36158 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 22, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

believe that the jackrabbit is capable of 

surviving such fire effects by running 

away (Service 2008, p. 64). We find 

prescribed burns may also expose 

white-sided jackrabbits to higher rates of 

predation, but also allow for easier 

detection of terrestrial predators 

(Service 2008, p. 65). The effects of a 

prescribed burn would likely be shortterm, because the fire-adapted grassland 

community usually responds quickly, 

with plant species showing regrowth 

within several days post-fire. 

Nevertheless, a reduction of shrubs 

would benefit the white-sided jackrabbit 

by improving grassland habitat. 

Although the MBHCP will likely result 

in short-term adverse effects to the 

jackrabbit, the long-term effects will 

improve the grassland community used 

by white-sided jackrabbits by reducing 

the shrub component, providing 

additional suitable habitat, and 

improving the area around occupied 

habitat for potential expansion; thus, 

implementation of the MBHCP, 

including the fire management program, 

should promote the conservation of the 

white-sided jackrabbit. For these 

reasons, we found no data or substantial 

information to indicate that wildfires or 

prescribed burns threaten white-sided 

jackrabbits or their habitat. 

Evaluation of Information Provided in 

the Petition and Available in Service 

Files 

We reviewed the petition, supporting 

information, and the information readily 

available to the Service and find the 

petition does not present any additional 

substantial information that any natural 

or manmade factors other than those 

discussed above for Factors A, B, and D 

may affect the white-sided jackrabbit’s 

continued existence. 

Finding 

Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Endangered 

Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act) 

(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that we 

make a finding on whether a petition to 

list, delist, or reclassify a species 

presents substantial scientific or 

commercial information indicating that 

the petitioned action may be warranted. 

We are to base this finding on 

information provided in the petition, 

supporting information submitted with 

the petition, and information otherwise 

available in our files. To the maximum 

extent practicable, we are to make this 

finding within 90 days of our receipt of 

the petition and publish our notice of 

the finding promptly in the Federal 

Register. 

Our process for making this 90–day 

finding under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the 

Act is limited to a determination of 

whether the information in the petition 

presents ‘‘substantial scientific and 

commercial information,’’ which is 

interpreted in our regulations as ‘‘that 

amount of information that would lead 

a reasonable person to believe that the 

measure proposed in the petition may 

be warranted’’ (50 CFR 424.14(b)). We 

have reviewed the petition and the 

available literature cited in the petition, 

and evaluated the information to 

determine whether the sources cited 

support the claims made in the petition. 

We also reviewed reliable information 

that was readily available in our files to 

clarify and verify information in the 

petition. As described in our Five-Factor 

Evaluation, above, the petition presents 

substantial information indicating that 

listing the white-sided jackrabbit 

throughout its entire range may be 

warranted based on Factor A (present or 

threatened destruction, modification, or 

curtailment of the species’ habitat or 

range), Factor B (overutilization for 

commercial, recreational, scientific or 

educational purposes), and Factor D 

(inadequacy of existing regulatory 

mechanisms). Based on our Five-Factor 

Evaluation (above), the petition does not 

present substantial information 

indicating that Factor C (disease or 

predation) or Factor E (other natural or 

manmade factors affecting the species’ 

continued existence) is currently, or in 

the future will be, a threat to the whitesided jackrabbit. 

Based on this review and evaluation, 

we find that the petition has presented 

substantial scientific or commercial 

information that listing the jackrabbit 

throughout all of its range may be 

warranted due to current and future 

threats under Factors A, B, and D. We 

also find that the petition presented 

substantial information that the 

northern populations of the species may 

be a valid DPS and may warrant listing. 

Therefore, we are initiating a status 

review to determine whether listing the 

jackrabbit under the Act is warranted. 

As part of our status review, we will 

examine whether the full species, 

subspecies, or the petitioned northern 

DPS of the jackrabbit warrants listing 

under the Act. We will issue a 12– 

month finding as to whether any of the 

petitioned actions is warranted. To 

ensure that the status review is 

comprehensive, we are soliciting 

scientific and commercial information 

regarding the jackrabbit. 

