 

refuges. 

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: http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/ 

fish/. 

Public Comments 

You may submit comment and 

materials on this proposed rule by any 

one of the methods listed in the 

ADDRESSES section. We will not accept 

comments sent by e-mail or fax or to an 

address not listed in the ADDRESSES

section. We will not consider handdelivered comments that we do not 

receive, or mailed comments that are 

not postmarked, by the date specified in 

the DATES section. 

We will post your entire comment on 

http://www.regulations.gov. Before 

including your address, phone number, 

e-mail 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. We will also post all hardcopy 

comments on http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Department of the Interior policy is, 

whenever practicable, to afford the 

public a meaningful opportunity to 

participate in the rulemaking process. 

During preparation of the refuge CCP, 

from which the major changes in this 

proposed rule originate, we used an 

extensive public information, outreach, 

and comment process, including 46 

public meetings or workshops attended 

by 4,500 persons and 80 other meetings 

with State department of natural 

resources agencies, other agencies, 

interest groups, elected officials, and 

other Service and Department of Interior 

offices. We received and responded to a 

total of 3,230 written comments in the 

Final EIS. We also received and 

responded to 23 written comments 

received on the 2007 proposed 

comprehensive hunting and fishing rule 

as documented in the final rule in the 

Federal Register (72 FR 51534, 

September 7, 2007). This proposal, and 

its publication as a proposed rule in the 

Federal Register, will provide an 

additional opportunity for comment 

during the 30–day comment period (see 

DATES section). 

In addition, we held two public open 

houses in September 2008 to provide 

information and gather comments on 

the changes to the Waterfowl Hunting 

Closed Areas and No Hunting Zones in 

Pool 4. The open houses were attended 

by 60 people, and we contacted over 

200 people at landings during the 2008– 

09 hunting season. We used input from 

these open houses and follow-up 

contacts to make several boundary 

adjustments in the closed area and no 

hunting zones in this proposed rule. 

We also prepared a separate 

Environmental Assessment (EA) for the 

proposed No Hunting and Trapping 

Zone for the refuge’s Mathy Tract on 

Brice Prairie, Wisconsin, near Pool 7. 

We sent a news release announcing the 

assessment to local media, distributed 

the assessment widely, and posted it on 

the refuge website. We provided the 

public 30 days to review and comment. 

We received 14 comments (9 supporting 

the closure, 4 opposed, and 1 on another 

topic) and responded to them in the 

Final EA. In our response to comments, 

we addressed opportunities for hunting 

elsewhere on the refuge, the potential 

conflicts between hunting and use of the 

tract as an administrative site, and the 

new opportunities for wildlife 

observation, photography, interpretation 

and environmental education. The one 

other commenter advocated for 

Henslow’s sparrow conservation; we 

plan to restore native grasslands which 

should benefit it and other grassland 

species. 

We believe that a 30–day comment 

period on this proposed rule, through 

this broader publication following the 

earlier public involvement, gives the 

public sufficient time to comment 

before the upcoming seasons. In 

addition, in order to continue to provide 

for previously authorized hunting and 

fishing opportunities while at the same 

time providing for adequate resource 

and visitor protection, we must be 

timely in providing modifications to 

hunting and fishing programs on 

refuges. 

If adopted, we will incorporate these 

proposed regulations into 50 CFR 32.42 

(Minnesota). Part 32 contains general 

provisions and § 32.42 contains refugespecific regulations for hunting and 

sport fishing on refuges located or 

headquartered in Minnesota. 

Clarity of This Rule 

We are required by Executive Orders 

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 the ADDRESSES

section. To better help us revise the 

rule, your comments should be a 

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 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has determined that this rule is 

not significant under Executive Order 

12866 (E.O. 12866). OMB bases its 

determination on the following four 

criteria: 

(a) Whether the rule will have an 

annual effect of $100 million or more on 

the economy or adversely affect an 

economic sector, productivity, jobs, the 

environment, or other units of the 

government. 

(b) Whether the rule will create 

inconsistencies with other Federal 

agencies’ actions. 

(c) Whether the rule will materially 

affect entitlements, grants, use fees, loan 

programs, or the rights and obligations 

of their recipients. 

