32878 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 23, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

Management activity Dates authorized for use in occupied habitat 

Mowing—tractors ............................ Before February 15 and after August 15. 

Mowing—handheld ......................... Year-round, with a buffer of 8 m (25 ft) between the mower and any individual lupine plant during the flight 

period of April 15 to June 30. 

Herbicides—hand wiping ................ Year-round. 

Herbicides—wicking ........................ Year-round. 

Herbicides—spot-spray ................... Year-round. 

Herbicides—broadcast spray .......... Outside of the flight period of April 15 to June 30 *. 

Herbicides—weed wiping ................ Outside of the flight period of April 15 to June 30 *. 

Planting native vegetation ............... Year-round. 

* Additional timing restrictions will apply based on the chemicals used. Contact the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office for additional information. 

(F) Reporting and disposal 

requirements. Any injury or mortality of 

Fender’s blue butterfly associated with 

the actions excepted under paragraphs 

(f)(3)(v)(A) through (D) of this section 

must be reported to the Service and 

authorized State wildlife officials within 

5 calendar days, and specimens may be 

disposed of only in accordance with 

directions from the Service. Reports 

should be made to the Service’s Office 

of Law Enforcement (contact 

information is at § 10.22) or the 

Service’s Oregon Fish and Wildlife 

Office and to the State of Oregon 

Department of Parks and Recreation, 

Stewardship Section, which has 

jurisdiction over invertebrate species. 

The Service may allow additional 

reasonable time for reporting if access to 

these offices is limited due to closure. 

Martha Williams, 

Principal Deputy Director, Exercising the 

Delegated Authority of the Director, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service. 

[FR Doc. 2021–12576 Filed 6–22–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 91 

[Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2021–0048; 

FXMB12330900000//212//FF09M13000] 

RIN 1018–BF62 

Revision of Federal Migratory Bird 

Hunting and Conservation Stamp 

(Duck Stamp) Contest Regulations 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), propose to 

revise the regulations governing the 

annual Migratory Bird Hunting and 

Conservation Stamp Contest (also 

known as the Federal Duck Stamp 

Contest (Contest)). Our proposed 

amendments would remove the 

previously specified permanent theme 

and the mandatory inclusion of an 

appropriate hunting element within all 

Contest entries and revise the 

qualifications of the judging panel to 

reflect this change. This change would 

be scheduled to begin with the 2022 

Contest. 

DATES: We will accept comments that 

we receive on or before July 23, 2021. 

Please note that if you are using the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal (see 

ADDRESSES, below), the deadline for 

submitting an electronic comment is 

11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing 

date. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by one of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments 

on Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2021– 

0048. 

• U.S. Mail: Public Comments 

Processing, Attn: FWS–HQ–MB–2021– 

0048, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

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

Church, VA 22041–3803. 

We will not accept hand-delivered, 

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 

Procedures and Public Availability of 

Comments, below, for more information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jerome Ford, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Department of the Interior, 

(202) 208–1050. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

History of the Federal Migratory Bird 

Hunting and Conservation Stamp (Duck 

Stamp) Program 

On March 16, 1934, Congress passed 

and President Franklin D. Roosevelt 

signed the Migratory Bird Hunting 

Stamp Act, which was later amended to 

become the Migratory Bird Hunting and 

Conservation Stamp Act (16 U.S.C. 718– 

718j, 48 Stat. 452). Popularly known as 

the Duck Stamp Act, the law requires all 

waterfowl hunters who have attained 

the age of 16 to buy an annual stamp. 

Funds generated from Duck Stamp sales 

are used to protect waterfowl and 

wetland habitat that is incorporated into 

the National Wildlife Refuge System 

from willing sellers and those interested 

in obtaining conservation easements. 

Over 1.5 million stamps are sold each 

year, and, as of 2021, Federal Duck 

Stamps have generated more than $1.1 

billion for the conservation of more than 

6 million acres of waterfowl habitat in 

the United States. In addition to 

waterfowl, numerous other birds, 

mammals, fish, reptiles, and amphibians 

benefit from habitat protected by the 

Duck Stamp revenues, including an 

estimated one-third of the nation’s 

endangered and threatened species. The 

healthy wetlands protected by Duck 

Stamp funding sequester carbon and 

contribute to addressing the impacts of 

climate change, including absorbing 

flood waters and storm surge. These 

wetlands purify water supplies and 

provide economic support to local 

communities as they attract outdoor 

recreationists from many different 

backgrounds. 

