7056 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

Responsibilities, and the Endangered 

Species Act), we readily acknowledge 

our responsibilities to work directly 

with Tribes in developing programs for 

healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that 

Tribal lands are not subject to the same 

controls as Federal public lands, to 

remain sensitive to Indian culture, and 

to make information available to Tribes. 

We have determined that the big red 

sage does not occur on Tribal lands, so 

no Tribes would be affected if we list 

the species. 

References Cited 

A complete list of references cited in 

this rulemaking is available on the 

internet at https://www.regulations.gov 

and upon request from the Austin 

Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). 

Authors 

The primary authors of this proposed 

rule are the staff members of the Fish 

and Wildlife Service’s Species 

Assessment Team and the Austin 

Ecological Services Field Office. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 

Endangered and threatened species, 

Exports, Imports, Plants, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, 

Transportation, Wildlife. 

Proposed Regulation Promulgation 

Accordingly, we propose to amend 

part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 

50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, 

as set forth below: 

PART 17—ENDANGERED AND 

THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531– 

1544; and 4201–4245, unless otherwise 

noted. 

■ 2. In § 17.12, in paragraph (h), amend 

the List of Endangered and Threatened 

Plants by adding an entry for ‘‘Salvia 

pentstemonoides’’ in alphabetical order 

under FLOWERING PLANTS to read as 

follows: 

§ 17.12 Endangered and threatened plants. 

* * * * * 

(h) * * * 

Scientific name Common name Where listed Status Listing citations and applicable rules 

FLOWERING PLANTS

*******

Salvia pentstemonoides ....... big red sage ........................ Wherever found .................. E [Federal Register citation when published as a final rule]. 

* * * * * * * 

Martha Williams, 

Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

[FR Doc. 2025–01117 Filed 1–17–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 20 

[Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2024–0127; 

FXMB1231099BPP0–245–FF09M32000] 

RIN 1018–BH65 

Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed 

2025–26 Migratory Game Bird Hunting 

Regulations (Preliminary) 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service (Service or we) proposes to 

establish hunting regulations for certain 

migratory game birds for the 2025–26 

hunting season. Through an annual 

rulemaking process, we prescribe 

outside limits (which we refer to as 

frameworks) within which States may 

select hunting seasons. This proposed 

rule provides the regulatory schedule, 

describes the proposed regulatory 

alternatives for the 2025–26 general 

duck seasons, and provides preliminary 

proposals that vary from the 2024–25 

hunting season regulations. 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 duck season regulatory 

alternatives, the process for authorizing 

annual hunting seasons, and other 

preliminary proposals for the 2025–26 

season until February 20, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: Comments: You may submit 

comments on the proposals by one of 

the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments 

on Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2024– 

0127. 

• U.S. mail: Public Comments 

Processing, Attn: FWS–HQ–MB–2024– 

0127; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 

MS: PRB/3W; 5275 Leesburg Pike; Falls 

Church, VA 22041–3803. 

We will not accept emailed or faxed 

comments. We will post all comments 

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

generally means that your entire 

submission—including any personal 

identifying information—will be posted 

on the website. See Public Comments, 

below, for more information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jerome Ford, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Department of the Interior, 

(703) 358–2606; jerome_ford@fws.gov. 

Individuals in the United States who are 

deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have 

a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY, 

TDD, or TeleBraille) to access 

telecommunications relay services. 

Individuals outside the United States 

should use the relay services offered 

within their country to make 

international calls to the point of 

contact in the United States. For a 

summary of the proposed rule, please 

see the ‘‘rule summary document’’ in 

docket FWS–HQ–MB–2024–0127 on 

https://www.regulations.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Process for Establishing Annual 

Migratory Game Bird Hunting 

Regulations 

Background 

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 (MBTA; 16 

U.S.C. 703–712), the Secretary of the 

Interior is authorized to determine when 

‘‘hunting, taking, capture, killing, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Proposed Rules 7057 

possession, sale, purchase, shipment, 

transportation, carriage, or export of any 

such bird, or any part, nest, or egg’’ of 

migratory game birds can take place, 

and to adopt regulations for this 

purpose (16 U.S.C. 704(a)). 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’’ (16 U.S.C. 704(a)) and are 

updated annually. 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 bird 

management is a cooperative effort of 

Federal, State, and Tribal governments. 

The Service annually develops 

migratory game bird hunting regulations 

by establishing the frameworks, or 

outside limits, for season dates, season 

lengths, shooting hours, bag and 

possession limits, and areas where 

migratory game bird hunting may occur. 

These frameworks are necessary to 

allow harvest at levels compatible with 

migratory game bird population status 

and habitat conditions. After the 

frameworks are established, States may 

select migratory game bird hunting 

seasons within the frameworks. States 

may always be more conservative in 

their selections than the frameworks, 

but never more liberal. The annual 

process of developing migratory game 

bird hunting regulations concludes 

when we establish the State season 

selections as Federal regulations under 

50 CFR part 20, subpart K. 

Acknowledging regional differences 

in hunting conditions, the Service has 

administratively divided the United 

States 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 within the Flyway, as 

well as Provinces in Canada that share 

migratory bird populations with the 

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, Tribal, and Provincial 

governments, as well as private 

conservation entities and the general 

public. 

Overview of the Rulemaking Process 

The process for adopting migratory 

game bird hunting regulations, which 

are set forth at 50 CFR 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. 