(d) Whether the rule raises novel legal 

or policy issues. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(as amended by the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 

[SBREFA] of 1996) (5 U.S.C. 601, 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 would 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 


erowe on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 28, 2009 / Proposed Rules 19321 

threshold for ‘‘significant impact’’ and a 

threshold for a ‘‘substantial number of 

small entities.’’ See 5 U.S.C. 605(b). 

SBREFA amended the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act to require Federal 

agencies to provide a statement of the 

factual basis for certifying that a rule 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

This proposed rule does not increase 

the number of recreation types allowed 

on the refuge but amends hunting and 

fishing regulations on the refuge. As a 

result, opportunities for hunting and 

fishing recreation on the refuge will 

remain abundant and increase over time 

based on analysis done in the Final EIS 

and CCP for the refuge. 

Many small businesses within the 

retail trade industry (such as hotels, gas 

stations, taxidermy shops, bait and 

tackle shops, etc.) may benefit from 

some increased refuge visitation. A large 

percentage of these retail trade 

establishments in the majority of 

affected counties qualify as small 

businesses (see table below). 

We expect that the incremental 

recreational opportunities will be 

scattered, and so we do not expect that 

the rule will have a significant 

economic effect (benefit) on a 

substantial number of small entities in 

any given community or county. We 

expect recreationists to spend an 

additional $2 million annually in total 

in the refuges’ local economies. As 

shown in the table below, this 

represents 0.02 percent of the total 

amount of retail expenditures in the 19- 

county area. For comparison purposes, 

the county with the smallest retail 

expenditure total, Buffalo County in 

Wisconsin, is shown. If the entire retail 

trade expenditures associated with the 

hunting and fishing regulations 

occurred in Buffalo County, this would 

amount to 3.4 percent increase in 

annual retail expenditures. 

TABLE 1—COMPARATIVE EXPENDITURES FOR RETAIL TRADE ASSOCIATED WITH ADDITIONAL REFUGE VISITATION 2009– 

2010 HUNTING AND FISHING REGULATIONS

Area 

Retail 

trade in 

2002 

Change due 

to 2009–2010 

hunting and 

fishing 

regulations 

(15-year 

span of 

CCP) 

Change as 

percent of 

total retail 

trade 

Total No. 

of retail 

establishments 

Establishments 

with fewer 

than 10 

employees 

19 County Area $9.8 billion $1,999,216 0.02 % 24,878 17,957 

Buffalo County, WI $58.3 million $1,999,216 3.4 % 350 290 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

The proposed rule is not a major rule 

under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act. We anticipate no 

significant employment or small 

business effects. This rule: 

a. Would not have an annual effect on 

the economy of $100 million or more. 

By the end of the 15–year CCP lifespan, 

the additional fishing and hunting 

opportunities on the refuge would 

generate an additional $2 million in 

angler and hunter expenditures with an 

economic impact estimated at $2.5 

million per year (2003 dollars). 

Consequently, the maximum benefit of 

this rule for businesses both small and 

large would not be sufficient to make 

this a major rule. The impact would be 

scattered across 19 counties and would 

most likely not be significant in any 

local area. 

b. Would not cause a major increase 

in costs or prices for consumers; 

individual industries; Federal, State, or 

local government agencies; or 

geographic regions. We do not expect 

this proposed rule to affect the supply 

or demand for fishing and hunting 

opportunities in the United States, and, 

therefore, it should not affect prices for 

fishing and hunting equipment and 

supplies, or the retailers that sell 

equipment. 

c. Would not have significant adverse 

effects on competition, employment, 

investment, productivity, innovation, or 

the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to 

compete with foreign-based enterprises. 

This proposed rule represents only a 

small proportion of recreational 

spending of a small number of affected 

hunters. Therefore, this rule would have 

virtually no economic effect on the 

wildlife-dependent industry, which has 

annual sales of equipment and travel 

expenditures of over $72 billion 

nationwide. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Since this proposed rule would apply 

to public use of federally owned and 

managed refuges, it would not impose 

an unfunded mandate on State, local, or 

Tribal governments or the private sector 

of more than $100 million per year. The 

rule would not have a significant or 

unique effect on State, local, or Tribal 

governments or the private sector. A 

statement containing the information 

required by the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not 

required. 