History of the Duck Stamp Contest 

The first Federal Duck Stamp was 

designed at President Roosevelt’s 

request by Jay N. ‘‘Ding’’ Darling, a 

nationally known political cartoonist for 

the Des Moines Register and a hunter 

and wildlife conservationist. In 

subsequent years, noted wildlife artists 

were asked to submit designs for the 

stamp. The first Contest was opened in 

1949 to any U.S. artist who wished to 

enter. Since then, the Contest has 

attracted large numbers of entrants, and 

it remains the only art competition of its 

kind sponsored by the U.S. Government. 

The Secretary of the Interior appoints a 

panel of judges who have expertise in 

the area of art, waterfowl, or philately to 

select each year’s winning design. 

Winners receive no compensation for 

the work, except a pane of Duck Stamps, 

based on their winning design, signed 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 23, 2021 / Proposed Rules 32879 

by the Secretary of the Interior. 

However, winners maintain the 

copyright to their artwork and may sell 

prints of their designs, which are sought 

by hunters, conservationists, and art 

collectors. 

Waterfowl hunters have been the 

greatest contributors to the program, as 

they are required to purchase Duck 

Stamps in order to hunt waterfowl. 

Many individuals not engaged in 

hunting also purchase Duck Stamps to 

contribute to conservation or for the 

stamp’s artistic value. 

The 2020 Final Rule and 2021 Contest 

On May 8, 2020, the Service 

published a final rule (85 FR 27313) 

revising the regulations at 50 CFR part 

91 governing the annual Federal Duck 

Stamp Contest. The Contest regulations 

made permanent the theme ‘‘celebrating 

our waterfowl hunting heritage’’ for all 

future Contests. The regulations require 

the inclusion of a waterfowl huntingrelated scene or accessory in every entry 

but do not specify what accessories to 

include. Requirements for the judging 

panel specified that all judges would 

have one or more prerequisite 

qualifications, which could include the 

ability to recognize waterfowl hunting 

accessories. An image of a drake lesser 

scaup with a lanyard and duck calls was 

chosen as the winner of the 2020 

Contest, and this image will appear on 

the 2021–2022 Federal Duck Stamp 

when it is released for sale in July 2021. 

The 2021 Contest species and 

regulations, with the permanent theme 

and mandatory inclusion of waterfowl 

hunting-related accessories or scenes in 

all entries, have been widely publicized 

and remain in effect for the 2021 

Contest with the entry period beginning 

on June 1, 2021. The Service encourages 

artists to continue with their entries for 

the 2021 Contest and to adhere to the 

theme, entry qualifications, and judging 

requirements as published in the 

current regulations. This proposed rule, 

even if finalized before the 2021 

Contest, will be applicable beginning 

with the 2022 Contest and each Contest 

thereafter. 

Proposed Changes to the Regulations at 

50 CFR Part 91 

With this proposed rule, we propose 

to remove the permanent ‘‘celebrating 

our waterfowl hunting heritage’’ theme 

and the mandatory inclusion of an 

appropriate hunting-related element in 

Contest entries, and accordingly revise 

the qualifications for selection as a 

judge and the scoring criteria for the 

Contest, beginning with the 2022 

Contest, as described below. Since the 

implementation of the 2020 rule 

requiring the inclusion of a mandatory 

hunting-related element, many Duck 

Stamp Contest artists have continued to 

express their dissatisfaction with this 

element being a requirement for all 

entries. The Service has proposed this 

change to allow artists more freedom of 

expression when designing their entries. 

Currently, § 91.14 explains that a live 

portrayal of any bird(s) of the five or 

fewer identified eligible waterfowl 

species must be the dominant feature of 

the design. In the May 8, 2020, final 

rule, we added to § 91.14 a paragraph (b) 

containing an additional permanent 

requirement that all Contest entries 

must also include one or more elements 

that reflect the theme ‘‘celebrating our 

waterfowl hunting heritage.’’ We 

propose to remove this requirement. 

Removing this requirement would not 

preclude artists from including other 

appropriate elements (e.g., hunting 

dogs, decoys, and hunting scenes) in 

their artwork as long as an eligible 

waterfowl species is in the foreground, 

portrayed alive, and is clearly the focus 

of attention. 

Paragraph (b) of § 91.21 outlines the 

qualifications of the judging panel. In 

the May 8, 2020, final rule, we revised 

§ 91.21(b) to add ‘‘an understanding and 

appreciation of the waterfowl hunting 

heritage and ability to recognize 

waterfowl hunting accessories’’ as a 

prerequisite for the judges, among the 

other qualifications. We propose to 

remove that prerequisite from the 

qualifications of Contest judges. 