Service Migratory Bird Regulations 

Committee Meetings 

The Service Migratory Bird 

Regulations Committee (SRC) conducted 

an open meeting on May 17, 2024, to 

discuss preliminary issues for the 2025– 

26 regulations and will conduct another 

meeting in fall 2024 to review 

information on the current status of 

migratory game birds and develop 

recommendations for the 2025–26 

hunting regulations for these species. In 

accordance with 50 CFR 20.153, these 

meetings are open to public observation, 

and observers may submit written 

comments to the Service on the matters 

discussed. These meetings are 

announced in the Federal Register or 

online on the Service’s Migratory Bird 

Program website at https://

www.fws.gov/event/us-fish-and-wildlifeservice-migratory-bird-regulationscommittee-meeting at least 2 weeks 

before the meeting date. 

Rulemaking Process for the 2025–26 

Season 

This document is the first in a series 

of proposed and final rulemaking 

documents for migratory game bird 

hunting regulations. This document 

announces our intent to establish open 

hunting seasons for certain designated 

groups or species of migratory game 

birds for 2025–26 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 50 CFR part 20, subpart K. For 

the 2025–26 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, and gallinules); 

and Scolopacidae (woodcock and 

snipe). 

The proposed regulatory alternatives 

for the 2025–26 duck hunting seasons 

are contained at the end of this 

document. We will publish additional 

proposals for public comment in the 

Federal Register as population, habitat, 

harvest, and other information become 

available. We annually publish 

definitions of flyways and management 

units and a description of the data used 

in and the factors affecting the 

regulatory process. This information 

will be included in proposed and final 

rules later in the regulationsdevelopment process (see 89 FR 41522, 

May 13, 2024, for the latest definitions 

and descriptions). Major steps in the 

2025–26 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. Our 

goal is to publish final regulatory 

alternatives for duck seasons and 

proposed season frameworks in winter 

2024 and final season frameworks in 

spring 2025. 

Subject Matter Organization 

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. Early Teal Seasons 

ii. Early Teal/Wood Duck Seasons 

iii. Black Ducks 

iv. Canvasbacks 

v. Pintails 

vi. Scaup 

vii. Mottled Ducks 

viii. Wood Ducks 

ix. Eastern Mallards 

x. Youth and Veterans–Active-MilitaryPersonnel Hunting Days 

xi. Mallard Management Units 

xii. 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 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
7058 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

7. Snow and Ross’s (Light) Geese 

8. Swans 

9. Sandhill Cranes 

10. Coots 

11. 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 

This and subsequent documents will 

refer only to numbered items requiring 

attention at the time of publication. 

Because this and other documents will 

omit those items not requiring attention, 

the remaining numbered items may be 

discontinuous and the list may appear 

incomplete. 

Potential New Process for Authorizing 

Annual Hunting Seasons 

For subsequent documents 

concerning the 2025–26 hunting 

regulations for certain migratory game 

birds, we may publish the remaining 

proposed and final rulemaking 

documents as we have done for many 

years (i.e., by following the current 

rulemaking process). However, to 

improve the regulations development 

process, we are considering a new 

approach that would be based on a 

change in our administrative process. In 

the Spring 2024 Unified Agenda of 

Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions 

(see https://www.reginfo.gov), we 

announced that we are developing this 

new process, which would be published 

as a proposed rule under RIN 1018– 

BI04. 

In brief, the new approach would 

involve codifying in regulations a new 

administrative process and our current 

provisions that change infrequently. By 

placing these provisions in regulations, 

we would no longer need to go through 

annual rulemaking to authorize annual 

migratory game bird hunting seasons. In 

the future, we would engage in 

rulemaking only when we have 

determined that changes to specific 

provisions in our regulations are 

appropriate and necessary. 

We expect this new direction for our 

administrative process to increase 

efficiency, better meet State, Tribal, and 

Federal rulemaking constraints, and 

reduce complexity and costs in the 

promulgation of annual migratory game 

bird hunting regulations. Our goal is to 

better serve State and Tribal partners 

and the hunting public while 

continuing to meet the legal 

requirements of the Administrative 

Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551–559) and 

the conservation purposes of the MBTA. 

By eliminating annual rulemaking, the 

Service would save about $80,000 per 

year in printing costs, reduce staff 

workload by about 1,700 hours, reduce 

managerial workload of reviewing and 

surnaming documents by about 200 

hours, and allow Federal limits to be 

established in the spring versus in the 

late summer, thereby providing States 

and Tribes more time for developing 

their annual regulations. 

A National Hunting Regulations 

Working Group has been established 

that includes representatives from all 

four Flyway Councils to help develop 

and review this potential new process. 

Tribal Regulations 

As part of our effort to improve the 

annual rulemaking process, we 

published a final rule for migratory 

game bird hunting regulations on 

certain Federal Indian reservations and 

ceded lands on September 1, 2023 (88 

FR 60375). Tribal migratory bird 

hunting regulations include guidelines 

for Tribes that want to establish 

migratory game bird hunting regulations 

on Federal Indian reservations 

(including off-reservation trust lands) 

and ceded lands through their own 

rulemaking process. Tribes are not 

required to submit a proposal to the 

Service for our review and approval. We 

established these regulatory guidelines 

in response to Tribal requests for our 

recognition of their reserved hunting 

rights, recognition of their Tribal 

sovereignty, and, for some Tribes, 

recognition of their authority to regulate 

hunting by both Tribal and nontribal 

members throughout their reservations. 

For inquiries on Tribal guidelines, 

Tribes should contact the address 

indicated under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

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 this proposed rule. We seek 

information and comments on the 

proposed regulatory alternatives for the 

2025–26 general duck hunting seasons, 

other recommended changes or specific 

preliminary proposals that vary from the 

2024–25 regulations, and issues 

requiring early discussion, action, or the 

attention of the States. 

The Service believes that a 30-day 

comment period is warranted for this 

proposed rule, as subsequent Federal 

Register documents will allow the 

public to submit comments on the 

overall hunting frameworks (see 

Schedule of Biological Information 

Availability, Regulations Meetings, and 

Federal Register Publications for the 

2025–26 Hunting Season at the end of 

this proposed rule for further 

information). For each subsequent 

proposed rule associated with this 

rulemaking action, we will establish a 

specific comment period. Before 

promulgation of final migratory game 

bird hunting regulations, we will take 

into consideration all comments we 

receive. We will summarize the 

comments received and publish 

responses to all proposals and written 

comments when we develop final 

frameworks for the 2025–26 season. 

Such comments, and any additional 

information we receive, may lead to 

final regulations that differ from the 

proposed rules. 

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 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 https://

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 https://

www.regulations.gov. 

Required Determinations 

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 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Proposed Rules 7059 

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 2024– 

25,’’ with its corresponding 2024 

finding of no significant impact. 

Endangered Species Act Consideration 

Before issuance of the 2025–26 

migratory game bird hunting 

regulations, we will comply with 

provisions of the Endangered Species 

Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 

U.S.C. 1531–1543), to ensure that 

hunting is not likely to jeopardize the 

continued existence of any species 

designated as endangered or threatened 

or adversely modify or destroy its 

critical habitat and is consistent with 

conservation programs for those species. 

Consultations under section 7 of the 

ESA may cause us to change proposals 

in future supplemental proposed 

rulemaking documents. 

Regulatory Planning and Review— 

Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 

14094 

Executive Order (E.O.) 14094 

reaffirms and amends the principles of 

E.O. 12866 and E.O. 13563. E.O. 13563 

emphasizes that regulations must be 

based on the best available science. The 

rulemaking process must allow for 

public participation and an open 

exchange of ideas; promote 

predictability and reduce uncertainty; 

identify and use the best, most 

innovative, and least burdensome tools 

for achieving regulatory ends; take into 

account benefits and costs, both 

quantitative and qualitative; and ensure 

that regulations are accessible, 

consistent, written in plain language, 

and easy to understand. E.O. 14094 

states that regulatory analysis should 

facilitate agency efforts to develop 

regulations that serve the public interest 

and advance statutory objectives. As 

practicable and appropriate and to the 

extent permitted by law, regulatory 

analysis shall recognize distributive 

impacts and equity. To the extent 

practicable and consistent with 

applicable law, regulatory actions 

should be informed by input from 

interested or affected communities; 

State, local, territorial, and Tribal 

officials and agencies; interested or 

affected parties in the private sector and 

other regulated entities; those with 

expertise in relevant disciplines; and 

the public as a whole. We have 

developed this proposed rule in a 

manner consistent with these 

requirements. 

E.O. 12866, as reaffirmed by E.O. 

13563 and reaffirmed and amended by 

E.O. 14094, provides that the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs 

(OIRA) in the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) will review all significant 

rules. This action is a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action,’’ as defined under 

section 3(f)(1) of E.O. 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), as amended by 

E.O. 14094 (88 FR 21879, April 11, 

2023). 

An economic analysis was prepared 

for the 2025–26 migratory bird hunting 

season. This analysis was based on data 

from the 2011 and the 2016 National 

Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and 

Wildlife-Associated Recreation 

(National Survey), the most recent years 

for which data are available. See 

discussion under Required 

Determinations, Regulatory Flexibility 

Act, below. This analysis estimated 

consumer surplus for four alternatives 

for hunting regulations. As defined by 

OMB in Circular A–4, consumers’ 

surplus is the difference between what 

a consumer pays for a unit of a good or 

service and the maximum amount the 

consumer would be willing to pay for 

that unit. The duck hunting regulatory 

alternatives are (1) not opening a 

hunting season, (2) issuing restrictive 

regulations that allow fewer days than 

the 2024–25 season, (3) issuing 

moderate regulations that allow more 

days than in Alternative 2 but fewer 

days than the 2024–25 season, and (4) 

issuing liberal regulations that allow 

days similar to the 2024–25 season. The 

estimated consumer surplus associated 

with liberal regulations issued for the 

2024–25 season across all flyways was 

$606 million to $797 million (2023$). 

We also chose Alternative 4 (liberal 

regulations) for the 2009–10 through 

2023–24 seasons. The 2025–26 analysis 

is part of the record for this rulemaking 

action and is available at https://

www.regulations.gov at Docket No. 

FWS–HQ–MB–2024–0127. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The annual migratory bird hunting 

regulations have a significant economic 

impact on substantial numbers of small 

entities, such as restaurants, grocery 

stores, lodging, transportation, and 

sporting goods stores, under the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.). An initial regulatory flexibility 

analysis was prepared to analyze the 

economic impacts of the annual hunting 

regulations on small business entities. 

This analysis is updated annually. The 

primary source of information about 

hunter expenditures for migratory game 

bird hunting is the National Survey, 

which is generally conducted at 5-year 

intervals. The 2022 National Survey did 

not collect migratory bird expenditure 

data, so the 2025–26 migratory bird 

hunting season analysis is based on the 

2011 and 2016 National Surveys and the 

U.S. Department of Commerce’s County 

Business Patterns, from which it is 

estimated that migratory bird hunters 

will spend approximately $2.6 billion 

(2023$) at small businesses during the 

2025–26 migratory bird hunting season. 

In summary, this proposed rule would 

have a significant beneficial economic 

impact on small entities. Without these 

annual regulations, States cannot 

establish migratory bird hunting 

seasons. A wide range of businesses and 

individuals benefit economically from 

the establishment of the annual 

migratory bird hunting regulations. The 

initial regulatory flexibility analysis can 

be found in the economic analysis of the 

migratory game bird hunting regulations 

for the 2025–26 season. Copies of the 

economic analysis are available upon 

request from the person listed above 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT or from https://

www.regulations.gov at Docket No. 

FWS–HQ–MB–2024–0127. 

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. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This proposed rule does not contain 

any new collection of information that 

requires approval by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) under 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). OMB has 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
7060 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

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 02/28/2027). 

• 1018–0023, ‘‘Migratory Bird 

Surveys, 50 CFR 20.20’’ (expires 05/31/ 

2026). 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 10/ 

30/2027). 

You may view the information 

collection request(s) at https://

www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. 

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. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

We have determined and certify, in 

compliance with the requirements of the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 2 

U.S.C. 1501 et seq., that this proposed 

rulemaking does not include any 

Federal mandate that may result in the 

expenditure by State, local, and Tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

(adjusted for inflation) in any 1 year and 

does not significantly or uniquely affect 

small governments. 

Civil Justice Reform—Executive Order 

12988 

The Department, in promulgating this 

proposed rule, has determined that this 

rulemaking 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— 

Executive Order 12630 

In accordance with E.O. 12630, this 

proposed rule, authorized by the MBTA, 

does not have significant takings 

implications and does not affect any 

constitutionally protected property 

rights. This proposed 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 proposed rule 

would allow hunters to exercise 

otherwise unavailable privileges and, 

therefore, reduces 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 likely to have a significant adverse 

effect on the supply, distribution, or use 

of energy and has not been designated 

by OIRA as a significant energy action. 

Therefore, 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 with respect to 

impacts to Tribes’ treaty rights to hunt 

waterfowl. We have determined that 

there are de minimis effects on Indian 

Tribes for that aspect of their treaty 

rights. Through this process to establish 

annual hunting regulations, we 

regularly coordinate with Tribes that are 

affected by this proposed rulemaking 

action. Tribes have the opportunity to 

attend spring and fall flyway meetings, 

provide comments on Federal Register 

publications concerning migratory bird 

hunting, and, whenever needed, we 

hold informal consultations with Tribes 

regarding trust resources, trust assets, 

health, and safety. Also, while 

streamlining the migratory bird hunting 

regulation process, four informational 

webinars were held to present the new 

process to Tribes, giving Tribes the 

opportunity to provide input and to ask 

questions about the Tribal migratory 

bird hunting regulations. This proposed 

rule would not have substantial direct 

effects on one or more Indian Tribes, on 

the relationship between the Federal 

Government and Indian Tribes, or on 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian Tribes. 

This proposed rule is general in 

nature and does not directly affect any 

specific Tribal lands, treaty rights, or 

Tribal trust resources. In addition, this 

proposed rule does not interfere with 

the ability of Tribes to manage 

themselves or their funds or to regulate 

migratory bird activities on Tribal lands. 

Therefore, we preliminarily conclude 

that this proposed rule does not have 

‘‘Tribal implications’’ under section 1(a) 

of E.O. 13175 with respect to waterfowl 

treaty rights. Thus, formal governmentto-government consultation is not 

required by E.O. 13175 and related 

policies of the Department of the 

Interior. We will continue to collaborate 

with Tribes on concerns related to 

migratory bird hunting regulations. 

Federalism Effects—Executive Order 

13132 

Due to the migratory nature of certain 

species of birds, the Federal 

Government has been given 

responsibility over these species by the 

MBTA. We annually prescribe 

frameworks from which the States make 

selections regarding the hunting of 

migratory birds, and we employ 

guidelines to establish special 

regulations on Federal Indian 

reservations and ceded lands. This 

process preserves the ability of the 

States and Tribes to determine which 

seasons meet their individual needs. 

Any State or Tribe may be more 

restrictive in its regulations than the 

Federal frameworks at any time. The 

frameworks are developed in a 

cooperative process with the States and 

the Flyway Councils. This process 

allows States to participate in the 

development of frameworks from which 

they will make selections, thereby 

having an influence on their own 

regulations. This proposed rule would 

not have substantial direct effects on the 

States, on the relationship between the 

national government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Therefore, in 

accordance with E.O. 13132, these 

proposed regulations do not have 

federalism implications and do not 

warrant the preparation of a federalism 

summary impact statement. 

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 2025–26 hunting 

season are authorized under 16 U.S.C. 

703–712, and 742 a–j. 

Shannon A. Estenoz, 

Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and 

Parks. 

Proposed 2025–26 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. Issues requiring 

early discussion, action, or the attention 

of the States or Tribes are described 

below. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Proposed Rules 7061 

1. Ducks 

As mentioned earlier in this 

document, the 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 (A, B, C, 

and D) are discussed below. 

A. General Harvest Strategy 

We will continue to use adaptive 

harvest management (AHM) to help 

determine appropriate duck-hunting 

regulations for the 2025–26 season. 

AHM is a tool that permits sound 

resource decisions in the face of 

uncertain regulatory impacts and 

provides a mechanism for reducing that 

uncertainty over time. We use an AHM 

protocol (decision framework) to 

evaluate four regulatory alternatives, 

each with a different expected harvest 

level, and choose the optimal regulation 

for duck hunting based on the status 

and demographics of mallards for the 

Mississippi, Central, and Pacific 

Flyways, and based on the status and 

demographics of a suite of four species 

(eastern waterfowl) in the Atlantic 

Flyway. We have specific AHM 

protocols that guide appropriate bag 

limits and season lengths for species of 

special concern, including black ducks, 

scaup, pintails, and mallards in the 

Atlantic Flyway (eastern mallards), 

within the general duck season. These 

protocols use the same outside season 

dates and lengths as those regulatory 

alternatives for the 2025–26 general 

duck seasons. 

For the 2025–26 hunting season, we 

will continue to use independent 

optimizations to determine the 

appropriate regulatory alternative for 

mallard stocks in the Mississippi, 

Central, and Pacific Flyways and for 

eastern waterfowl in the Atlantic 

Flyway. This means that we will 

develop regulations for mid-continent 

mallards, western mallards, and eastern 

waterfowl independently based on the 

breeding stock that contributes 

primarily to each Flyway. We detailed 

implementation of AHM protocols for 

mid-continent and western mallards in 

the July 24, 2008, Federal Register (73 

FR 43290), and for eastern waterfowl in 

the September 21, 2018, Federal 

Register (83 FR 47868). 

B. Regulatory Alternatives 

The basic structure of the current 

regulatory alternatives for AHM was 

adopted in 1997 (beginning with the 

1997–98 general duck hunting season; 

62 FR 31298, June 6, 1997). Beginning 

with the 2002–03 season, 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 

(67 FR 47224, July 17, 2002). These 

extended dates were made available 

with no associated penalty in season 

length or bag limits. Beginning with the 

2019–20 season, we adopted a closing 

duck framework date of January 31 for 

the ‘‘moderate’’ and ‘‘liberal’’ 

alternatives in the Atlantic Flyway as 

part of the Atlantic Flyway’s eastern 

waterfowl AHM protocol (83 FR 47868, 

September 21, 2018). We subsequently 

proposed to extend the framework 

closing date to January 31 across all four 

Flyways for the 2019–20 season (84 FR 

16152, April 17, 2019). 

The John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation, 

Management, and Recreation Act of 

2019 (Pub. L. 116–9, Dingell Act) 

amended the MBTA to establish that the 

closing framework date for duck seasons 

will be January 31, unless a flyway 

chooses an earlier closing date. Thus, as 

directed by the Dingell Act, we adjusted 

the framework closing date under each 

regulatory alternative for all four 

Flyways to January 31 beginning with 

the 2019–20 season (84 FR 42996, 

August 19, 2019). Beginning with the 

2021–22 season, we agreed to move the 

opening framework date to 1 week 

earlier in the restrictive regulatory 

alternative for the Mississippi and 

Central Flyways based on their 

recommendations (85 FR 51854, August 

21, 2020). 

For the 2025–26 general duck season, 

we propose to use the same regulatory 

alternatives that are in effect for the 

2024–25 season (see table at the end of 

this proposed rule for specifics of the 

regulatory alternatives). Alternatives are 

specified for each Flyway and are 

designated as ‘‘RES’’ for the restrictive, 

‘‘MOD’’ for the moderate, and ‘‘LIB’’ for 

the liberal alternative. We plan to 

finalize AHM regulatory alternatives for 

the 2025–26 season in a proposed rule, 

which we plan to publish by winter 

2024 (see Schedule of Biological 

Information Availability, Regulations 

Meetings, and Federal Register 

Publications for the 2025–26 Hunting 

Season at the end of this proposed rule 

for further information). 

C. Zones and Split Seasons 

Zones and split seasons are special 

regulations designed to distribute 

hunting opportunities and harvests 

according to temporal, geographic, and 

demographic variability in waterfowl 

and other migratory game bird 

populations. The Service has allowed 

the use of zones to provide equitable 

distribution of duck hunting 

opportunities within a State or region. 

The intent is not to increase total annual 

waterfowl harvest in the zoned areas; 

harvest levels are to be adjusted 

downward if they exceeded traditional 

levels as a result of zoning. In 1991, the 

Service developed guidelines to provide 

a framework for controlling the 

proliferation of zones and split seasons 

in duck hunting. Substantial concern 

remains about the unknown 

consequences of zones and split seasons 

on duck populations and harvest 

redistribution among States and 

flyways, potential reduced effectiveness 

of regulations (season length and bag 

limit) to reduce duck harvest if needed, 

and the administrative burden. The 

guidelines identified a limited number 

of zone and split-season configurations 

that could be used for duck hunting and 

restricted the frequency of changes in 

State selection among these 

configurations to the beginning of 5-year 

intervals. 

The next opportunity for States to 

select zones and split-season 

configurations for duck hunting is in 

2025 for the fixed period of 2026–2030 

seasons. We are proposing to adopt the 

same zones and split-season guidelines 

and configurations for duck hunting as 

we used for the 2021–25 seasons. We 

discussed and presented guidelines and 

configurations for duck zones and split 

seasons during 2021–25 seasons in our 

August 21, 2020, final rule (85 FR 51854 

at 51857–51858). For those States 

wishing to change zone and split-season 

configurations in time for the 2026– 

2030 seasons, we would need to receive 

configuration selections and zone 

descriptions by August 31, 2025. 

We also note that when we adopted 

guidelines for duck zones and split 

seasons during 2021–25 seasons, we 

offered a new configuration (two zones 

with up to three season segments in 

each) at the request of the four Flyway 

Councils. We expressed our sensitivity 

to the States’ desires for flexibility in 

addressing human dimensions concerns 

of the hunting public (i.e., foster hunter 

recruitment, retention, and satisfaction) 

despite our continued concerns about 

the proliferation of zones, impacts to 

harvest, regulation complexity, and 

administrative burden. Similarly, we 

revised the zones-splits guidelines for 

the 2011–2015 period to allow two new 

options (four zones with a continuous 

season, and three zones with up to two 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
7062 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

1The Service’s primary goal is to ensure that 

waterfowl sport harvest management conforms to 

the MBTA and ensures the long-term conservation 

of bird populations. The various harvest strategies 

reflect this goal by ensuring that harvest does not 

exceed maximum sustainable yield (MSY). 

Secondarily to the MBTA, the Service has adopted 

policies to promote wildlife-based recreation, 

including migratory bird harvest. To the extent that 

management actions designed to promote hunter 

recruitment and retention do not result in harvest 

greater than the biological capacity of a population 

(i.e., does not exceed MSY), the Service deems these 

actions to be in accordance with the MBTA. 

Management actions that result in harvest equal to 

or less than MSY will result in stable or increasing 

populations and provide consumptive and 

nonconsumptive uses indefinitely. 

season segments in each) at the request 

of the four Flyway Councils (77 FR 

23094 at 23100–23101, April 17, 2012). 

Because the two zones and three season 

segments configuration are new, we 

stated in 2020 (85 FR 51854 at 51857– 

51858, August 21, 2020) that States that 

select this configuration must conduct 

an evaluation of impacts to hunter 

dynamics (e.g., hunter numbers, 

satisfaction) and harvest during the 

fixed 5-year period it is implemented 

(e.g., 2021–25 period). Five States 

selected the new configuration for the 

2021–25 period in two Flyways: 

Atlantic (Connecticut, Maryland, North 

Carolina, and Virginia) and Mississippi 

(Louisiana). These States will need to 

provide an evaluation through the 2025 

season regardless of actual 

implementation. 

D. Special Seasons/Species 

Management 

v. Pintails 

Over the past 5 years, scientists from 

the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and 

the Service, in consultation with the 

Flyway Councils, have collaborated on 

the development of a revised decision 

framework for pintail harvest 

management. The Flyway Councils and 

Service undertook the revision process 

due to several concerns about the 

current strategy (adopted in 2010; see 75 

FR 44856 at 44860; July 29, 2010). 

Concerns included public desires for 

inclusion of a more liberal regulatory 

alternative (3-pintail daily bag limit), 

reliance on outdated modeling 

techniques and data, and 

communication challenges associated 

with the regulatory schedule. To 

address these concerns, the Service 

convened the national Pintail Working 

Group (PWG) composed of two 

representatives from each Flyway, the 

four Service Flyway Representatives, 

and technical experts from the Service 

and USGS. 

The PWG evaluated pintail 

population and harvest dynamics, built 

new models using updated data and 

modern estimation methods, and 

developed and evaluated many 

alternative harvest strategies. An 

important change is that the model of 

predicted harvest includes an estimate 

of fall population size. This has an 

important effect on the harvest strategy 

because the expected harvest decreases 

with decreasing fall pintail population 

size. The strategy recognizes that there 

is sustainable harvest under conditions 

that were not previously thought 

sustainable. (i.e., expected increase in 

frequency of regulatory alternatives with 

liberal pintail daily bag limits including 

the possibility for 3 pintails). 

In January 2024, after extensive 

consultation, the PWG proposed an 

interim harvest strategy to inform 

harvest management decisions for 

pintails and to learn about the effects of 

a 3-bird daily bag limit (new alternative) 

on management objectives. The interim 

strategy is intended to be implemented 

until three hunting seasons with a 3- 

bird daily bag limit have been realized 

(i.e., trial phase over three or more 

hunting seasons) with an additional 

allowance for 2 years for data collection 

and analysis, review of performance, 

and evaluation of updated alternative 

strategies. Evaluation results will be 

provided to the Flyway technical 

committees for consideration in the 

development of a proposed operational 

harvest strategy, which may or may not 

include an option for a 3-bird daily bag 

limit. 

We greatly appreciate the time and 

attention over the last 5 years that the 

PWG has devoted to review and 

consideration of the current pintail 

harvest strategy, technical updates, and 

the various alternatives for 

implementing a derived pintail harvest 

strategy. The revised interim strategy 

addresses stakeholder concerns with the 

current strategy and includes important 

technical updates with implications for 

our harvest management policy. In 

compliance with the Information 

Quality Act (section 515 of Pub. L. 106– 

554) and Service policy, a scientific peer 

review of the interim harvest strategy 

model was completed in early May 

2023; during that review, no technical 

issues or concerns were identified, and 

reviewer comments have been 

addressed. Therefore, we propose to 

adopt the interim harvest strategy for 

pintail harvest management as 

described by the PWG in their report 

entitled, ‘‘Proposed Interim Northern 

Pintail Harvest Strategy’’ dated February 

9, 2024, beginning with the 2025–26 

hunting seasons. The proposed interim 

pintail harvest strategy is available at 

the address indicated under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT and at 

https://www.regulations.gov. 

xii. Other 

Although not part of any current 

harvest management strategy, we 

propose to allow South Dakota and 

Nebraska an additional year to conduct 

a pilot study during the 2025–26 duck 

season of a two-tier regulatory system as 

described in our March 19, 2020, 

proposed rule (85 FR 15870 at 15875– 

15876). The 2024–25 hunting season is 

the last year of the planned 4-year pilot 

study. A final report on the 4-year pilot 

study will be due to the Service after the 

2024–25 hunting season in about May 

2025, which is after proposals for 2025– 

26 hunting season are formulated (about 

October 2024) by the Service and 

Flyway Councils. The 1-year extension 

will allow the Service and Flyway 

Councils to evaluate the results of the 

pilot study in meeting the primary goal 

of increasing or stabilizing the number 

of waterfowl hunters before the 

subsequent 2026–27 hunting regulations 

are developed. If the pilot study results 

indicate there is merit, the Service and 

Flyway Councils will consider 

developing a phase-two study that 

considers application of the pilot study 

concepts at the Flyway or national level, 

rather than at the State level, which is 

consistent with the Service’s policy on 

the scale of migratory game bird 

management. 

The intent of the two-tier regulation 

study is to evaluate whether regulations 

that relax the requirement for hunters to 

identify duck species can improve 

waterfowl hunter recruitment and 

retention.1 Declines in waterfowl hunter 

numbers have been of concern to the 

Service and the Flyway Councils, 

prompting the development of 

recruitment, retention, and reactivation 

efforts in the conservation community. 

The study allows a person to obtain one 

of two license types during the duck 

season. The first license type (tier 1) 

allows a daily bag limit as specified in 

the current duck regulations (six ducks) 

with species- and sex-specific daily bag 

limit restrictions for species of special 

concern. The second license type (tier 2) 

allows a daily bag limit of 3 ducks with 

no species- or sex-specific restrictions in 

the daily bag limit. A memorandum of 

agreement between the Service and the 

two States specifies the purpose of the 

study and the roles and responsibilities 

of each party while conducting the pilot 

study. 

16. Doves 

Similar to duck hunting (see 1. Ducks, 

above), the Service has allowed the use 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Proposed Rules 7063 

of zones to provide equitable 

distribution of dove hunting 

opportunities within a State or region. 

The intent is not to increase total annual 

dove harvest in the zoned areas; harvest 

levels are to be adjusted downward if 

they exceed traditional levels as a result 

of zoning. In 2006, the Service 

developed guidelines to provide a 

framework for controlling the 

proliferation of zones and split seasons 

in dove hunting (see 71 FR 51406 at 

51408, August 29, 2006). Substantial 

concern remains about the unknown 

consequences of zones and split seasons 

on dove populations and harvest 

redistribution among States and 

flyways, potential reduced effectiveness 

of regulations (season length and bag 

limit) to reduce dove harvest if needed, 

and the administrative burden. The 

guidelines identified a limited number 

of zone and split-season configurations 

that could be used for dove hunting and 

restricted the frequency of changes in 

State selection among these 

configurations to the beginning of a 5- 

year interval. 

The next opportunity for States to 

select zones and split-season 

configurations for dove hunting is in 

2025 for the fixed period of 2026–2030 

seasons. We are proposing to adopt the 

same zones and split-season guidelines 

and configurations for dove hunting as 

we used for the 2021–25 seasons. We 

discussed and presented guidelines and 

configurations for dove zones and split 

seasons during 2021–25 seasons in the 

August 21, 2020, final rule (85 FR 51854 

at 51865–51866). For those States 

wishing to change zone and split-season 

configurations in time for the 2026– 

2030 seasons, we would need to receive 

configuration selections and zone 

descriptions by August 31, 2025. 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

EP21JA25.227</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

PROPOSED REGULATORY ALTERNATIVES FOR THE 2025-26 GENERAL 

ATIANTIC FLYWAY MISSISSIPPI FLYWAY CENTRAL FLYWAY (al P

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

Beginning 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 sunrise sunrise sunrise sunrise sunrise sunrise sunrise sunrise sunrise sunrise 

Ending 

Shooting Sunset Sunset Sunset Sunset Sunset Sunset Sunset Sunset Sunset Sunse

Time 

Opening Oct.1 Sat. nearest Sat nearest Sat nearest Sat nearest Sat. nearest Sat nearest Sat nearest Sat nearest Sat. near

Date Sept. 24 Sept. 24 Sept. 24 Sept. 24 Sept. 24 Sept. 24 Sept. 24 Sept. 24 Oct.1 

Closing Jan. 31 Jan. 31 Jan. 31 Jan. 31 Jan. 31 Jan. 31 Jan. 31 Jan. 31 Jan. 31 Jan.31 

Date 

Season r 30 r 45 r 60 . 30 , 45 , 60 r 39 , 60 , 74 . 60 

Length (in days) 

Daily Bag ,. 3 , 6 , 6 • 3 • 6 , 6 ,. 3 " 6 , 6 • 4 

Soecies/Sex Limits within the Overall Dailv Baa 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. Additiona

be allowed under the various alternatives as follows: Restrictive 12, days; Moderate and Liberal, 23 days. Under all alternatives, additional days must be on or after 

December 10. 

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

except the liberal alternative, 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 be 

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

(d) Under the multi-stock AHM protocol for the Atlantic Flyway, the mallard bag limit is not prescribed by the regulatory alternative. 

EP21JA25.228</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

SCHEDULE(a) OF BIOLOGICAL INFORMATION AVAILABILITY, REGULATIONS 

FEDERAL REGISTER PUBLICATIONS FOR THE 2025-26 HUNTING S

SURVEY & ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE MEETING SCHEDULE FEDERA

March-June, 2024 I 

SPRING POPULATION SURVEYS I May 2024 SRC Meeting I 

August 15, 2024 

WATERFOWL STATUS REPORT 

August 20, 2024 

AHM REPORTw!OPTIMAL ALTERNATIVES, 

WEBLESS and CRANE STATUS 

INFORMATION, DOVE and WOODCOCK I August - September 2024 REGULATORY ALTERNATIVES, and Flyway Tech And Council Meetings I 

HUNTER ACTIVllY and HARVEST REPORT PROPOSED 

WITH 

I October 2024 I 

SRC Regulatory Meeting 

PROPOSE

(30 

December 15, 2024-January 31, 2025 

FALL and WINTER SURVEY 

INFORMATION for CRANES 

and WATERFOWL I March 2025 (at North American Corterence) Flyway Cou nci I Mtgs I 

,. 

FINAL S

ALL HUNT

(Season Selec

I September 1, 2025 and later ALL HUNTING SEASONS I 

(a) All puJlication dates of Federal Register documents are target dates. 
7066 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

[FR Doc. 2025–01319 Filed 1–17–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–C 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 92 

[Docket No. FWS–R7–MB–2024–0197; 

FXMB12610700000–201–FF07M01000] 

RIN 1018–BG70 

Migratory Bird Subsistence Harvest in 

Alaska 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), are proposing 

changes to the migratory bird 

subsistence harvest regulations in 

Alaska. Subsistence harvest regulations 

allow for the continuation of customary 

and traditional subsistence uses of 

migratory birds in Alaska and establish 

when and where the harvesting of 

certain migratory birds may occur 

within each subsistence region. 

Subsistence harvest regulations, 

including these proposed changes, were 

developed under a co-management 

process involving the Service, the 

Alaska Department of Fish and Game, 

and Alaska Native representatives. 

DATES: We will accept comments 

received or postmarked on or before 

February 20, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by one of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments to 

Docket No. FWS–R7–MB–2024–0197. 

• U.S. Mail: Public Comments 

Processing, Attn: FWS–R7–MB–2024– 

0197, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

MS: JAO/3W, 5275 Leesburg Place, Falls 

Church, VA 22041–3803. 

We will post all comments on https:// 

www.regulations.gov. This generally 

means that we will post any personal 

information you provide us (see Public 

Comment Procedures, below, for more 

information). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Wendy Loya, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, 1011 E Tudor Road, Mail Stop 

201, Anchorage, AK 99503; (907) 227– 

2942. Individuals in the United States 

who are deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, 

or have a speech disability may dial 711 

(TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access 

telecommunications relay services. 

Individuals outside the United States 

should use the relay services offered 

within their country to make 

international calls to the point of 

contact in the United States. Please see 

Docket No. FWS–R7–MB–2024–0197 on 

https://www.regulations.gov for a 

document that summarizes this 

proposed rule. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Comment Procedures 

To ensure that any action resulting 

from this proposed rule will be as 

accurate and as effective as possible, we 

request that you send relevant 

information for our consideration. The 

comments that will be most useful and 

likely to influence our decisions are 

those that you support by quantitative 

information or studies and those that 

include citations to, and analyses of, the 

applicable laws and regulations. Please 

make your comments as specific as 

possible and explain the basis for them. 

In addition, please include sufficient 

information with your comments to 

allow us to authenticate any scientific or 

commercial data you include. 

You must submit your comments and 

materials concerning this proposed rule 

by one of the methods listed above in 

ADDRESSES. We will not accept 

comments sent by email or fax or to an 

address not listed in ADDRESSES. If you 

submit a comment via https://

www.regulations.gov, your entire 

comment—including any personal 

identifying information, such as your 

address, telephone number, or email 

address—will be posted on the website. 

When you submit a comment, the 

system receives it immediately. 

However, the comment will not be 

publicly viewable until we post it, 

which might not occur until several 

days after submission. 

If you mail a hardcopy comment 

directly to us that includes personal 

information, you may request at the top 

of your document that we withhold this 

information from public review. 

However, we cannot guarantee that we 

will be able to do so. All comments and 

materials we receive will be available 

for public inspection via https://

www.regulations.gov. Search for FWS– 

R7–MB–2024–0197, which is the docket 

number for this rulemaking. 

Background 

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 

(MBTA, 16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.) was 

enacted to protect migratory birds and 

gives the Secretary of the Interior the 

authority to regulate the harvest of 

certain migratory birds. The law further 

authorizes the Secretary to issue 

regulations to ensure that the 

indigenous inhabitants of the State of 

Alaska may take certain migratory birds 

and collect their eggs for nutritional and 

other essential needs during seasons 

established by the Secretary to provide 

for the preservation and maintenance of 

these migratory birds (16 U.S.C. 712(1)). 

The take of migratory birds for 

subsistence uses in Alaska occurs 

primarily during the spring and 

summer, a timeframe not included in 

the fall and winter general migratory 

game bird hunting regulations for the 

United States. Regulations governing the 

subsistence harvest of migratory birds in 

Alaska are located in title 50 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations (CFR) in part 92. 

These regulations allow for the 

continuation of customary and 

traditional subsistence uses of migratory 

birds and establish when and where the 

harvesting of certain birds in Alaska 

may occur within each subsistence 

region. 

The migratory bird subsistence 

harvest regulations are developed 

cooperatively. The Alaska Migratory 

Bird Co-Management Council (Council 

or AMBCC) consists of the Service, the 

Alaska Department of Fish and Game 

(ADFG), and Alaska Native 

representatives. The Council’s primary 

purpose is to develop recommendations 

pertaining to the subsistence harvest of 

migratory birds. 

The Council generally holds an 

annual spring meeting to review and 

recommend any regulatory changes for 

migratory bird subsistence harvest 

regulations in Alaska. The Council met 

May 22–23, 2024, and recommended 

changes to the subsistence harvest 

regulations intended to take effect 

beginning with the 2025 harvest season. 

The Council’s recommendations were 

presented to the Pacific Flyway Council 

for their review and comment and 

subsequent submission to the Service 

Regulations Committee (SRC) for 

consideration at the SRC meeting on 

November 19, 2024. 

Proposed Revisions to the Regulations 

Under the collaborative process 

described above, this document 

proposes the following revisions to the 

regulations for the taking of certain 

migratory birds for subsistence uses in 

Alaska during the spring and summer. 

Proposed Revision to Subpart A 

In 50 CFR part 92, subpart A (general 

provisions), we propose to correct a 

reference to the United States Code 

(U.S. Code). The current definition for 

Alaska Native in § 92.4 incorrectly 

references 16 U.S.C. 1602(b), which 

refers to section 3(b) of the Alaska 

Native Claims Settlement Act. The 

Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act is 

found in title 43 not title 16 of the U.S. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1