The ‘‘substantial information’’ 

standard for a 90–day finding is in 

contrast to the Act’s ‘‘best scientific and 

commercial data’’ standard that applies 

to a 12–month finding as to whether a 

petitioned action is warranted. A 90– 

day finding is not a status assessment of 

the species and does not constitute a 

status review under the Act. Our final 

determination as to whether a 

petitioned action is warranted is not 

made until we have completed a 

thorough status review of the species, 

which is conducted following a positive 

90–day finding. Because the Act’s 

standards for 90–day and 12–month 

findings are different, as described 

above, a positive 90–day finding does 

not mean that the 12–month finding 

also will be positive. 

The petitioner requested that critical 

habitat be designated for this species. If 

we determine in our 12–month finding 

that listing the jackrabbit is warranted, 

we will address the designation of 

critical habitat at the time of the 

proposed rulemaking. 

References Cited 

A complete list of references cited is 

available on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov and upon request 

from the New Mexico Ecological 

Services Office (see FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT). 

Author 

The primary authors of this notice are 

the staff members of the New Mexico 

Ecological Services Office (see FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). 

Authority 

The authority for this action is the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). 

Dated: July 14, 2009. 

James J. Slack, 

Acting Deputy Director, Fish and Wildlife 

Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–17449 Filed 7–21–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–S 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Parts 21 and 22 

[FWS–R9–MB–2009–0002; 91200–1231– 

9BPP] 

RIN 1018–AW44 

Migratory Bird Permits; Changes in the 

Regulations Governing Falconry 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, published a final rule 

in the Federal Register on October 8, 

2008, to revise our regulations 

governing falconry in the United States. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 22, 2009 / Proposed Rules 36159 

With this action, we propose to make 

several changes to those regulations to 

correct inconsistencies and oversights 

and make the regulations clearer. 

Because a few of our changes are 

technically substantive, we are opening 

a comment period for this action. 

DATES: We must receive any comments 

by August 21, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by either of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public 

Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–R9– 

MB–2009–0002; Division of Policy and 

Directives Management; U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, 

Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203–1610. 

We will not accept e-mail or faxed 

comments. We will post all comments 

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

generally means that we will post any 

personal information you provide us 

(see the Public Comments section below 

for more information). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

George T. Allen, Division of Migratory 

Bird Management, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, 703–358–1825. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Comments 

We intend that the final action 

resulting from this proposal will be 

based on the best scientific and 

commercial data available and be as 

accurate and as effective as possible. 

Therefore, we request comments or 

suggestions on this proposed rule from 

the public, other concerned 

governmental agencies, the scientific 

community, industry, or any other 

interested parties. 

You may submit your comments and 

materials concerning this proposed rule 

by one of the methods listed in the 

ADDRESSES section. We will not 

consider comments sent by e-mail or fax 

or to an address not listed in the 

ADDRESSES section. 

If you submit a comment via http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your entire 

comment—including any personal 

identifying information—will be posted 

on the Web site. If you submit a 

hardcopy comment that includes 

personal identifying 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. 

We will post all hardcopy comments on 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

Comments and materials we receive, 

as well as supporting documentation we 

used in preparing this proposed rule, 

will be available for public inspection at 

http://www.regulations.gov, or by 

appointment, during normal business 

hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT). 

You may obtain copies of our 

previous actions concerning this subject 

by mail (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT) or by visiting the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

I. Background 

On October 8, 2008, we published a 

final rule in the Federal Register (73 FR 

59448) to revise our regulations 

governing falconry in the United States. 

We eliminated the requirement for a 

Federal permit to practice falconry, and 

made other changes to make it easier to 

understand the requirements for the 

practice of falconry, including take of 

raptors from the wild, and the 

procedures for obtaining a falconry 

permit. The rule also added a provision 

allowing us to approve falconry 

regulations that Indian Tribes, States, or 

U.S. territories adopt. This final rule 

became effective November 7, 2008, and 

changed the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR parts 21 

and 22. 

We have received questions about 

some parts of the final rule, which we 

propose to clarify or correct. Because a 

few of our proposed changes are 

technically substantive, we are opening 

a comment period for this action. 

II. Corrections 

We propose to better define the term 

‘‘imprint’’ in 50 CFR 21.3 by changing 

the definition to mean a bird that is 

hand-raised in isolation from the sight 

of other raptors from 2 weeks of age 

until it is fully feathered. 

Since publishing the rule, we have 

received inquiries about the prohibition 

in 50 CFR 21.29(c)(3)(i)(E) on possession 

of captive-bred raptors by Apprentice 

falconers. We continue to disallow 

possession of eagles and of raptor 

species on the most recent national list 

of bird species of conservation concern 

(currently Birds of Conservation 

Concern 2008, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Division of Migratory Bird 

Management, Arlington, Virginia). 

However, captive-bred individuals of 

some of the prohibited species may be 

appropriate for Apprentice falconers. 

We failed to clearly prohibit possession 

of wild raptors of threatened or 

endangered species. We propose to 

revise paragraph (c)(3)(i)(E) to clarify 

this issue for the public and to clarify 

that an Apprentice falconer may have a 

hybrid raptor of most species. 

In § 21.29(c)(3)(ii)(C), we stated that to 

advance to the level of General 

Falconer, an Apprentice Falconer must 

‘‘have practiced falconry with wild 

raptor(s) at the Apprentice Falconer 

level or equivalent for at least 2 years, 

including maintaining, training, flying, 

and hunting the raptor(s) for at least 4 

months in each year.’’ However, because 

apprentices need not use wild raptors to 

advance to the General Falconer level, 

we propose to remove the word ‘‘wild’’ 

from this requirement. Likewise, we 

would correct § 21.29(g)(5)(ii), to make 

the requirements listed match those in 

§ 21.29(c)(3)(ii)(C). Finally, for the same 

reason, we would remove the word 

‘‘wild’’ from § 21.29(d)(1)(ii)(A). 

In § (c)(7)(i), we by replace the words 

‘‘in lieu of a’’ with the words ‘‘in 

addition to the’’ in the second sentence. 

The four species named in that 

paragraph must be banded with a 

nonreusable band that we will provide 

to the State, Tribe, or territory. 

In § 21.29(d)(1)(ii)(A)(4), we stated in 

our regulations for housing falconry 

raptors that ‘‘[e]ach raptor must have a 

pan of clean water available.’’ In cold 

weather conditions and with some 

perch types, this requirement is 

impractical, and potentially harmful. 

We propose to change the requirement 

to clarify that, if practical, a water pan 

should be made available for a falconry 

bird. 

In an oversight, the regulations at 

§ 21.29(e)(3)(ii) state that General or 

Master falconers ‘‘may take raptors less 

than 1 year of age from the wild during 

any period or periods specified by the 

State, Tribe, or territory.’’ This 

constraint was not put in place for 

Apprentice falconers, so we wish to add 

the relevant language to the regulations, 

at § 21.29(e)(3)(i). 

Since the final rule was published, we 

have been asked about the use of 

falconry birds in demonstrating or 

advertising falconry-related items such 

as hoods and telemetry equipment. We 

propose to add a sentence to 

§ 21.29(f)(9)(i) clarifying that filming, 

photography, or illustration of falconry 

birds to demonstrate or advertise 

falconry equipment is acceptable. 

Finally, we make several small word 

changes or additions to make these 

regulations compliant with other 

regulations. We also correct paragraph 

designations for several subparagraphs 

by indicating that the designations 

should have published in italics to 

conform with style requirements of the 

Office of the Federal Register, which 

requires that paragraph designations in 

the CFR follow this order: (a), (1), (i), 

(A), (1), and (i). Because several of the 

other proposed changes are substantive, 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
36160 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 22, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

we request public comment on this 

proposed rule. 

III. Required Determinations 

Clarity of This Regulation 

Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 requires 

each agency to write regulations that are 

easy to understand. We invite your 

comments on how to make this rule 

easier to understand, including answers 

to questions such as the following: 

1. Are the requirements in the rule 

clearly stated? 

2. Does the rule contain technical 

language or jargon that interferes with 

its clarity? 

3. Does the format of the rule 

(grouping and order of sections, use of 

headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or 

reduce its clarity? 

4. Would the rule be easier to 

understand if it were divided into more 

(but shorter) sections? (A ‘‘section’’ 

appears in bold type and is preceded by 

the symbol § and a numbered heading; 

for example: ‘‘§ 21.29 Falconry 

standards and falconry permitting.’’) 

5. Does the description of the rule in 

the Supplementary Information section 

of the preamble help you to understand 

the proposed rule? What else could we 

do to make the rule easier to 

understand? 

Send a copy of any comments that 

concern how we could make this rule 

easier to understand to: Office of 

Regulatory Affairs, Department of the 

Interior, Room 7229, 1849 C Street, 

NW., Washington, DC 20240. You also 

may e-mail comments to 

Exsec@ios.doi.gov. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has determined that this 

proposed rule is not significant under 

Executive Order 12866. OMB bases its 

determination upon the following four 

criteria: 

a. Whether the rule will have an 

annual effect of $100 million or more on 

the economy or adversely affect an 

economic sector, productivity, jobs, the 

environment, or other units of the 

government. 

b. Whether the rule will create 

inconsistencies with other Federal 

agencies’ actions. 

c. Whether the rule will materially 

affect entitlements, grants, user fees, 

loan programs, or the rights and 

obligations of their recipients. 

d. Whether the rule raises novel legal 

or policy issues. 

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

et seq.) 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by the 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996 (Pub. L. 

104–121)), whenever an 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 (that 

is, small businesses, small 

organizations, and small government 

jurisdictions). However, no regulatory 

flexibility analysis is required if the 

head of an agency certifies the rule will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

SBREFA amended the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act to require Federal 

agencies to provide the statement of the 

factual basis for certifying that a rule 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. We have examined this rule’s 

potential effects on small entities as 

required by the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act, and have determined that this 

action will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities because the 

changes we are proposing are intended 

primarily to clarify and correct small 

problems with the published 

regulations. 

Consequently, we certify that because 

this proposed rule will not have a 

significant economic effect on a 

substantial number of small entities, a 

regulatory flexibility analysis is not 

required. 

This rule is not a major rule under the 

SBREFA (5 U.S.C. 804(2)). It will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

a. This rule does not have an annual 

effect on the economy of $100 million 

or more. There are no costs to 

permittees or any other part of the 

economy associated with these 

regulations changes. 

b. This rule will not cause a major 

increase in costs or prices for 

consumers, individual industries, 

Federal, State, or local government 

agencies, or geographic regions. The 

practice of falconry does not 

significantly affect costs or prices in any 

sector of the economy. 

c. This rule will not have significant 

adverse effects on competition, 

employment, investment, productivity, 

innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based 

enterprises to compete with foreignbased enterprises. Falconry is an 

endeavor of private individuals. Neither 

regulation nor practice of falconry 

significantly affects business activities. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

In accordance with the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et 

seq.), we have determined the following: 

a. This rule will not ‘‘significantly or 

uniquely’’ affect small governments. A 

small government agency plan is not 

required. Falconry is an endeavor of 

private individuals. Neither regulation 

nor practice of falconry affects small 

government activities in any significant 

way. 

b. This rule will not produce a 

Federal mandate of $100 million or 

greater in any year; i.e., it is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. 

Though States may have to revise their 

falconry regulations to comply with the 

proposed revisions, nearly every State 

already has falconry regulations in 

place. Therefore, revisions of the State 

regulations should not be significant. 

Takings 

In accordance with E.O. 12630, the 

rule does not have significant takings 

implications. A takings implication 

assessment is not required. This rule 

does not contain a provision for taking 

of private property. 

Federalism 

This rule does not have sufficient 

Federalism effects to warrant 

preparation of a Federalism assessment 

under E.O. 13132. It will not interfere 

with the States’ ability to manage 

themselves or their funds. No significant 

economic impacts are expected to result 

from the regulation of falconry. 

However, this rule provides the 

opportunity for States to cooperate in 

management of falconry permits and to 

ease the permitting process for permit 

applicants. 

Civil Justice Reform 

In accordance with E.O. 12988, the 

Office of the Solicitor has determined 

that the rule does not unduly burden the 

judicial system and meets the 

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

of the Order. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

We examined this rule under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. OMB 

has approved the information collection 

requirements of the Migratory Bird 

Permits Program and assigned OMB 

control number 1018–0022, which 

expires November 30, 2010. This 

regulation change does not add to the 

approved information collection. 

Information from the collection is used 

to document take of raptors from the 

wild for use in falconry and to 

document transfers of raptors held for 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 22, 2009 / Proposed Rules 36161 

falconry between permittees. A Federal 

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. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

We evaluated the environmental 

impacts of the significant changes to 

these regulations, and determined that 

the clarifications and corrections in this 

rule do not have any environmental 

impacts. Within the spirit and intent of 

the Council on Environmental Quality’s 

regulations for implementing the 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA), and other statutes, orders, and 

policies that protect fish and wildlife 

resources, we determined that these 

regulatory changes do not have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. 

Under the guidance in Appendix 1 of 

the Department of the Interior Manual at 

516 DM 2, we conclude that the 

regulatory changes are categorically 

excluded because they ‘‘have no or 

minor potential environmental impact’’ 

(516 DM 2, Appendix 1A(1)). No more 

comprehensive NEPA analysis of the 

regulations change 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), Executive 

Order 13175, and 512 DM 2, we have 

evaluated potential effects on Federally 

recognized Indian Tribes and have 

determined that this rule will not 

interfere with Tribes’ ability to manage 

themselves or their funds or to regulate 

falconry on Tribal lands. 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 

E.O. 13211 requires agencies to 

prepare Statements of Energy Effects 

when undertaking certain actions. 

Because this rule only affects the 

practice of falconry in the United States, 

it is not a significant regulatory action 

under E.O. 12866, and will not 

significantly affect energy supplies, 

distribution, or use. Therefore, this 

action is not a significant energy action 

and no Statement of Energy Effects is 

required. 

Environmental Consequences of the 

Proposed Action 

The changes we propose are primarily 

in the combining, reorganizing, and 

rewriting of the regulations. The 

environmental impacts of this action are 

limited. 

Socioeconomic. We do not expect the 

proposed action to have discernible 

socioeconomic impacts. 

Raptor populations. This rule will not 

change the effects of falconry on raptor 

populations. 

Endangered and Threatened Species. 

This proposed rule has language 

additions or changes that clarify 

protections for endangered and 

threatened species. The rule does not 

itself make any changes to those 

protections. 

Compliance With Endangered Species 

Act Requirements 

Section 7 of the Endangered Species 

Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 

U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that ‘‘The 

Secretary [of the Interior] shall review 

other programs administered by him 

and utilize such programs in 

furtherance of the purposes of this 

chapter’’ (16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(1)). It 

further states that the Secretary must 

‘‘insure that any action authorized, 

funded, or carried out * * * 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’’ (16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(2)). 

These regulatory corrections and 

clarifications would not affect 

threatened or endangered species or 

their habitats in the United States. 

List of Subjects 

50 CFR Part 21 

Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, 

Transportation, Wildlife. 

50 CFR Part 22 

Exports, Imports, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, 

Transportation, Wildlife. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, we propose to amend part 21 

of subpart C, subchapter B, chapter I, 

title 50 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations, as follows: 

PART 21—MIGRATORY BIRD PERMITS 

1. The authority citation for part 21 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 40 

Stat. 755 (16 U.S.C. 703); Public Law 95–616, 

92 Stat. 3112 (16 U.S.C. 712(2)); Public Law 

106–108, 113 Stat. 1491, Note Following 16 

U.S.C. 703. 

§ 21.3 [Amended] 

2. Amend § 21.3 in the definition of 

the term ‘‘Imprint’’ by removing the 

words ‘‘has fledged’’ and adding in their 

place the words ‘‘is fully feathered.’’ 

§ 21.29 [Amended] 

3. Amend § 21.29 as follows: 

a. Redesignate paragraphs 

(c)(3)(i)(C)(1), (2), and (3) as paragraphs 

(c)(3)(i)(C)(1), (2), and (3); 

b. Revise paragraph (c)(3)(i)(E) to read 

as set forth below; 

c. Amend paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(C) by 

removing the word ‘‘wild’’ from the first 

sentence; 

d. Amend paragraphs (c)(3)(iii)(C) and 

(c)(3)(iv)(B) by adding the words ‘‘for 

use in falconry’’ at the end of both 

paragraphs; 

e. Redesignate paragraphs 

(c)(3)(iv)(A)(1) and (2) as paragraphs 

(c)(3)(iv)(A)(1) and (2); 

f. Amend paragraph (c)(7)(i) by adding 

the words ‘‘or from another falconer’’ 

after the word ‘‘rehabilitator’’ in the first 

sentence; 

g. Amend paragraph (c)(7)(i) in the 

second sentence by removing the words 

‘‘in lieu of a’’ and adding the words ‘‘in 

addition to the’’ in their place; 

h. Amend paragraph (d)(1)(ii)(A) by 

removing the word ‘‘wild’’; 

i. Redesignate paragraphs 

(d)(1)(ii)(A)(1), (2), (3), and (4) as 

paragraphs (d)(1)(ii)(A)(1), (2), (3), and 

(4) and revise paragraph (d)(1)(ii)(A)(4) 

to read as set forth below; 

j. Redesignate paragraphs 

(d)(1)(ii)(B)(1) and (2) as paragraphs 

(d)(1)(ii)(B)(1) and (2) and paragraphs 

(d)(1)(ii)(D)(1), (2), and (3) as paragraphs 

(d)(1)(ii)(D)(1), (2), and (3); 

k. Amend paragraph (e)(1)(v) by 

adding the words ‘‘or wildlife’’ after the 

word ‘‘livestock’’ in both places where 

it occurs; 

l. Revise paragraph (e)(3)(i) to read as 

set forth below; 

m. Amend paragraphs (e)(3)(iii), 

(e)(3)(iii)(A), and (e)(3)(iii)(B) by adding 

the words ‘‘or wildlife’’ after the word 

‘‘livestock’’ wherever it occurs; 

n. Redesignate paragraphs 

(e)(3)(vi)(C)(1) and (2) as paragraphs 

(e)(3)(vi)(C)(1) and (2); 

o. Revise paragraph (f)(9)(ii) to read as 

set forth below; and 

p. Amend paragraph (g)(5)(ii) by 

removing the words ‘‘taken from the 

wild’’ and ‘‘an average of 6 months per 

year, with.’’ 

§ 21.29 Falconry standards and falconry 

permitting. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(3) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(E) You may possess a raptor of any 

Falconiform or Strigiform species except 

a Federally listed threatened or 

endangered species, a bald eagle 

(Haliaeetus leucocephalus), a whitetailed eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla), a 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
36162 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 22, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

Steller’s sea-eagle (Haliaeetus 

pelagicus), or a Golden eagle (Aquila 

chrysaetos), including wild, captivebred, or hybrid individuals of these 

species. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ii) * * * 

(A) * * * 

(4) In most cases, each raptor should 

have a pan of clean water available. 

However, this requirement is waived if 

weather conditions, the perch type 

used, or some other factor makes it 

inadvisable to have water available to 

the raptor. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(3) * * * 

(i) If you are an Apprentice Falconer, 

you may take raptors less than 1 year of 

age from the wild during any period or 

periods specified by the State, Tribe, or 

territory. You may take any species from 

the wild except any listed as a national 

Species of Conservation Concern in the 

most recent list of ‘‘Birds of 

Conservation Concern’’ from the 

Division of Migratory Bird Management, 

a bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), 

a white-tailed eagle (Haliaeetus 

albicilla), a Steller’s sea-eagle 

(Haliaeetus pelagicus), a Golden eagle 

(Aquila chrysaetos), or a Federally listed 

threatened or endangered species. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(9) * * * 

(ii) You may not use falconry raptors 

for entertainment; for advertisements; as 

a representation of any business, 

company, corporation, or other 

organization; or for promotion or 

endorsement of any products, 

merchandise, goods, services, meetings, 

or fairs, except for products related 

directly to falconry, such as hoods, 

telemetry equipment, giant hoods, 

perches, and materials for raptor 

facilities. 

* * * * * 

PART 22—EAGLE PERMITS 

4. The authority citation for part 22 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 668–668d; 16 U.S.C. 

703–712; 16 U.S.C. 1531–1544. 

§ 22.24 [Amended] 

5. Amend § 22.24(b) by adding the 

words ‘‘or wildlife’’ after the word 

‘‘livestock’’ in both places where it 

occurs. 

Dated: June 16, 2009. 

Jane Lyder, 

Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and 

Parks. 

[FR Doc. E9–16922 Filed 7–21–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1