Finally, § 91.23 sets forth the scoring 

criteria for the competition. In the May 

8, 2020, final rule, we revised the 

criteria to include that Contest entries 

would also be judged on how well they 

illustrate the theme of ‘‘celebrating our 

waterfowl hunting heritage.’’ We 

propose to remove that judging 

requirement. 

Public Comments Procedures 

To ensure that any final 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. We 

will accept public comments we receive 

on or before the date listed above in 

DATES. We are striving to ensure that 

any final rule resulting from this 

proposed rule would allow sufficient 

time for artists to prepare their 

submissions by the June 1, 2022, 

opening of the 2022 Contest entry 

submission period. The comments that 

will be most useful are those supported 

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 hand-delivered or those sent 

by email or fax or to an address not 

listed in ADDRESSES. If you submit a 

comment via http://

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. 

Please note that comments submitted to 

this website are not immediately 

viewable. 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. To ensure that the 

electronic docket for this rulemaking is 

complete and all comments we receive 

are publicly available, we will post all 

hardcopy comments on http://

www.regulations.gov. 

In addition, all comments and 

materials we receive, as well as 

supporting documentation used in 

preparing this proposed rule, will be 

available for public inspection via 

http://www.regulations.gov. Search for 

FWS–HQ–MB–2021–0048, which is the 

docket number for this rulemaking. 

Public Availability of Comments 

As stated above in more detail, 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. 

Required Determinations 

National Environmental Policy Act 

This proposed rule is categorically 

excluded. It reflects an administrative 

modification of procedures and the 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
32880 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 23, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

impacts are limited to administrative 

effects (516 DM 8.5(a)(3)). A detailed 

statement under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) is therefore not 

required. 

Endangered Species Act Consideration 

Of the species on our List of Eligible 

Species, only two species are currently 

listed as endangered or threatened 

under section 4 of the Endangered 

Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 

16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). No legal 

complications arise from the dual listing 

as the two lists are developed under 

separate authorities and for different 

purposes. Because this proposed rule is 

strictly administrative in nature, it has 

no effect on endangered or threatened 

species. Thus, it does not require 

consultation under section 7 of the ESA. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

(Executive Orders 12866 and 13563) 

Executive Order 12866 provides that 

the Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant 

rules. OIRA has determined that this 

proposed rule is not significant. 

Executive Order (E.O.) 13563 

reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 

while calling for improvements in the 

Nation’s regulatory system to promote 

predictability, to reduce uncertainty, 

and to use the best, most innovative, 

and least burdensome tools for 

achieving regulatory ends. The 

executive order directs agencies to 

consider regulatory approaches that 

reduce burdens and maintain flexibility 

and freedom of choice for the public 

where these approaches are relevant, 

feasible, and consistent with regulatory 

objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes 

further that regulations must be based 

on the best available science and that 

the rulemaking process must allow for 

public participation and an open 

exchange of ideas. We have developed 

this rule in a manner consistent with 

these requirements. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(as amended by the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 

(SBREFA) of 1996), 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) (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.). 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 

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. The changes we propose are 

intended primarily to clarify the 

requirements for the Contest. These 

changes would affect individuals, not 

businesses or other small entities as 

defined in the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act. Currently, Duck Stamp sales 

average approximately 1.5 million each 

year. Active waterfowl hunters, the only 

people required to purchase an annual 

stamp, number approximately 1.1 

million each year. Duck Stamps are also 

purchased by stamp and wildlife art 

collectors, bird watchers, and other 

conservationists, and a current stamp 

can be used for access at any national 

wildlife refuge that has an entry fee. 

Many hunters also purchase multiple 

stamps for different purposes. We are 

currently unable to quantify numbers of 

stamps purchased by each user group; 

we do not anticipate being able to 

attribute any variability in sales due to 

the proposed changes in the Contest. In 

recent years, when no theme is required, 

we have received an average of 200 

entries per year to the Contest. We 

anticipate that the number of entries 

into the Federal Duck Stamp Contest 

will range between 140 and 250 in any 

given year. 

We therefore certify that, if adopted, 

this proposed rule would not have a 

significant economic effect on a 

substantial number of small entities as 

defined under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act. A Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is 

not required. Accordingly, a Small 

Entity Compliance Guide is not 

required. 

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 ADDRESSES. To 

better help us revise the rulemaking, 

your comments should be as specific as 

possible. For example, you should tell 

us the numbers of the sections or 

paragraphs that are unclearly written, 

which sections or sentences are too 

long, the sections where you feel lists or 

tables would be useful, etc. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act (SBREFA) 

This rulemaking is not a major rule 

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

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act. This proposed rule: 

(a) Would not have an annual effect 

on the economy of $100 million or 

more. 

(b) Would not cause a major increase 

in costs or prices for consumers; 

individual industries; Federal, State, or 

local government agencies; or 

geographic regions. 

(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. 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) 

This rule does not contain any new 

collections of information that require 

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 previously approved 

the information collection requirements 

associated with the Federal Migratory 

Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp 

(Duck Stamp) Contest and assigned 

OMB Control Number 1018–0172. You 

may view the information collection 

request(s) at http://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 

This proposed rule would not impose 

an unfunded mandate on State, local, or 

Tribal governments or the private sector 

of more than $100 million per year. The 

rulemaking does 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. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 23, 2021 / Proposed Rules 32881 

Civil Justice Reform 

In accordance with E.O. 12988, the 

Office of the Solicitor has determined 

that this proposed rule does not unduly 

burden the judicial system and that it 

meets the requirements of sections 3(a) 

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

Takings 

In accordance with E.O. 12630, this 

proposed rule does not have significant 

takings implications. A takings 

implication assessment is not required. 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 

On May 18, 2001, the President issued 

Executive Order 13211 on regulations 

that significantly affect energy supply, 

distribution, or use. This proposed rule 

would revise the current regulations at 

50 CFR part 91 that govern the Federal 

Duck Stamp Contest. This rule would 

not significantly affect energy supplies, 

distribution, or use. Therefore, this 

action is a not a significant energy 

action and no Statement of Energy 

Effects is required. 

Government-to-Government 

Relationship With Tribes 

Under the President’s memorandum 

of April 29, 1994, ‘‘Government-toGovernment Relations with Native 

American Tribal Governments’’ (59 FR 

22951), and 512 DM 2, we have 

evaluated possible effects on federally 

recognized Indian Tribes and have 

determined that there are no effects. 

Individual Tribal members must meet 

the same regulatory requirements as 

other individuals who enter the Federal 

Duck Stamp Contest. 

Federalism 

These proposed revisions to part 91 

do not contain significant Federalism 

implications. A federalism summary 

impact statement under Executive Order 

13132 is not required. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 91 

Hunting, Wildlife. 

Proposed Regulation Promulgation 

Accordingly, we propose to amend 

part 91, subchapter G of chapter I, title 

50 of the Code of Federal Regulations as 

follows: 

PART 91—MIGRATORY BIRD 

HUNTING AND CONSERVATION 

STAMP CONTEST 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 91 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 16 U.S.C. 718j; 31 

U.S.C. 9701. 

■ 2. Revise § 91.14 to read as follows: 

§ 91.14 Restrictions on subject matter for 

entry. 

A live portrayal of any bird(s) of the 

five or fewer identified eligible 

waterfowl species must be the dominant 

feature of the design. The design may 

depict more than one of the eligible 

species. The judges’ overall mandate is 

to select the best design that will make 

an interesting, useful, and attractive 

duck stamp that will be accepted and 

prized by hunters, stamp collectors, 

conservationists, and others. The design 

must be the contestant’s original handdrawn creation. The entry design may 

not be copied or duplicated from 

previously published art, including 

photographs, or from images in any 

format published on the internet. 

Photographs, computer-generated art, or 

art produced from a computer printer or 

other computer/mechanical output 

device (airbrush method excepted) are 

not eligible to be entered into the 

contest and will be disqualified. An 

entry submitted in a prior contest that 

was not selected for a Federal or State 

stamp design may be submitted in the 

current contest if the entry meets the 

criteria set forth in this section. 

■ 3. Amend § 91.21 by revising 

paragraph (b) to read as follows: 

§ 91.21 Selection and qualification of 

contest judges. 

* * * * * 

(b) Qualifications. The panel of five 

judges will comprise individuals who 

have one or more of the following 

prerequisites: Recognized art 

credentials, knowledge of the 

anatomical makeup and the natural 

habitat of the eligible waterfowl species, 

an understanding of the wildlife 

sporting world in which the Duck 

Stamp is used, an awareness of philately 

and the role the Duck Stamp plays in 

stamp collecting, and demonstrated 

support for the conservation of 

waterfowl and wetlands through active 

involvement in the conservation 

community. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Revise § 91.23 to read as follows: 

§ 91.23 Scoring criteria for contest. 

Entries will be judged on the basis of 

anatomical accuracy, artistic 

composition, and suitability for 

reduction in the production of a stamp. 

Shannon A. Estenoz, 

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish 

and Wildlife and Parks, Exercising the 

Delegated Authority of the Assistant Secretary 

for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. 

[FR Doc. 2021–13476 Filed 6–22–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS