[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 124 (Wednesday, June 29, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38669-38673]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-13403]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 92

[Docket No. FWS-R7-MB-2021-0172; FXMB12610700000-201-FF07M01000]
RIN 1018-BF65


Migratory Bird Subsistence Harvest in Alaska; Harvest Regulations 
for Migratory Birds in Alaska During the 2022 Season

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS, Service, or we) is 
revising the migratory bird subsistence harvest regulations in Alaska. 
These regulations allow for the continuation of customary and 
traditional subsistence uses of migratory birds in Alaska and prescribe 
regional information on when and where the harvesting of birds may 
occur. These regulations were developed under a co-management process 
involving the Service, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, and 
Alaska Native representatives. The changes update the regulations to 
incorporate revisions requested by these partners.

DATES: This rule is effective June 29, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may find the comments submitted on the proposed rule as 
well as supplementary materials for this rulemaking action at the 
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. 
FWS-R7-MB-2021-0172.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric J. Taylor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, 1011 E. Tudor Road, Mail Stop 201, Anchorage, AK 99503; (907) 
903-7210. 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.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA, 16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.) 
was enacted to conserve certain species of migratory birds and gives 
the Secretary of the Interior the authority to regulate the harvest of 
these birds. The law further authorizes the Secretary to issue 
regulations to ensure that the indigenous inhabitants of the State of 
Alaska may take migratory birds and collect their eggs for nutritional 
and other essential needs during seasons established by the Secretary 
so as to provide for the preservation and maintenance of stocks of 
migratory birds (16 U.S.C. 712(1)).
    The take of migratory birds for subsistence uses in Alaska occurs 
during the spring and summer, during which timeframe when the annual 
fall/winter harvest of migratory birds is not allowed. 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 prescribe regional 
information on when and where the harvesting of birds in Alaska may 
occur.
    The migratory bird subsistence harvest regulations are developed 
cooperatively. The Alaska Migratory Bird Co-Management Council (Council 
or AMBCC) consists of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Alaska 
Department of Fish and Game (ADFG), and representatives of Alaska's 
Native population. 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 develop 
recommendations for migratory bird subsistence-harvest regulations in 
Alaska that would take effect in the spring of the next year. In 2021, 
the in-person spring meeting did not occur due to the coronavirus 
pandemic. Instead, the Council met virtually via teleconference on 
April 5, 2021, to approve subsistence harvest regulations that would 
take effect during the 2022 harvest season. The Council's 
recommendations were presented to the Pacific Flyway Council for review 
and subsequent submission to the Service Regulations Committee (SRC) 
for approval at the SRC meeting on September 28 and 29, 2021.

Comments Received on the Proposed Rule

    Per the collaborative process described above, we published a 
proposed rule to update the regulations for the taking of migratory 
birds for subsistence uses in Alaska during the spring and summer (87 
FR 14232, March 14, 2022). By the end of the comment period on the 
proposed rule, we received two comments. We hereby respond to the 
relevant issues that were raised in the public input. We made no 
changes to the proposed rule as a result of the input we received via 
the public comments (see Final Regulations, below, for more 
information).
    Issue: One commenter expressed the following sentiments: (i) 
migratory birds are endangered; (ii) the proposed rule would allow the 
killing of endangered species; (iii) subsistence harvest of migratory 
birds is not necessary because subsistence harvesters can survive on 
food that does not come from animals; (iv) by killing healthy animals, 
other species take over resources and disrupt the ecosystem; and (v) 
migratory birds should be protected.
    Response: Migratory birds open for harvest during the spring/summer 
subsistence season in Alaska do not include threatened or endangered 
species. Annual harvest surveys show that species protected by the 
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et 
seq.), are not harvested by subsistence hunters. The Service conducted 
an intra-agency consultation and determined that this rule complies 
with the ESA (see Endangered Species Act Consideration, below, for more 
information). The Service agrees that subsistence hunters harvest 
healthy migratory birds; however, there is no evidence that this 
harvest results in other wildlife species taking food, habitat, or 
other resources to the detriment of the ecosystem. The comment that 
people can survive on food that is not animal-based is true; however, 
the spring/summer migratory bird subsistence harvest in Alaska is of

[[Page 38670]]

cultural, traditional, and nutritional importance to Alaska Native 
peoples and other rural Alaskans. The Service conducts annual 
population and harvest surveys of migratory birds and establishes 
hunting regulations to ensure the sustainability of migratory bird 
populations and that harvest does not result in species becoming 
vulnerable or any disruptions to the ecosystem.
    Issue: A commenter inquired about (i) the boundaries of the 
Kachemak Bay State Wilderness Park; (ii) use of quota sampling as a 
survey method to estimate subsistence harvest; and (iii) how these 
regulations may modernize existing rules and commitments.
    Response: The Service revised the previously vague boundaries of 
the harvest area for the Villages of Nanwalek and Port Graham by 
referencing specific waypoints, lines of longitude, and boundaries of 
Game Management Units to define an exact map location. The harvest area 
includes parts of the Kachemak Bay State Park and Kachemak Bay State 
Wilderness Park; further, some of the waypoints and boundaries occur at 
the head of Kachemak Bay at the Fox River Flats in tidal/mud flats and 
marshland. The boundary occurs in this tidal flat area because the 
previous definition included the boundary as the ``mouth of Fox 
River.'' Given the vagueness of the phrase ``mouth of Fox River'' in a 
tidal mud flat, the Service selected a specific latitude/longitude to 
better define the boundary. The Service now defines the boundary as 
``the north bank of the Fox River [59[deg]48'57'' N; 150[deg]58'44'' 
W].''
    The commenter also recommended the Service consider quota sampling 
to provide timely and accurate harvest information. Quota sampling is a 
method for selecting survey participants on a non-random basis, i.e., 
all members of the population do not have an equal chance of being 
selected to be a part of the sample group. Because quota sampling does 
not select sample units with a known inclusion probability and all 
units of the population do not have a known sample probability, the 
method can be unreliable. Because the non-random element of quota 
sampling is a source of uncertainty about the nature of the actual 
sample, the Service believes alternative sampling methods are preferred 
over quota sampling. Finally, the proposed changes to the regulations 
will allow publication of maps that are accurate and reproducible into 
the future and interpretable by subsistence hunters and law enforcement 
officials.

Final Regulations

    We are making no changes to the regulatory revisions in our March 
14, 2022, proposed rule (87 FR 14232) as a result of the input we 
received via the public comments.
    The rule sets forth the same subsistence harvest regulations in 
subpart D, Annual Regulations Governing Subsistence Harvest, as those 
from the 2021 subsistence harvest seasons (see 86 FR 11707, February 
26, 2021; 86 FR 20311, April 19, 2021) with five clarifications:

Revisions to Subpart A

    In part 92, subpart A (general provisions), we clarify the 
regulations defining excluded areas, which are those areas that are 
closed to subsistence harvest.
    First, we clarify that subsistence hunters whose communities 
petitioned successfully to be added to the list of included areas 
appearing at 50 CFR 92.5(a)(2) may harvest migratory birds within the 
entirety of the subsistence harvest areas designated for their 
community, including portions of harvest areas that occur within 
designated excluded areas.
    For example, portions of the subsistence harvest areas selected by 
communities in the Upper Copper River Region listed as eligible under 
50 CFR 92.5(a)(2)(i) occur within the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, an 
excluded area that is otherwise closed to harvest (50 CFR 92.5(b)(2)). 
The regulations do not specify that these portions of designated 
harvest areas that occur in excluded areas are, in fact, open to 
subsistence hunting. To address this issue, we amended 50 CFR 92.5(b) 
to make an exception to harvest closures in those portions of excluded 
areas that fall within subsistence harvest areas designated for 
specific communities that petitioned to be listed as eligible for 
participation in the spring/summer subsistence hunt (50 CFR 
92.5(a)(2)).
    This exception would not apply to subsistence harvest areas that 
have been generally designated for regions (e.g., Bering Strait Norton 
Sound Region) or subregions (e.g., Bering Strait Norton Sound Stebbins/
St. Michael Area) listed as included areas at 50 CFR 92.5(a).
    Second, to clarify the boundaries of areas that are closed to 
subsistence harvest, we address an apparent inconsistency in some terms 
used in part 92. The regulations governing subsistence harvest of 
migratory birds were set forth August 16, 2002 (67 FR 53511). That rule 
defined the term ``village'' at 50 CFR 92.4 and also set forth 
provisions regarding areas that are excluded from eligibility to 
participate in the subsistence harvest of migratory birds. Under 50 CFR 
92.5(b)(2), excluded areas include ``[v]illage areas'' located in 
Anchorage, the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, the Kenai Peninsula roaded 
area, the Gulf of Alaska roaded area, Southeast Alaska, and the Central 
Interior Excluded Area. The definition of ``village'' at 50 CFR 92.4 
and use of the term ``village areas'' at 50 CFR 92.5(b)(2) to describe 
excluded areas has created confusion in determining the boundaries of 
closed areas. We never intended for the excluded areas set forth at 50 
CFR 92.5(b)(2) to be only those portions of those areas that meet the 
definition of ``village'' at 50 CFR 92.4. Therefore, we remove the term 
``village areas'' from 50 CFR 92.5(b)(2) to clarify that excluded areas 
are closed to harvest in their entirety, except those portions that 
occur within a harvest area that has been designated for a specific 
community.
    Third, we clarify the language defining boundaries of the excluded 
areas of the Kenai Peninsula roaded area and the Gulf of Alaska roaded 
area. The geographic boundaries of the Kenai Peninsula roaded area and 
the Gulf of Alaska roaded area are undefined in the regulations, making 
the development of usable hunt maps imprecise and ambiguous. The 
changes to the regulations would allow publication of maps that are 
accurate and reproducible into the future and interpretable by 
subsistence hunters and law enforcement officials.
    Finally, we are including a needed administrative correction. The 
Chugach Community of Cordova should have been included in the list of 
included areas for the Gulf of Alaska region in subpart A following 
Council action in 2014. The omission of this community from the 
regulations was the result of an inadvertent oversight. The Chugach 
Community of Cordova does appropriately appear in the regulations for 
eligible subsistence-harvest areas in 50 CFR 92.31(j)(2). Therefore, we 
are adding the Chugach Community of Cordova to the current list of 
included areas in 50 CFR 92.5(a)(2)(ii). Similarly, we are clarifying 
that the Central Interior Excluded Area includes the Fairbanks North 
Star Borough.
    These revisions to the regulations in subpart A are not anticipated 
to result in a significant increase in harvest of birds and eggs 
because spring and summer subsistence practices likely occur in these 
areas at the present time.

Revisions to Subpart D

    In 50 CFR 92.31, we clarify the designated harvest area boundaries 
for

[[Page 38671]]

the communities of Port Graham and Nanwalek in the Gulf of Alaska 
Region and for the community of Tyonek in the Cook Inlet Region. 
Current harvest area definitions in the regulations for these 
communities are incomplete (that is, they do not describe a complete 
polygon), and only partially define the boundaries of the harvest 
areas. The revisions would allow publication of maps that are accurate 
and reproducible into the future and provide a clear definition of the 
harvest areas designated for the communities that subsistence hunters 
and law enforcement officials can interpret and follow in the field.

Compliance With the MBTA and the Endangered Species Act

    The Service has dual objectives and responsibilities for 
authorizing a subsistence harvest while protecting migratory birds and 
threatened species. Although these objectives continue to be 
challenging, they are not irreconcilable, provided that: (1) 
regulations continue to protect threatened species, (2) measures to 
address documented threats are implemented, and (3) the subsistence 
community and other conservation partners commit to working together.
    Mortality, sickness, and poisoning from lead exposure have been 
documented in many waterfowl species, including threatened spectacled 
eiders (Somateria fischeri) and the Alaska-breeding population of 
Steller's eiders (Polysticta stelleri). While lead shot has been banned 
nationally for waterfowl hunting since 1991, Service staff have 
documented the availability of lead shot in waterfowl rounds for sale 
in communities on the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta and North Slope. The 
Service will work with partners to increase our education, outreach, 
and enforcement efforts to ensure that subsistence waterfowl hunting is 
conducted using nontoxic shot.

Conservation Under the MBTA

    We have monitored subsistence harvest for the past 25 years through 
the use of household surveys in the most heavily used subsistence 
harvest areas, such as the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. Based on our 
monitoring of the migratory bird species and populations taken for 
subsistence, we find that this rule will provide for the preservation 
and maintenance of migratory bird stocks as required by the MBTA. 
Communication and coordination between the Service, the AMBCC, and the 
Pacific Flyway Council have allowed us to set harvest regulations to 
ensure the long-term viability of the migratory bird stocks.

Endangered Species Act Consideration

    Spectacled eiders and the Alaska-breeding population of Steller's 
eiders are listed as threatened species under the ESA. Their migration 
and breeding distributions overlap with areas where the spring and 
summer subsistence migratory bird hunt is open in Alaska. Neither 
species is included in the list of subsistence migratory bird species 
at 50 CFR 92.22; therefore, both species are closed to subsistence 
harvest. Under 50 CFR 92.21 and 92.32, the Service may implement 
emergency closures, if necessary, to protect Steller's eiders or any 
other endangered or threatened species or migratory bird population.
    Section 7 of the ESA requires the Secretary of the Interior to 
review other programs administered by the Department of the Interior 
and utilize such programs in furtherance of the purposes of the ESA. 
The Secretary is further required to insure that any action authorized, 
funded, or carried out by the Department of the Interior is not likely 
to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered species or 
threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification 
of critical habitat.
    The Service's Alaska Region Migratory Bird Management Program 
conducted an intra-agency consultation with the Service's Fairbanks 
Fish and Wildlife Field Office. The consultation was completed with a 
biological opinion issued on March 15, 2022, that concluded these 
rulemaking actions are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence 
of endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or 
adverse modification of designated critical habitat. Therefore, we have 
determined that this rule complies with the ESA.

Immediate Effective Date

    This rule takes effect on the date set forth above in DATES. 
Delaying the effective date for 30 days would have detrimental effects 
on Alaskans seeking to conduct subsistence harvest of migratory birds. 
To respect the subsistence hunt of many rural Alaskans, either for 
their cultural or religious exercise, sustenance, and/or materials for 
cultural use (e.g., handicrafts), the Department of the Interior finds 
that it is in the public interest to make this rule effective as soon 
as possible. For these reasons, we find that ``good cause'' exists 
within the terms of 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) of the Administrative Procedure 
Act and under the authority of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (July 3, 
1918), as amended (16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.), to make this rule take 
effect immediately upon publication in the Federal Register.

Required Determinations

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 rule is not significant.
    Executive Order 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

    The Department of the Interior certifies that this rule will not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities as defined under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 
et seq.). A regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. 
Accordingly, a small entity compliance guide is not required. This rule 
would legalize a preexisting subsistence activity, and the resources 
harvested will be consumed.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule:
    (a) Would not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million 
or more. It would legalize and regulate a traditional subsistence 
activity. It would not result in a substantial increase in subsistence 
harvest or a significant change in harvesting patterns. The commodities 
that would be regulated under this rule are migratory birds. This rule 
deals with legalizing the subsistence harvest of migratory birds

[[Page 38672]]

and, as such, does not involve commodities traded in the marketplace. A 
small economic benefit from this rule would derive from the sale of 
equipment and ammunition to carry out subsistence hunting. Most, if not 
all, businesses that sell hunting equipment in rural Alaska qualify as 
small businesses. We have no reason to believe that this rule would 
lead to a disproportionate distribution of benefits.
    (b) Would not cause a major increase in costs or prices for 
consumers; individual industries; Federal, State, or local government 
agencies; or geographic regions. This rule does not deal with traded 
commodities and, therefore, would not have an impact on prices for 
consumers.
    (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 
rule deals with the harvesting of wildlife for personal consumption. It 
would not regulate the marketplace in any way to generate substantial 
effects on the economy or the ability of businesses to compete.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    We have determined and certified under the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) that this rule would not impose a cost of 
$100 million or more in any given year on local, State, or Tribal 
governments or private entities. The rule would not have a significant 
or unique effect on local, State, or Tribal governments or the private 
sector. A statement containing the information required by the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act is not required. Participation on regional 
management bodies and the Council requires travel expenses for some 
Alaska Native organizations and local governments. In addition, they 
assume some expenses related to coordinating involvement of village 
councils in the regulatory process. Total coordination and travel 
expenses for all Alaska Native organizations are estimated to be less 
than $300,000 per year. In a notice of decision (65 FR 16405; March 28, 
2000), we identified 7 to 12 partner organizations (Alaska Native 
nonprofits and local governments) to administer the regional programs. 
The ADFG also incurs expenses for travel to Council and regional 
management body meetings. In addition, the State of Alaska would be 
required to provide technical staff support to each of the regional 
management bodies and to the Council. Expenses for the State's 
involvement may exceed $100,000 per year but should not exceed $150,000 
per year. When funding permits, we make annual grant agreements 
available to the partner organizations and the ADFG to help offset 
their expenses.

Takings (Executive Order 12630)

    Under the criteria in Executive Order 12630, this rule would not 
have significant takings implications. This rule is not specific to 
particular land ownership, but instead applies to the harvesting of 
migratory bird resources throughout Alaska. A takings implication 
assessment is not required.

Federalism (Executive Order 13132)

    Under the criteria in Executive Order 13132, this rule does not 
have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a 
federalism summary impact statement. We discuss effects of this rule on 
the State of Alaska in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act section, above. 
We worked with the State of Alaska to develop these regulations. 
Therefore, a federalism summary impact statement is not required.

Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order 12988)

    The Department, in promulgating this rule, has determined that it 
would not unduly burden the judicial system and that it meets the 
requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988.

Government-to-Government Relations With Native American Tribal 
Governments

    Consistent with Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249; November 9, 
2000), ``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments,'' and Department of the Interior policy on Consultation 
with Indian Tribes (December 1, 2011), we sent letters via electronic 
mail to all 229 Alaska federally recognized Indian Tribes. Consistent 
with Congressional direction (Pub. L. 108-199, div. H, Sec. 161, Jan. 
23, 2004, 118 Stat. 452, as amended by Public Law 108-447, div. H, 
title V, Sec. 518, Dec. 8, 2004, 118 Stat. 3267), we also sent letters 
to approximately 200 Alaska Native corporations and other Tribal 
entities in Alaska soliciting their input as to whether or not they 
would like the Service to consult with them on the 2022 migratory bird 
subsistence harvest regulations.
    We implemented the amended treaty with Canada with a focus on local 
involvement. The treaty calls for the creation of management bodies to 
ensure an effective and meaningful role for Alaska's indigenous 
inhabitants in the conservation of migratory birds. According to the 
Letter of Submittal, management bodies are to include Alaska Native, 
Federal, and State of Alaska representatives as equals. They develop 
recommendations for, among other things: seasons and bag limits, 
methods and means of take, law enforcement policies, population and 
harvest monitoring, educational programs, research and use of 
traditional knowledge, and habitat protection. The management bodies 
involve village councils to the maximum extent possible in all aspects 
of management. To ensure maximum input at the village level, we 
required each of the 11 participating regions to create regional 
management bodies consisting of at least one representative from the 
participating villages. The regional management bodies meet twice 
annually to review and/or submit proposals to the statewide body.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA)

    This 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.). 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. OMB has previously approved the information collection 
requirements associated with subsistence harvest reporting and assigned 
the following OMB control numbers:
    <bullet> Alaska Migratory Bird Subsistence Harvest Household 
Survey, OMB Control Number 1018-0124 (expires 04/30/2024), and
    <bullet> Regulations for the Taking of Migratory Birds for 
Subsistence Uses in Alaska, 50 CFR part 92, OMB Control Number 1018-
0178 (expires 04/30/2024).

National Environmental Policy Act Consideration (42 U.S.C. 4321 et 
seq.)

    The annual regulations and options are considered in the January 
2022 Environmental Assessment, ``Managing Migratory Bird Subsistence 
Hunting in Alaska: Hunting Regulations for the 2022 Spring/Summer 
Harvest.'' Copies are available from the person listed under FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or at https://www.regulations.gov.

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (Executive Order 13211)

    Executive Order 13211 requires agencies to prepare statements of 
energy effects when undertaking certain

[[Page 38673]]

actions. This is not a significant regulatory action under this 
Executive order; it allows only for traditional subsistence harvest and 
improves conservation of migratory birds by allowing effective 
regulation of this harvest. Further, this rule is not expected to 
significantly affect energy supplies, distribution, or use. Therefore, 
this action is not a significant energy action under Executive Order 
13211, and a statement of energy effects is not required.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 92

    Hunting, Treaties, Wildlife.

Regulation Promulgation

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, we amend 50 CFR part 92 as 
set forth below:

PART 92--MIGRATORY BIRD SUBSISTENCE HARVEST IN ALASKA

0
1. The authority citation for part 92 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  16 U.S.C. 703-712.


0
2. Amend Sec.  92.5 by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a)(2)(ii), the first sentence of paragraph (b) 
introductory text, and paragraphs (b)(2) and (3); and
0
b. Adding paragraphs (b)(4) and (5).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec.  92.5  Who is eligible to participate?

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ii) Gulf of Alaska Region--Chugach Community of Chenega, Chugach 
Community of Cordova, Chugach Community of Nanwalek, Chugach Community 
of Port Graham, and Chugach Community of Tatitlek.
* * * * *
    (b) Excluded areas. Excluded areas are not subsistence harvest 
areas and are closed to harvest, with the exception of any portion of 
an excluded area that falls within a harvest area that has been 
designated for a specific community under paragraph (a)(2) of this 
section. * * *
* * * * *
    (2) The Municipality of Anchorage, the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, 
the Kenai Peninsula roaded area (as described in paragraph (b)(3) of 
this section), the Gulf of Alaska roaded area (as described in 
paragraph (b)(4) of this section), Southeast Alaska, and the Central 
Interior Excluded Area (as described in paragraph (b)(5) of this 
section) do not qualify for a spring and summer harvest.
    (3) The Kenai Peninsula roaded area comprises the following: Game 
Management Unit (Unit) 7, Unit 15(A), Unit 15(B), and that portion of 
Unit 15(C) east and north of a line beginning at the northern boundary 
of Unit 15(C) and mouth of the Kasilof River at 60[deg]23'19'' N; 
151[deg]18'37'' W, extending south along the coastline of Cook Inlet to 
Bluff Point (59[deg]40'00'' N), then south along longitude line 
151[deg]41'48'' W to latitude 59[deg]35'56'' N, then east to the tip of 
Homer Spit (excluding any land of the Homer Spit), then northeast to 
the north bank of Fox River (59[deg]48'57'' N; 150[deg]58'44'' W), and 
then east to the eastern boundary of Unit 15(C) at 150[deg]19'59'' W.
    (4) The Gulf of Alaska roaded area comprises the incorporated city 
boundaries of Valdez and Whittier, Alaska.
    (5) The Central Interior Excluded Area comprises the following: The 
Fairbanks North Star Borough and that portion of Unit 20(A) east of the 
Wood River drainage and south of Rex Trail, including the upper Wood 
River drainage south of its confluence with Chicken Creek; that portion 
of Unit 20(C) east of Denali National Park north to Rock Creek and east 
to Unit 20(A); and that portion of Unit 20(D) west of the Tanana River 
between its confluence with the Johnson and Delta Rivers, west of the 
east bank of the Johnson River, and north and west of the Volkmar 
drainage, including the Goodpaster River drainage. The following 
communities are within the Excluded Area: Delta Junction/Big Delta/Fort 
Greely, McKinley Park/Village, Healy, Ferry, and all residents of the 
formerly named Fairbanks North Star Borough Excluded Area.
* * * * *

0
3. Amend Sec.  92.31 by revising paragraphs (j)(3) introductory text 
and (k)(1) to read as follows:


Sec.  92.31  Region-specific regulations.

* * * * *
    (j) * * *
    (3) Kachemak Bay Area (Harvest area: That portion of Game 
Management Unit [Unit] 15[C] west and south of a line beginning at the 
northern boundary of Unit 15[C] and mouth of the Kasilof River at 
60[deg]23'19'' N; 151[deg]18'37'' W, extending south along the 
coastline of Cook Inlet to Bluff Point [59[deg]40'00'' N], then south 
along longitude line 151[deg]41'48'' W to latitude 59[deg]35'56'' N, 
then east to the tip of Homer Spit [excluding any land of the Homer 
Spit], then northeast to the north bank of the Fox River 
[59[deg]48'57'' N; 150[deg]58'44'' W], and then east to the eastern 
boundary of Unit 15[C] at 150[deg]19'59'' W) (Eligible Chugach 
Communities: Port Graham, Nanwalek):
* * * * *
    (k) * * *
    (1) Season: April 2-May 31--That portion of Game Management Unit 
16(B) west of the east bank of the Yentna River, south of the north 
bank of the Skwentna River, and south of the north bank of Portage 
Creek to the boundary of Game Management Unit 16(B) at Portage Pass; 
and August 1-31--That portion of Game Management Unit 16(B) west of 
longitude line 150[deg]56' W, south of the north banks of the Beluga 
River and Beluga Lake, then south of latitude line 61[deg]26'08'' N.
* * * * *

Shannon A. Estenoz,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2022-13403 Filed 6-28-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P