Takings (E.O. 12630) 

In accordance with E.O. 12630, this 

proposed rule would not have 

significant takings implications. This 

regulation would affect only visitors to 

the refuge and describe what they can 

do while they are on the refuge. 

Federalism (E.O. 13132) 

As discussed in the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act section above, 

this proposed rule would not have 

sufficient Federalism implications to 

warrant the preparation of a Federalism 

Assessment under E.O. 13132. In 

preparing the CCP for the refuge, we 

worked closely with the four States 

bordering the refuge, and this proposed 

rule reflects the CCP. 

Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988) 

In accordance with E.O. 12988, the 

Office of the Solicitor has determined 

that the proposed rule would not 

unduly burden the judicial system and 

that it meets the requirements of 

sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order. 

This proposal would clarify established 

regulations and result in better 

understanding of the regulations by 

refuge visitors. 

Energy Supply, Distribution or Use 

(E.O. 13211) 

On May 18, 2001, the President issued 

E.O. 13211 on regulations that 

significantly affect energy supply, 

distribution, and use. E.O. 13211 

requires agencies to prepare Statements 


erowe on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
19322 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 28, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

of Energy Effects when undertaking 

certain actions. Because this proposed 

rule is a modification of an existing 

hunting and fishing program on the 

refuge, and we do not expect it to 

significantly affect energy supplies, 

distribution, and use. Therefore, this 

action is a not a significant energy 

action and no Statement of Energy 

Effects is required. 

Consultation and Coordination With 

Indian Tribal Governments (E.O. 

13175) 

In accordance with E.O. 13175, we 

have evaluated possible effects on 

federally recognized Indian tribes and 

have determined that there are no 

effects. We coordinate recreational use 

on national wildlife refuges with Tribal 

governments having adjoining or 

overlapping jurisdiction before we 

propose changes to the regulations. 

During scoping and preparation of the 

Final EIS, we contacted 35 Indian tribes 

to inform them of the process and seek 

their comments. Only the Iowa Tribe of 

Oklahoma provided comment on the 

Draft EIS, saying they have an historic 

presence in counties adjacent to the 

refuge, and they wish to be kept 

informed of any artifact discoveries as 

we implement refuge plans. We replied 

in the Final EIS that we appreciated 

their interest in the refuge and would 

keep them informed of any cultural 

resource issues and discoveries. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This regulation does not contain any 

information collection requirements 

other than those already approved by 

the Office of Management and Budget 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (OMB Control 

Numbers 1018–0102 and 1018–0140). 

See 50 CFR 25.23 for information 

concerning that approval. 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. 

Endangered Species Act Section 7 

Consultation 

During preparation of the Final EIS, 

we completed a section 7 consultation 

and determined that the preferred 

alternative, which included hunting and 

fishing changes reflected in this 

proposed rule, is not likely to adversely 

effect individuals of listed or candidate 

species or designated critical habitat of 

such species. The Service’s Ecological 

Services Office concurred with this 

determination. The listed species on the 

refuge is the Higgins eye mussel; 

candidate species are the Eastern 

massasauga and spectaclecase and 

sheepnose mussels. A copy of the 

section 7 evaluation and accompanying 

biological assessment is available from 

the refuge at the locations listed in the 

‘‘Available Information for Specific 

Districts of the Refuge’’ section of this 

document. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) 

Concerning the actions that are the 

subject of this proposed rulemaking, we 

have complied with NEPA through the 

preparation of a Final EIS and Record of 

Decision which include the major 

hunting changes reflected in this 

proposed rule. An Environmental 

Assessment (EA) was prepared for the 

75-acre No Hunting and Trapping Zone 

on Brice Prairie near Pool 7. The NEPA 

documents are available on or through 

our website at http://www.fws.gov/ 

midwest/UpperMississippiRiver/. Then 

click on Current Topics on the left, 

which will bring you to the Mathy Tract 

EA. 

Available Information for Specific 

Districts of the Refuge 

The refuge is divided into four 

districts for management, 

administrative, and public service 

effectiveness and efficiency. These 

districts correspond to two or more 

Mississippi River pools created by the 

series of locks and dams on the river. 

District offices are located in Winona, 

Minnesota (Pools 4–6), La Crosse, 

Wisconsin (Pools 7-8), McGregor, Iowa 

(Pools 9–11), and Savanna, Illinois 

(Pools 12–14). If you are interested in 

specific information pertaining to a 

specific area encompassed in this 

proposed rule, you may contact the 

appropriate district office listed below: 

Winona District, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, 51 East Fourth Street, 

Room 203, Winona, MN 55987; 

Telephone (507) 454–7351. 

La Crosse District, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, 555 Lester Avenue, 

Onalaska, WI 54650; Telephone (608) 

783–8405. 

McGregor District, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 460, 

McGregor, IA 52157; Telephone (563) 

873–3423. 

Savanna District, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, 7071 Riverview Road, 

Thomson, IL 61285; Telephone (815) 

273–2732. 

Primary Author 

Don Hultman, Refuge Manager, Upper 

Mississippi River National Wildlife and 

Fish Refuge, is the primary author of 

this rulemaking document. 

List of Subjects in: 

50 CFR Part 25 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Concessions, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Safety, 

Wildlife refuges. 

50 CFR Part 32 

Fishing, Hunting, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Wildlife, 

Wildlife refuges. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, we propose to amend title 50, 

Chapter I, subchapter C of the Code of 

Federal Regulations as follows: 

PART 25—[AMENDED] 

1. The authority citation for part 25 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 16 U.S.C. 460k, 

664, 668dd, and 715i, 3901 et seq.; and Pub. 

L. 102–402, 106 Stat. 11961. 

2. Revise §25.23 to read as follows: 

§ 25.23 What are the general regulations 

and information collection requirements? 

The Office of Management and Budget 

has approved the information collection 

requirements contained in subchapter C, 

parts 25, 32, and 36 under 44 U.S.C. 

3501 et seq. and assigned the following 

control numbers: 1018–0014 for Special 

Use Permit Applications on National 

Wildlife Refuges in Alaska; 1018–0102 

for Special Use Permit Applications on 

National Wildlife Refuges Outside 

Alaska; and 1018–0140 for Hunting and 

Fishing Application Forms and Activity 

Reports for National Wildlife Refuges. 

We collect information to assist us in 

administering our programs in 

accordance with statutory authorities 

that require that recreational or other 

uses be compatible with the primary 

purposes for which the areas were 

established. Send comments on any 

aspect of these forms to the Information 

Collection Clearance Officer, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, MS 222 ARLSQ, 

Washington, DC 20240. 

PART 32—[AMENDED] 

3. The authority citation for part 32 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 16 U.S.C. 460k, 

664, 668dd–668ee, and 715i. 

4. Amend §32.42 Minnesota by 

revising paragraphs A.2., A.3., A.4., and 

A.6. of Upper Mississippi River 

National Wildlife and Fish Refuge to 

read as follows: 

§ 32.42 Minnesota. 

* * * * * 


erowe on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 28, 2009 / Proposed Rules 19323 

Upper Mississippi River National 

Wildlife and Fish Refuge 

A. Migratory Game Bird Hunting. * * * 

* * * * * 

2. In areas posted and shown on maps 

as ‘‘No Entry – Sanctuary,’’ we prohibit 

migratory bird hunting at all times and 

all public entry except as specified. 

These areas are named and located as 

follows: 

i. Pool Slough, Pool 9, Minnesota/ 

Iowa, 1,126 acres. 

ii. Bertom Island, Pool 11, Wisconsin, 

31 acres. 

iii. Guttenberg Ponds, Pool 11, Iowa, 

252 acres. 

iv. Spring Lake, Pool 13, Illinois, 

3,697 acres. 

3. In areas posted and shown on maps 

as ‘‘Area Closed’’ and ‘‘Area Closed – 

No Motors,’’ we prohibit migratory bird 

hunting at all times. We ask that you 

practice voluntary avoidance of these 

areas by any means or for any purpose 

from October 15 to the end of the 

respective State duck season. In areas 

also marked ‘‘no motors,’’ we prohibit 

the use of motors on watercraft from 

October 15 to the end of the respective 

State duck season. 

These ‘‘Area(s) Closed’’ are named 

and located as follows: 

i. Big Lake, Pool 4, Wisconsin, 2,210 

acres. 

ii. Weaver Bottoms/Lost Island, Pool 

5, Minnesota/Wisconsin, 3,508 acres. 

iii. Polander Lake, Pool 5A, 

Minnesota/Wisconsin, 1,873 acres. 

iv. Lake Onalaska, Pool 7, Wisconsin, 

7,366 acres (voluntary avoidance on 

3,365 acres until mid-November). 

v. Wisconsin Islands, Pool 8, 

Minnesota/Wisconsin, 6,538 acres. 

vi. Harpers Slough, Pool 9, Iowa/ 

Wisconsin, 5,209 acres. 

vii. Wisconsin River Delta, Pool 10, 

Wisconsin, 1,414 acres (closed 

November 1 to end of duck season). 

viii. 12-Mile Island, Pool 11, Iowa, 

1,139 acres. 

ix. Bertom-McCartney, Pool 11, 

Wisconsin, 2,384 acres (no voluntary 

avoidance provision). 

x. Pleasant Creek, Pool 13, Iowa, 2,191 

acres. 

xi. Elk River, Pool 13, Iowa, 1,248 

acres. 

The ‘‘Area(s) Closed – No Motors’’ are 

named and located as follows: 

xii. Peterson Lake, Pool 4, Wisconsin 

572 acres. 

xiii. Rieck’s Lake, Pool 4, Wisconsin, 

499 acres. 

xiv. Spring Lake, Pool 5, Wisconsin, 

254 acres. 

xv. Sturgeon Slough, Pool 10, 

Wisconsin, 340 acres. 

xvi. 12-Mile Island, Pool 10, Iowa, 540 

acres. 

xvii. John Deere Marsh, Pool 11, Iowa, 

439 acres. 

xviii. Kehough Slough, Pool 12, 

Illinois, 333 acres. 

xiv. Beaver Island, Pool 14, Iowa, 864 

acres. 

4. In areas posted and shown on maps 

as ‘‘No Hunting Zone’’ or ‘‘No Hunting 

or Trapping Zone,’’ we prohibit 

migratory bird hunting at all times. You 

must unload and encase firearms in 

these areas. These areas are named and 

located as follows: 

i. Buffalo River, Pool 4, Wisconsin, 

219 acres. 

ii. Fountain City Bay, Pool 5A, 

Wisconsin, 24 acres. 

iii. Upper Halfway Creek Marsh, Pool 

7, Wisconsin, 143 acres. 

iv. Mathy Tract (Brice Prairie), Pool 7, 

Wisconsin, 75 acres. 

v. Hunter’s Point, Pool 8, Wisconsin, 

82 acres. 

vi. Goose Island, Pool 8, Wisconsin, 

984 acres (also no motors and voluntary 

avoidance as in condition A3). 

vii. Sturgeon Slough, Pool 10, 

Wisconsin, 66 acres. 

viii. Goetz Island Trail, Pool 11, Iowa, 

31 acres. 

ix. Crooked Slough Backwater, Pool 

13, Illinois, 2,453 acres. 

x. Crooked Slough Proper, Pool 13, 

Illinois, 270 acres. 

xi. Frog Pond, Pool 13, Illinois, 64 

acres. 

xii. Ingersoll Learning Center, Pool 13, 

Illinois, 41 acres. 

* * * * * 

6. You must immediately make a 

reasonable attempt to retrieve downed 

waterfowl unless the bird lies in plain 

sight of you, is clearly dead, and there 

is no risk of the bird drifting off due to 

wind or current. You may retrieve dead 

or wounded game from areas posted 

‘‘Area Closed,’’ ‘‘No Hunting Zone,’’ and 

‘‘No Hunting or Trapping Zone’’ 

provided you do not take a loaded gun 

into the area and do not attempt to 

chase birds from the area. You may not 

use a motor to aid in the retrieval of 

game in areas posted ‘‘Area Closed – No 

Motors.’’ You may not retrieve birds or 

other game from areas posted ‘‘No Entry 

– Sanctuary.’’ 

* * * * * 

Dated: April 11, 2009 

Will Shafroth, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and 

Wildlife and Parks. 

[FR Doc. E9–9491 Filed 4–27–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–S 


erowe on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS2