Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed Frameworks for Early-Season Migratory Bird Hunting Regulations and Final Regulatory Alternatives for the 1997-98 Duck Hunting Season

Part IV

Department of the Interior

_______________________________________________________________________

Fish and Wildlife Service

_______________________________________________________________________

50 CFR Part 20

Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed Rule

Proposed Rules

=======================================================================

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 20

RIN 1018-AE14

Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed Frameworks for Early-Season

Migratory Bird Hunting Regulations and Final Regulatory Alternatives

for the 1997-98 Duck Hunting Season

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; Supplemental.

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

SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service (hereinafter the Service) is

proposing to establish the 1997-98 early-season hunting regulations for

certain migratory game birds. The Service annually prescribes

frameworks, or outer limits, for dates and times when hunting may occur

and the maximum number of birds that may be taken and possessed in

early seasons. Early seasons generally open prior to October 1, and

include seasons in Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands.

These frameworks are necessary to allow State selections of final

seasons and limits and to allow recreational harvest at levels

compatible with population status and habitat conditions. This

supplement to the proposed rule also provides the Service's final

regulatory alternatives for the 1997-98 duck hunting season.

DATES: The comment period for proposed early-season frameworks will end

on August 5, 1997; and for late-season proposals on September 4, 1997.

The Service will hold a public hearing on late-season regulations

August 7, 1997, starting at 9 a.m.

abitat conditions. This

supplement to the proposed rule also provides the Service's final

regulatory alternatives for the 1997-98 duck hunting season.

DATES: The comment period for proposed early-season frameworks will end

on August 5, 1997; and for late-season proposals on September 4, 1997.

The Service will hold a public hearing on late-season regulations

August 7, 1997, starting at 9 a.m.

ADDRESSES: The Service will hold a public hearing August 7 in the

Department of the Interior's Auditorium, 1849 C Street, NW.,

Washington, DC. Parties should submit written comments on these

proposals and/or a notice of intention to participate in the late-

season hearing to the Chief, Office of Migratory Bird Management

(MBMO), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, room 634--Arlington Square,

Washington, DC 20240. The public may inspect comments during normal

business hours in room 634, Arlington Square Building, 4401 N. Fairfax

Drive, Arlington, Virginia.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul R. Schmidt, Chief, MBMO, U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service, (703) 358-1714.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulations Schedule for 1997

On March 13, 1997, the Service published in the Federal Register

(62 FR 12054) a proposal to amend 50 CFR part 20. The proposal dealt

with the establishment of seasons, limits, and other regulations for

migratory game birds under Secs. 20.101 through 20.107, 20.109, and

20.110 of subpart K. On June 6, 1997, the Service published in the

Federal Register (62 FR 31298) a second document providing supplemental

proposals for early- and late-season migratory bird hunting regulations

frameworks and the proposed regulatory alternatives for the 1997-98

duck hunting season. The June 6 supplement also provided detailed

information on the 1997-98 regulatory schedule and announced the

Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee and Flyway Council

meetings

FR 31298) a second document providing supplemental

proposals for early- and late-season migratory bird hunting regulations

frameworks and the proposed regulatory alternatives for the 1997-98

duck hunting season. The June 6 supplement also provided detailed

information on the 1997-98 regulatory schedule and announced the

Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee and Flyway Council

meetings.

This document is the third in a series of proposed, supplemental,

and final rulemaking documents for migratory bird hunting regulations

and deals specifically with proposed frameworks for early-season

regulations and the final regulatory alternatives for the 1997-98 duck

hunting season. It will lead to final frameworks from which States may

select season dates, shooting hours, and daily bag and possession

limits for the 1997-98 season. The Service has considered all pertinent

comments received through July 8, 1997, in developing this document. In

addition, new proposals for certain early-season regulations are

provided for public comment. Comment periods are specified above under

DATES. The Service will publish final regulatory frameworks for early

seasons in the Federal Register on or about August 20, 1997.

This supplemental proposed rulemaking consolidates further changes

in the original framework proposals published in the March 13 Federal

Register. The regulations for early waterfowl hunting seasons proposed

in this document are based on the most current information available

about the status of waterfowl populations and habitat conditions on the

breeding grounds.

Presentations at Public Hearing

supplemental proposed rulemaking consolidates further changes

in the original framework proposals published in the March 13 Federal

Register. The regulations for early waterfowl hunting seasons proposed

in this document are based on the most current information available

about the status of waterfowl populations and habitat conditions on the

breeding grounds.

Presentations at Public Hearing

Five Service employees presented reports on the status of various

migratory bird species for which early hunting seasons are proposed.

These reports are briefly reviewed below.

Dr. John Bruggink, Eastern Shore and Upland Game Bird Specialist,

reported on the 1997 status of the American woodcock. The 1996

recruitment index for the Eastern Region (1.3 immatures per adult

female) was 24 percent below the long-term regional average; the

recruitment index for the Central Region (1.3 immatures per adult

female) also was 24 percent below the long-term regional average. No

changes (P0.1) from 1996 levels were detected in the number

of woodcock displaying during the 1997 Singing-ground Survey. Trends

from the Singing-ground Survey during 1987-97 were negative (-3.6 and -

4.4 percent per year for the Eastern and Central regions, respectively;

P<0.01). There were long-term (1968-97) declines (P<0.01) of 2.5

percent per year in the Eastern Region and 1.7 percent per year in the

Central Region.

Dr. Graham W. Smith, Chief, Population and Habitat Assessment

Section, presented information on 1997 habitat conditions for

waterfowl, preliminary estimates of duck abundance, and harvests during

the 1996 September special teal seasons. Weather conditions throughout

the north central U.S. and most of Canada were cool and moist this

spring. Palmer Drought Indices for May 1997 in the north central U.S.

and the portions of the prairie provinces of Canada indicated moderate

to extreme wetness, similar to conditions in May 1996. The pond

estimate for the north central U.S

er was abundant around their margins. In Alaska, the

breakup of ice generally was earlier than normal. However, breakup on

the North Slope was later than average. Generally, conditions in Alaska

were favorable for waterfowl. In the eastern survey area, weather in

May was wet and cool. Snow persisted into late May and early June in

some areas, and spring-like conditions were delayed by about 2

weeks. Above-average runoff inundated many habitats, and caused birds

to settle in sites less suitable for successful nesting.

This year the preliminary estimate of total ducks was a record high

at 42.6 million birds. Populations of mallard, gadwall, American

wigeon, northern shoveler, and northern pintail increased relative to

last year. Numbers of green- and blue-winged teal, redhead, canvasback,

and scaup were similar to those of last year. Of these species, all but

northern pintail and scaup are above long-term averages. The

preliminary estimate of the size of the blue-winged teal population

this spring is 6.1 million birds, compared to 6.4 million last year.

The 1997 estimate is the second highest recorded, and is 44 percent

above the long-term average. The 1996 September teal season in the

Mississippi and Central Flyways resulted in the harvest of about

430,000 blue-winged teal, the second consecutive year of record-high

harvest for the teal season. The harvest estimate is about 150,000

birds higher than during the 1970's and early 1980's, a period with

teal seasons and relatively liberal hunting regulations. However, band-

recovery information suggests that harvest rates of blue-winged teal

during 1996-97 were similar to or lower than those which occurred

during the 1970's and early 1980's.

Mr. David Sharp, Central Flyway Representative, reported on the

status and harvests of sandhill cranes. The Mid-Continent Population

appears to have stabilized following dramatic increases in the early

1980's

However, band-

recovery information suggests that harvest rates of blue-winged teal

during 1996-97 were similar to or lower than those which occurred

during the 1970's and early 1980's.

Mr. David Sharp, Central Flyway Representative, reported on the

status and harvests of sandhill cranes. The Mid-Continent Population

appears to have stabilized following dramatic increases in the early

1980's. The Central Platte River Valley 1997 preliminary spring index,

uncorrected for visibility, was 357,248. This index is 12 percent

higher than 1996's index of 318,514. The photo-corrected 3-year average

for the 1994-96 period was 441,127, which was also 12 percent above the

previous year's 3-year running average and within the established

population-objective range of 343,000-465,000 cranes. All Central

Flyway States, except Nebraska, elected to allow crane hunting in

portions of their respective States in 1996-97; about 21,300 Federal

permits were issued and approximately 7,300 permittees hunted one or

more times. The number of permittees and active hunters were similar to

the previous year's seasons. About 17,030 cranes were harvested in

1996-97, a 17 percent decrease from the previous year's record high

estimate. Harvests from Alaska, Canada and Mexico are estimated to be

less than 10,000 for 1996-97 sport-hunting seasons. The total North

American sport harvest was estimated to be about 29,808. The fall pre-

migration survey for the Rocky Mountain Population was 16,938, which is

6 percent larger than the 1995 estimate. Limited special seasons were

held during 1996 in portions of Arizona, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico,

Utah, and Wyoming, and resulted in an estimated harvest of 448 cranes.

Mr. James R. Kelley, Jr., Wildlife Biologist, reviewed the status

of several populations of Canada geese for which the Service is

proposing September seasons. In Alaska, five subspecies of Canada geese

are hunted including Dusky Canada geese and Cackling Canada geese

1996 in portions of Arizona, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico,

Utah, and Wyoming, and resulted in an estimated harvest of 448 cranes.

Mr. James R. Kelley, Jr., Wildlife Biologist, reviewed the status

of several populations of Canada geese for which the Service is

proposing September seasons. In Alaska, five subspecies of Canada geese

are hunted including Dusky Canada geese and Cackling Canada geese.

Numbers of Dusky Canada geese, which nest primarily in the Copper River

Delta of Alaska, have declined steadily since an earthquake in 1964

altered their nesting habitat and resulted in lowered recruitment

rates. The January 1995 population index revealed approximately 8,500

geese. Unfortunately, no survey was conducted in January 1996. In 1997,

new methodologies were utilized to develop an index to this population.

The index from the new method indicated 11,200 geese in January 1997.

It should be noted that the 1995 and 1997 estimates are not directly

comparable due to differences in methodologies. The Service remains

concerned about the continued poor status of this population. The

December 1996 survey of Cackling Canada geese could not be completed

due to weather and logistical problems. However, this population grew

at a rate of approximately 14 percent per year during 1986-95. The 3

other subspecies of Canada geese hunted in Alaska are thought to be at

or above objective levels. In the Pacific Flyway, the Rocky Mountain

Population of Canada geese decreased 19 percent from 1996 to a level of

91,700 geese. The December 1996 composite index of Great Plains and

Western Prairie Populations of Canada geese in the Central Flyway was

453,400 birds, which represents a 12 percent increase from 1995. The

population of Mississippi Flyway giant Canada geese has increased at a

rate of about 5 percent per year during the last 10 years. In some

areas, numbers of giant geese have increased to record-high levels

e December 1996 composite index of Great Plains and

Western Prairie Populations of Canada geese in the Central Flyway was

453,400 birds, which represents a 12 percent increase from 1995. The

population of Mississippi Flyway giant Canada geese has increased at a

rate of about 5 percent per year during the last 10 years. In some

areas, numbers of giant geese have increased to record-high levels. The

situation is similar in the northeastern U.S., where the ``resident''

goose population has more than doubled since 1989 to nearly 933,000

birds. The Service is concerned about the rapid growth rate and large

sizes of resident Canada goose populations in parts of the Atlantic and

Mississippi Flyways. In some regions, the management of these large

populations of resident geese is confounded by the presence of other

populations, which are below population objectives. A case in point is

the migratory population of Atlantic Canada geese which nests in

northern Quebec and winters in the Atlantic Flyway. The number of

breeding pairs of Atlantic Canada geese declined from 118,000 in 1988

to only 29,000 in 1995. In 1996 the number of breeding pairs increased

58 percent to a level of 46,000. The Service recognizes the challenge

facing management agencies which are striving to increase migrant

populations, while simultaneously attempting to control resident

populations.

Mr. David Dolton, Western Shore and Upland Game Bird Biologist,

presented the mourning dove population status. The report summarized

call-count information gathered over the past 32 years. Trends were

calculated for the most recent 2 and 10-year intervals and for the

entire 32-year period. Between 1996 and 1997, the average number of

doves heard per route declined in the Eastern Management Unit and

increased in the Central Unit. No change was evident in the Western

Management Unit. Over the most recent 10 years, significant downward

trends were found in dove populations in the Eastern and Central Units

r the most recent 2 and 10-year intervals and for the

entire 32-year period. Between 1996 and 1997, the average number of

doves heard per route declined in the Eastern Management Unit and

increased in the Central Unit. No change was evident in the Western

Management Unit. Over the most recent 10 years, significant downward

trends were found in dove populations in the Eastern and Central Units.

No trend was indicated for the Western Unit. Over the entire 32-year

period, a significant downward trend was found in the Central and

Western Units while no trend was indicated in the Eastern Unit.

Mr. Dolton also presented the status of white-winged doves. In

Arizona, the 1997 call-count index of 31.0 doves heard per route was

essentially the same as the index of 31.1 doves per route in 1996. In

the Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas, the total number of whitewings

estimated to be breeding in Cameron, Willacy, Hidalgo, and Starr

counties was about 389,000. This is about the same as the 1996 estimate

of 392,000. Additionally, about 24,000 whitewings were estimated to be

nesting in West Texas, 67,000 in the Lake Corpus Christi area, and

635,000 nesting throughout a 13-county area in Upper South Texas.

Whitewings are continuing to increase in density and distribution. For

example, in San Antonio, whitewing numbers have gone from 174,000 in

1989 to 271,000 in 1997. The remainder of South Texas has increased

from 95,000 in 1989 to 364,000 in 1997. New sightings of whitewings

have been reported during the past year in Wichita Falls and Amarillo.

Last year, whitewings were 60 miles south of Wichita Falls and about

100 miles south of Amarillo.

nd distribution. For

example, in San Antonio, whitewing numbers have gone from 174,000 in

1989 to 271,000 in 1997. The remainder of South Texas has increased

from 95,000 in 1989 to 364,000 in 1997. New sightings of whitewings

have been reported during the past year in Wichita Falls and Amarillo.

Last year, whitewings were 60 miles south of Wichita Falls and about

100 miles south of Amarillo.

Next, Mr. Dolton reported on white-tipped doves in Texas. In 1997,

an average of 0.61 whitetips were heard per stop on 348 rural brush

locations. This is 28 percent below that recorded in 1996.

Last, Mr. Dolton presented information on band-tailed pigeons. For

the Coastal Population, the Breeding Bird Survey indicated that there

was a significant decline between 1968 and 1996. There has also been a

significant decline over the most recent 10-year period, 1986-96. Late

August mineral spring counts conducted in Oregon at 10 selected sites

indicated that the pigeon population decreased 1 percent between 1995

and 1996 from 9,753 to 8,874. Washington's call-count survey showed a

nonsignificant increase of 36 percent between 1995 and 1996. A

nonsignificant decline is evident in the population from 1975-96.

However, there has been a significant increase over the most recent 5

years, 1992-96. Bag limits and season lengths continue to be

restricted. In Oregon, the 1995 harvest estimate was 2,100 birds while,

in California, it was 18,300. For the Interior Population, Breeding

Bird Survey data indicated a stable population between 1968 and 1996

with no trend being evident. The same was true for the most recent 10-

year period. The combined harvest for the Four-corners States in 1996

was 723 birds. This was less than the 1,600 taken in 1995 and well

below the harvest in earlier years which ranged up to 6,000 birds.

Comments Received at Public Hearing

ation, Breeding

Bird Survey data indicated a stable population between 1968 and 1996

with no trend being evident. The same was true for the most recent 10-

year period. The combined harvest for the Four-corners States in 1996

was 723 birds. This was less than the 1,600 taken in 1995 and well

below the harvest in earlier years which ranged up to 6,000 birds.

Comments Received at Public Hearing

Bill Goudy, representing the Ruffed Grouse Society, commented that

the Service's recommendation regarding woodcock was disturbing because

of the potential loss of hunting opportunity. He believed that the data

used to make the decision were flawed, therefore any decision based on

these data was also flawed. He further commented that the proposed

reduction in the daily bag limit was not a serious concern for most

hunters, but that States such as Minnesota and Michigan will be

concerned about the framework opening date. He urged the Service to

consider allowing States the use of zoning to lessen the impact

associated with the proposed reduction in days.

Charles Kelley, Director of the Game and Fish Division of the

Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, commended the

Service for the implementation of a youth waterfowl hunting day. He

further asked that the Service work with the States to address the

woodcock habitat problem.

Written Comments Received

The preliminary proposed rulemaking, which appeared in the March 13

Federal Register, opened the public comment period for migratory game

bird hunting regulations. The supplemental proposed rule, which

appeared in the June 6 Federal Register, defined the public comment

period for the Service's proposed regulatory alternatives for the 1997-

98 duck hunting season. The public comment period for the proposed

alternatives ended July 3, 1997. Early-season comments and comments

pertaining to the proposed regulatory alternatives are summarized below

and numbered in the order used in the March 13 Federal Register

e June 6 Federal Register, defined the public comment

period for the Service's proposed regulatory alternatives for the 1997-

98 duck hunting season. The public comment period for the proposed

alternatives ended July 3, 1997. Early-season comments and comments

pertaining to the proposed regulatory alternatives are summarized below

and numbered in the order used in the March 13 Federal Register. Only

the numbered items pertaining to early seasons items and the proposed

regulatory alternatives for which written comments were received are

included.

The Service received recommendations from all four Flyway Councils.

Some recommendations supported continuation of last year's frameworks.

Due to the comprehensive nature of the annual review of the frameworks

performed by the Councils, support for continuation of last year's

frameworks is assumed for items for which no recommendations were

received. Council recommendations for changes in the frameworks are

summarized below.

General

Written Comments: Several individuals from Tennessee and

Mississippi recommended either a noon or 1:00 p.m. closing time for

duck hunting, citing positive benefits to the duck population and law

enforcement.

An individual from Minnesota urged elimination of the 4:00 p.m.

closing time in Minnesota.

1. Ducks

The categories used to discuss issues related to duck harvest

management are as follows: (A) General Harvest Strategy, (B) Framework

Dates, (C) Season Length, (D) Closed Seasons, (E) Bag Limits, (F) Zones

and Split Seasons, and (G) Special Seasons/Species Management. Only

those categories containing substantial recommendations are included

below.

A. Harvest Strategy Considerations

1. Ducks

The categories used to discuss issues related to duck harvest

management are as follows: (A) General Harvest Strategy, (B) Framework

Dates, (C) Season Length, (D) Closed Seasons, (E) Bag Limits, (F) Zones

and Split Seasons, and (G) Special Seasons/Species Management. Only

those categories containing substantial recommendations are included

below.

A. Harvest Strategy Considerations

On March 13, 1997, the Service published for public comment

recommendations from the Adaptive Harvest Management (AHM) technical

working group regarding modification of the regulatory alternatives for

duck hunting (62 FR 12054). On June 6, 1997, the Service published the

proposed regulatory alternatives for the 1997-98 duck hunting season

(62 FR 31298). Significant proposed changes from the alternatives

utilized in 1996-97 included: (1) addition of a ``very restrictive''

alternative; (2) additional days and a higher total-duck daily bag

limit in the ``moderate'' and ``liberal'' alternatives; and (3) an

increase in the daily bag limit of hen mallards in the ``moderate'' and

``liberal'' alternatives.

Council Recommendations: All four Flyway Councils generally

endorsed the regulatory alternatives recommended by the AHM technical

working group that were identified in the March 13, 1997, Federal

Register. Modifications recommended by the Councils were identified and

discussed in the June 6, 1997, Federal Register. The recommendations

are reiterated below and modified where necessary based on subsequent

comments received from the Flyway Councils.

The Atlantic Flyway Council originally endorsed the four regulatory

alternatives for the Atlantic Flyway, with the exception of the total

duck bag limit and hen mallard bag limit restrictions (see further

discussion in E. Bag Limits)

6, 1997, Federal Register. The recommendations

are reiterated below and modified where necessary based on subsequent

comments received from the Flyway Councils.

The Atlantic Flyway Council originally endorsed the four regulatory

alternatives for the Atlantic Flyway, with the exception of the total

duck bag limit and hen mallard bag limit restrictions (see further

discussion in E. Bag Limits). In a subsequent letter, the Council

expressed preference for the AHM working group's originally recommended

overall daily bag limits (with the exception of hen mallard

restrictions) over those proposed by the Service in the June 6 Federal

Register. The Council considers the 1997-98 alternatives as interim

pending the final development and experimentation with population

models for eastern mallards. However, the Council was not opposed to

holding these alternatives constant for a period of years once a

satisfactory set of alternatives is developed for the Flyway.

The Upper- and Lower-Region Regulations Committees of the

Mississippi Flyway Council endorsed the regulatory alternatives for the

Mississippi Flyway for the 1997-98 season, with the Lower-Region

Regulations Committee also recommending an experimental later framework

closing date (see further discussion in B. Framework Dates).

The Central Flyway Council endorsed the regulatory alternatives

with the exception of recommending a harvest strategy for pintails and

an earlier framework opening date for northern states (see further

discussions in B. Framework Dates and G. Special Seasons/Species

Management, ii. Pintails).

The Pacific Flyway Council endorsed the working group's recommended

alternatives with several modifications. The Council recommended minor

changes in season length and the hen mallard bag limit and adoption of

an interim pintail harvest strategy (see further discussion in C.

Season Length, E. Bag Limits and G. Special Seasons/Species Management,

ii. Pintails).

ies

Management, ii. Pintails).

The Pacific Flyway Council endorsed the working group's recommended

alternatives with several modifications. The Council recommended minor

changes in season length and the hen mallard bag limit and adoption of

an interim pintail harvest strategy (see further discussion in C.

Season Length, E. Bag Limits and G. Special Seasons/Species Management,

ii. Pintails).

Public-Hearing Comments: Mr. Robert McDowell, representing the

Atlantic Flyway Council, conveyed the Flyway's commitment to Adaptive

Harvest Management and endorsed the Service's regulatory packages for

1997. However, he asked that the packages for the Atlantic Flyway be

considered interim until the completion of eastern mallard models in

1998. Further, he asked that the Service consider dropping the hen

restriction on mallards for the liberal package since there is no

historical precedent in the Atlantic Flyway and no biological data to

suggest that there would be any negative impacts to the mallard

population.

Written Comments: The New Jersey Division of Fish, Game and

Wildlife (New Jersey) endorsed the Service's proposed alternatives for

the 1997-98 season with the total daily bag limits (with the exception

of hen mallard restrictions) originally recommended by the AHM working

group. New Jersey considers the 1997-98 alternatives as interim pending

the final development and experimentation with population models for

eastern mallards. However, New Jersey was not opposed to holding these

alternatives constant for a period of years once a satisfactory set for

the Flyway is agreed upon.

The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (Minnesota) and the

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources supported the alternatives

proposed by the AHM technical working group

nd experimentation with population models for

eastern mallards. However, New Jersey was not opposed to holding these

alternatives constant for a period of years once a satisfactory set for

the Flyway is agreed upon.

The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (Minnesota) and the

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources supported the alternatives

proposed by the AHM technical working group. Minnesota's support of the

alternatives is based on their firm support of the AHM process, which

should bring more science, better decisions and less politics into the

regulations-setting process, although they believe that the proposed

``liberal'' alternative essentially changes the allocation of harvest,

providing additional opportunity to mid-latitude and southern States

while limiting Minnesota hunter opportunities due to typical freeze-up

dates.

The Missouri Department of Conservation (Missouri) supported the

working group's recommendations and further supported any change among

the various options that provided a consistent, science-based approach

to waterfowl management. Missouri further commented that the strengths

of AHM are the shared objectives and improved use of available

information. Missouri believes that State and region-specific proposals

generated outside the AHM process jeopardize these improvements in the

decision-making process. In a subsequent comment, Missouri expressed

belief that the Service's June 6 Federal Register was a balance among

State and Flyway preferences and that no set of regulatory alternatives

would provide the degree of resource protection desired by some or the

amount of hunting opportunity preferred by others. They further hoped

that the Service and the Flyways could continue to address the priority

needs for AHM without allowing distractions such as frameworks, zones/

split seasons and special seasons to stall progress.

The South Carolina Department of Natural Resources supported the

AHM working group's recommended alternatives

ired by some or the

amount of hunting opportunity preferred by others. They further hoped

that the Service and the Flyways could continue to address the priority

needs for AHM without allowing distractions such as frameworks, zones/

split seasons and special seasons to stall progress.

The South Carolina Department of Natural Resources supported the

AHM working group's recommended alternatives.

The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (Texas) requested that the

Service extend the comment period on the regulatory alternatives to

allow the four Flyway Councils time to meet and reflect on the proposed

options, as well as discuss their respective interests in future AHM

priorities. Texas believes that the guidance and support from the

Central Flyway Council to the Service will improve when the Council has

the opportunity to meet again and review the options.

The Indiana Department of Natural Resources affirmed their approval

of the proposed alternatives for the 1997-98 season. They believed that

the alternatives were biologically sound and should aid in providing a

better understanding of the impacts of regulations on harvest. They

further felt that any changes to the alternatives that could affect the

predictive capability of the models would not be in the best interest

of the AHM process at this time.

Governor Kirk Fordice of Mississippi supported the recommendations

of the Lower-Region Regulations Committee of the Mississippi Flyway

Council. He further supported the ``liberal'' alternative's days and

bag limit but was concerned that the alternative offered little

additional benefits to extreme northern States and extreme southern

States, while providing additional benefits to mid-latitude States.

The North American Waterfowl Federation (NAWF) supported the

development and implementation of AHM in setting waterfowl regulations

but did not support the proposed liberalizations regarding increases in

season lengths and bag limits

ternative offered little

additional benefits to extreme northern States and extreme southern

States, while providing additional benefits to mid-latitude States.

The North American Waterfowl Federation (NAWF) supported the

development and implementation of AHM in setting waterfowl regulations

but did not support the proposed liberalizations regarding increases in

season lengths and bag limits. NAWF believed that extensive changes

were premature and did not provide adequate consideration for

population impacts. NAWF pointed out that several species of waterfowl

had not yet reached population goals and that additional harvest did

not appear justified. NAWF was also not aware of any initiative or

substantial interest among the duck hunting public for an expansion of

hunting opportunities and questioned whether the interests of hunters

were being represented.

The Delta Wildlife Foundation and the Delta Outfitters Association

of Mississippi and the Alabama Waterfowl Association expressed support

for the recommendations of the Lower-Region Regulations Committee of

the Mississippi Flyway Council.

The Louisiana Wildlife Federation supported the establishment of a

``more'' or ``most'' liberal alternative for those years when duck

reproduction was high and the population could support additional

harvest.

Delta Waterfowl strongly supported the utilization of AHM in the

setting of waterfowl regulations and complimented the Service for

developing a process driven by biological parameters. Delta Waterfowl

supported the addition of a ``very restrictive'' alternative and the

total bag limit increases under the ``moderate'' and ``liberal''

alternatives. However, they did not support the proposed season-length

increases for the ``moderate'' and ``liberal'' alternatives, citing

concern for species such as pintail and scaup, the growing discrepancy

with harvest distribution between northern and southern regions of the

flyways, and the lack of interest in such changes from the hunting

public

under the ``moderate'' and ``liberal''

alternatives. However, they did not support the proposed season-length

increases for the ``moderate'' and ``liberal'' alternatives, citing

concern for species such as pintail and scaup, the growing discrepancy

with harvest distribution between northern and southern regions of the

flyways, and the lack of interest in such changes from the hunting

public.

The Nevada Waterfowl Association suggested that most hunters would

prefer lower bag limits with no species restrictions instead of more

liberal bag limits and season lengths.

The LaCrosse County Conservation Alliance of Wisconsin recommended

that the four alternatives consist of season lengths/bag limits of 30/

3, 40/4, 50/5, and 60/6.

The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) strongly opposed the

increased bag limits in the ``moderate'' and ``liberal'' alternatives

and the addition of a fourth alternative, ``very restrictive''. HSUS

believed these proposals were designed to stimulate hunter interest,

maximize license sales, and satisfy state wildlife management agencies.

Several individuals from Louisiana fully supported the proposed

alternatives.

Several individuals from Alabama expressed support for the

recommendations of the Lower Region Regulations Committee of the

Mississippi Flyway Council.

Several individuals from Alabama, Colorado, Illinois, Michigan,

Minnesota, Mississippi and Wisconsin believed that the AHM process was

far too liberal with respect to the proposed bag limits and season

lengths. They believed that these frameworks were ill-advised,

inappropriate, and short-sighted. Another individual from Minnesota

questioned the AHM process, citing the fact that harvest had increased

each year under AHM. He further questioned the need for a ``super-

liberal'' alternative and believed that States would be unwilling to

actually use the ``conservative'' alternative

and season

lengths. They believed that these frameworks were ill-advised,

inappropriate, and short-sighted. Another individual from Minnesota

questioned the AHM process, citing the fact that harvest had increased

each year under AHM. He further questioned the need for a ``super-

liberal'' alternative and believed that States would be unwilling to

actually use the ``conservative'' alternative.

Individuals from Alabama, Tennessee and Louisiana expressed support

for the ``liberal'' alternative, while other commenters from California

and Kansas supported any expansion of hunting opportunity.

Several individuals from Minnesota and one individual from

Louisiana suggested keeping the ``liberal'' alternative at 50 days with

a 5-bird daily bag limit. Other commenters from Arkansas, California,

Iowa, Kentucky, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin preferred longer

seasons and smaller daily bag limits to current seasons and higher bag

limits.

An individual from Minnesota urged support for a 30- to 40-day

season and a 3- to 5-bird daily bag limit, depending on water

conditions.

The California Waterfowl Association supported the addition of a

``very restrictive'' alternative and proposals for extended season

lengths under the ``moderate'' and ``liberal'' alternatives.

An individual from Kansas strongly supported the addition of a

``very restrictive'' alternative as a management tool, while a

commenter from California believed that this alternative was critical

to maintaining wetland habitat in California. Another commenter from

Tennessee questioned the need for a fourth alternative.

Individuals from Oregon and Tennessee were concerned about

potential increases in mallard harvest given the population status of

mallards and recent season liberalizations.

Several individuals from Ohio, California, and Pennsylvania opposed

all increases in either daily bag limits or season lengths on moral

grounds, with some calling for overall reductions in hunting

opportunities

ernative.

Individuals from Oregon and Tennessee were concerned about

potential increases in mallard harvest given the population status of

mallards and recent season liberalizations.

Several individuals from Ohio, California, and Pennsylvania opposed

all increases in either daily bag limits or season lengths on moral

grounds, with some calling for overall reductions in hunting

opportunities.

Service Response: For the 1997-98 regular duck hunting season, the

Service will utilize the four regulatory alternatives detailed in the

accompanying table. Alternatives are specified for each Flyway and are

designated as ``VERY RES'' for the very restrictive, ``RES'' for the

restrictive, ``MOD'' for the moderate, and ``LIB'' for the liberal

alternative. The Service is convinced that these alternatives will be

successful at providing maximum hunting opportunity, while not

jeopardizing the ability of duck species to attain population goals

when habitat conditions are adequate. The Service will propose a

specific regulatory alternative when survey data on waterfowl

population and habitat status are available.

B. Framework Dates

Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council was concerned

that extensions of framework dates had the potential to affect all

States in all Flyways, including reducing the frequency with which

``liberal'' and ``moderate'' regulatory alternatives would be selected.

They were also concerned that the traditional allocation of duck

harvest in the U.S. could be altered. They strongly urged the Service

to seek a thorough and scientific review by each Flyway Council before

taking any action on framework modifications.

The Lower-Region Regulations Committee of the Mississippi Flyway

Council recommended the Service allow an experimental January 31

framework closing date, as long as it does not affect regulations/

framework alternatives in non-participatory States

hey strongly urged the Service

to seek a thorough and scientific review by each Flyway Council before

taking any action on framework modifications.

The Lower-Region Regulations Committee of the Mississippi Flyway

Council recommended the Service allow an experimental January 31

framework closing date, as long as it does not affect regulations/

framework alternatives in non-participatory States.

The Central Flyway Council recommended a framework opening date of

the Saturday nearest September 23 in North Dakota, South Dakota,

Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, and Nebraska.

Written Comments: The State of North Dakota provided a concurrent

resolution urging the Service to adopt a framework opening date of

September 20.

The Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources

recommended a framework closing date of January 31 under the

``liberal'' and ``moderate'' alternatives. In lieu of this option, they

suggested an experimental season of 3 to 5 years for a limited number

of States in order to determine any resulting detrimental effects from

the later framework closing date.

The Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, the Alabama

Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, and the Mississippi

Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Parks supported the

recommendation of the Lower-Region Regulations Committee of the

Mississippi Flyway Council for extending the framework closing date to

January 31 for the 1997-98 hunting season. They believed that this was

an excellent opportunity for the Service to conduct a study regarding

the framework extension. In a subsequent letter, they supported the

``liberal'' alternative's days and bag limit, but were very concerned

that the alternative offered little additional benefit to extreme

northern States and extreme southern States, while providing additional

benefit to mid-latitude States

ved that this was

an excellent opportunity for the Service to conduct a study regarding

the framework extension. In a subsequent letter, they supported the

``liberal'' alternative's days and bag limit, but were very concerned

that the alternative offered little additional benefit to extreme

northern States and extreme southern States, while providing additional

benefit to mid-latitude States. They estimated that a January 31

framework closing date would result in, at most, an increased harvest

of 18,500 mallards in Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi. Lastly, they

believe that present framework dates do not afford their hunters the

same hunting opportunities as hunters in mid-latitude States because

their States do not have the opportunity to select a hunting season

that coincides with the greatest number of birds available to the

hunting public.

Senators Trent Lott and Thad Cochran of Mississippi urged support

for extending the framework closing date to January 31 in Mississippi

with the same number of days and bag limit as other States in the

Mississippi Flyway.

Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama urged support for extending the

framework closing date to January 31 in Alabama. Senator Shelby

believed the current season deprives Alabama hunters of their best

opportunity to harvest ducks.

Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana supported the recommendation of

the Lower-Region Regulations Committee of the Mississippi Flyway

Council for extending the framework closing date to January 31 for the

1997-98 hunting season.

Representatives Bennie G. Thompson, Mike Parker, Gene Taylor,

Charles Pickering, and Roger Wicker of Mississippi supported the

recommendation of the Lower-Region Regulations Committee of the

Mississippi Flyway Council for extending the framework closing date to

January 31 with the same number of days and bag limit as other States

in the Mississippi Flyway.

The Mississippi State Senate adopted a resolution urging the

Mississippi U.S

arker, Gene Taylor,

Charles Pickering, and Roger Wicker of Mississippi supported the

recommendation of the Lower-Region Regulations Committee of the

Mississippi Flyway Council for extending the framework closing date to

January 31 with the same number of days and bag limit as other States

in the Mississippi Flyway.

The Mississippi State Senate adopted a resolution urging the

Mississippi U.S. Congressional Delegation to express to the Service the

need and support for a duck hunting framework closing date of January

31 for the Mississippi Flyway. The resolution stated that peak duck

populations in Mississippi occur from late December through January, a

January 31 framework closing date would not adversely impact the

survival rate of ducks, and Mississippi hunters were denied the same

opportunity to hunt ducks afforded to hunters in the northern and

central portions of the Mississippi Flyway.

State Representatives Dick Livingston and Tom Cameron and State

Senators

Lynn Posey and Neely Carlton of Mississippi requested a January 31

framework closing date for the Lower Region of the Mississippi Flyway

beginning in the 1997-98 hunting season.

State Representative Michael J. Michot of Louisiana requested a

January 31 framework closing date for Louisiana for the 1997-98 hunting

season.

Governor Kirk Fordice of Mississippi requested a January 31

framework closing date for the Lower Region of the Mississippi Flyway

beginning in the 1997-98 hunting season. Governor Fordice stated that

the present framework does not afford Mississippi hunters the same

hunting opportunities as hunters in mid-latitude States since

Mississippi does not have the opportunity to hunt when the greatest

number of birds are available to the hunting public.

The City of Grenada, Mississippi, urged consideration of a season

ending after the first week in February so as to allow Mississippi

hunters the same hunting opportunities afforded other States in the

Mississippi Flyway

opportunities as hunters in mid-latitude States since

Mississippi does not have the opportunity to hunt when the greatest

number of birds are available to the hunting public.

The City of Grenada, Mississippi, urged consideration of a season

ending after the first week in February so as to allow Mississippi

hunters the same hunting opportunities afforded other States in the

Mississippi Flyway.

The Delta Wildlife Foundation of Mississippi supported the

recommendations of the Lower-Region Regulations Committee of the

Mississippi Flyway Council for extending the framework closing date to

January 31 for the 1997-98 hunting season. They supported the

``liberal'' alternative's days and bag limit, but were concerned that

the alternative offered little additional benefits to extreme northern

States and extreme southern States, while providing additional benefits

to mid-latitude States. They estimated that a January 31 framework

closing date would result in, at most, an increased harvest of 18,500

mallards in Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi. Lastly, they believe

that the present framework does not afford their hunters the same

hunting opportunities as hunters in mid-latitude States since their

States do not have the opportunity to select a hunting season that

coincides with the greatest number of birds available to the hunting

public.

The Mississippi Wildlife Federation expressed support for a later

framework closing date in January, citing the fact that Mississippi

overwinters the third largest number of waterfowl in the Mississippi

Flyway, but only ranks 11th out of 14 States in the Flyway in waterfowl

harvest.

The Delta Outfitters Association of Mississippi requested that a

January 31 framework closing date be approved for the Lower Region of

the Mississippi Flyway beginning with the 1997-98 hunting season.

The Alabama Waterfowl Association supported a January 31 framework

closing date in Alabama

l in the Mississippi

Flyway, but only ranks 11th out of 14 States in the Flyway in waterfowl

harvest.

The Delta Outfitters Association of Mississippi requested that a

January 31 framework closing date be approved for the Lower Region of

the Mississippi Flyway beginning with the 1997-98 hunting season.

The Alabama Waterfowl Association supported a January 31 framework

closing date in Alabama.

One hundred and eighty-three individual commenters and 128

petitioners from Mississippi recommended either a later framework

closing date or an extension to January 31. Most commenters believed

the majority of waterfowl do not arrive in Mississippi until mid- to

late-January after the current season closes. Further, many cited the

opinion that due to the Service's unfair frameworks policy, southern

waterfowlers are not given the same hunting opportunities as those

given to hunters in northern States.

Twenty-three individuals and 11 petitioners from Mississippi

recommended a framework closing date extension to February 9. Three

individuals from Mississippi recommended a season running through the

middle of February.

Thirty-three individuals and eight petitioners from Alabama urged

the Service to extend the framework closing date to at least January 31

in Alabama.

The Louisiana Wildlife Federation supported modifying the framework

closing date to allow hunting through the last weekend in January,

provided that the late-season disturbance was not shown to be an

impediment to the overall population or to achieving the NAWMP goals.

Twenty-six individuals from Louisiana recommended a duck hunting season

closing either at the end of January or in early February.

Commenters from Tennessee also requested a later framework closing

date. Three individuals urged the Service to extend the framework

closing date to at least January 31 in Tennessee while four other

individuals thought the season should be extended until the end of

February

individuals from Louisiana recommended a duck hunting season

closing either at the end of January or in early February.

Commenters from Tennessee also requested a later framework closing

date. Three individuals urged the Service to extend the framework

closing date to at least January 31 in Tennessee while four other

individuals thought the season should be extended until the end of

February. One individual simply requested later seasons, while another

suggested changing the framework closing date to either the Sunday

nearest January 20 or January 20, whichever was later.

Individuals from other States also requested modifications to the

framework dates. Individuals in Ohio, Texas, and Virginia recommended a

closing date of January 31, while commenters in California, New Jersey,

and Florida asked for the season to end later. Individuals in

Washington and California recommended closing dates in mid- to late

February. Three individuals in Michigan and Minnesota requested a

framework opening date of the last Saturday in September rather than

the Saturday nearest October 1.

An individual from Montana questioned the Service's conclusions

regarding the Iowa early duck season. Specifically, he questioned

whether looking at total season harvest was the best way to evaluate

the effects of Iowa's experimental seasons (1979-84).

The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (Minnesota) expressed

serious concerns about the proposals to extend framework opening and

closing dates, stating that the proposed changes would alter the

current distribution of duck harvest within and among Flyways.

Minnesota commented that shifting hunting opportunity further to the

south through a framework extension would be unacceptable to Minnesota

and would allow a reallocation of harvest by default.

The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (Wisconsin) did not

support modification of the frameworks at this time

ges would alter the

current distribution of duck harvest within and among Flyways.

Minnesota commented that shifting hunting opportunity further to the

south through a framework extension would be unacceptable to Minnesota

and would allow a reallocation of harvest by default.

The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (Wisconsin) did not

support modification of the frameworks at this time. Wisconsin stated,

however, that if the Service were to seriously consider changing the

framework closing date, it must also consider changes to the framework

opening date. Wisconsin believed that extending the framework date to

the end of January without modifying the opening framework dates would

only serve to widen the gap in hunting opportunities currently offered

in the Mississippi Flyway. Wisconsin further recommended that the

Service establish a timetable and a process to allow a thorough

discussion of the implications of framework modification for all

Flyways.

Although supporting the proposed alternatives, the Missouri

Department of Conservation (Missouri) believed the 1996-97 regulations

provided excellent hunting opportunity and would prefer retaining these

options rather than any additional wholesale changes in frameworks.

Missouri was concerned that the potential biological impacts of

framework extensions had not been adequately considered and that a

rigorous evaluation would be necessary. Missouri further believed that

this was not a high priority for AHM at this time and questioned

whether issues of harvest allocation should even be a part of the AHM

process, stating that these issues were largely social, not technical.

In a subsequent comment letter, Missouri was pleased that the Service

adopted the AHM working group's recommendations concerning framework

dates and agreed with the assessment that issues of harvest, allocation

of hunting opportunity, and biological impacts must be addressed when

considering future framework proposals

AHM

process, stating that these issues were largely social, not technical.

In a subsequent comment letter, Missouri was pleased that the Service

adopted the AHM working group's recommendations concerning framework

dates and agreed with the assessment that issues of harvest, allocation

of hunting opportunity, and biological impacts must be addressed when

considering future framework proposals. Missouri continued to question

whether frameworks were among the most pressing needs for AHM at this

time.

The Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries opposed any

lengthening of the season framework as proposed by the Central Flyway

Council and Lower-Region Regulations Committee of the Mississippi

Flyway Council. Although sympathetic with the desire of these Flyways

to maximize hunting opportunities, they felt that a change of this

magnitude requires a thorough review and discussion of the implication

for all flyways.

The Georgia Department of Natural Resources voiced concern over the

framework extensions proposed by the Central Flyway Council and Lower-

Region Regulations Committee of the Mississippi Flyway Council. They

believed the increase in the harvest due to the extended frameworks and

the potential that this action would lead to more restrictive and

variable harvest strategies throughout all Flyways was inappropriate.

They further urged the Service to adhere to the 1996 joint Flyway

Council recommendation to maintain traditional allocation of hunting

opportunities when considering changes to regulatory alternatives. They

were also concerned about the potential effect of framework extensions

on other species of ducks, such as wood ducks and black ducks and that

the potential effects on other species should be closely weighed before

considering any framework changes

lyway

Council recommendation to maintain traditional allocation of hunting

opportunities when considering changes to regulatory alternatives. They

were also concerned about the potential effect of framework extensions

on other species of ducks, such as wood ducks and black ducks and that

the potential effects on other species should be closely weighed before

considering any framework changes. They requested the Service review

framework extensions in a thorough and scientific manner and that the

issue receive a thorough review through the Flyway Council process

before any changes are considered or implemented.

The Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission (Florida)

supported the Service's decision not to extend framework closing dates

for the 1997-98 season. Florida further commented that if framework

dates were extended, those extension should be made equally available

to all Flyways. However, they believed that adjusting framework dates

could influence the relative allocation of harvest among States, the

size of the harvest, and the population dynamics of waterfowl. Florida

believed that this issue merits further evaluation by the Service and

the Flyway Councils and asked the AHM working group to evaluate

framework extensions for use with the ``liberal'' alternative.

The Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife (Delaware) concurred

with the Service's position on the framework extension issue and

requested that no such changes be granted until all four Flyway

Councils had adequate time to address the issue. Delaware further

commented that the framework extensions proposed by the Central Flyway

Council and Lower-Region Regulations Committee of the Mississippi

Flyway Council were counter to the 1996 joint Flyway Council

recommendation to maintain traditional allocation of hunting

opportunities when considering changes to the AHM regulatory

alternatives

cils had adequate time to address the issue. Delaware further

commented that the framework extensions proposed by the Central Flyway

Council and Lower-Region Regulations Committee of the Mississippi

Flyway Council were counter to the 1996 joint Flyway Council

recommendation to maintain traditional allocation of hunting

opportunities when considering changes to the AHM regulatory

alternatives.

The New Jersey Division of Fish, Game and Wildlife (New Jersey) was

concerned that any duck hunting framework extensions had the potential

to affect all States in all Flyways, including reducing the frequency

with which ``liberal'' and ``moderate'' regulatory alternatives would

be selected. They were also concerned that the traditional allocation

of duck harvest in the U.S. could be altered. They strongly urged the

Service to seek a thorough and scientific review by each Flyway Council

before taking any action on framework modifications.

The Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife

(Massachusetts) opposed the extensions of frameworks at this time.

Massachusetts believed that the proposed September openings and January

31 framework closing date would impact States throughout the Flyways

and has not been adequately examined. Massachusetts was particularly

concerned about species such as wood ducks.

The Arizona Game and Fish Department concurred with the Service's

June 6 Federal Register not to extend the framework closing date to

January 31. They believed that although additional harvest likely would

occur, such an extension would not be beneficial to the pintail

population and would complicate the evaluation of regulatory changes

already proposed.

Several individuals from Tennessee and Louisiana expressed strong

opposition to extending the framework closing date past January 20,

citing concerns for the conditions of the ducks and the lack of hunting

opportunity later in January

y would

occur, such an extension would not be beneficial to the pintail

population and would complicate the evaluation of regulatory changes

already proposed.

Several individuals from Tennessee and Louisiana expressed strong

opposition to extending the framework closing date past January 20,

citing concerns for the conditions of the ducks and the lack of hunting

opportunity later in January.

The California Waterfowl Association expressed concerns about the

impacts of either earlier framework opening dates or later framework

closing dates.

Individuals in Pennsylvania and Iowa believed the season in their

respective States closed too early. Individuals in California and

Oregon expressed support for extending the hunting season.

Service Response: In 1995, the Service established AHM framework

opening and closing dates of the Saturday nearest October 1 to the

Sunday nearest January 20 for the Pacific, Central, and Mississippi

Flyways, and fixed dates of October 1 to January 20 for the Atlantic

Flyway (60 FR 50045). In 1996, the Service denied requests for a

January 31 closing date in Mississippi, but recognized that the

suitability of all aspects of the regulatory alternatives, including

framework dates, should be investigated by the AHM technical working

group. All four Flyway Councils, in joint recommendations dated July

28, 1996, assigned a high priority to refining the AHM regulatory

alternatives and asked the technical working group to draft

recommendations prior to the 1997 regulatory cycle. In the fall of

1996, the technical working group circulated a questionnaire to all

States seeking input regarding concerns with the current regulatory

alternatives. Fifty-four percent of States nationwide believed the

current framework dates of approximately October 1 to January 20 were

satisfactory, while 32 percent believed the dates were too constrained

prior to the 1997 regulatory cycle. In the fall of

1996, the technical working group circulated a questionnaire to all

States seeking input regarding concerns with the current regulatory

alternatives. Fifty-four percent of States nationwide believed the

current framework dates of approximately October 1 to January 20 were

satisfactory, while 32 percent believed the dates were too constrained.

Overall, States ranked framework dates as the sixth most important

regulatory issue, after issues involving season lengths, bag limits,

and the number of regulatory alternatives. The Service recognizes that

questionnaires received from Central and Mississippi Flyway States

indicated a somewhat higher level of dissatisfaction with established

framework dates than the national average.

After extensive deliberation and consideration of input by States

and Flyway Councils, the AHM technical working group recommended no

change in framework dates from those established in 1995 (62 FR 12054).

The Service's Migratory Bird Regulations Committee reviewed the working

group's recommendations with the Flyway Council Regulations Consultants

at the January 23, 1997, meeting and there were no indications that

framework dates of approximately October 1 to January 20 would not be

satisfactory to most States. On April 22, 1997, representatives from

the Service met with Flyway Council Chairmen and Regulations

Consultants to consider the Flyway Councils' recommendations for the

AHM regulatory alternatives. Representatives from the Atlantic,

Central, and Pacific Flyway Councils, and from the Upper-Region

Regulations Committee of the Mississippi Flyway Council, agreed that

framework dates should not be extended beyond those currently in use

for the 1997-98 season; however, the representatives agreed the issue

should be reviewed further by the AHM working group and all four Flyway

Councils

tives. Representatives from the Atlantic,

Central, and Pacific Flyway Councils, and from the Upper-Region

Regulations Committee of the Mississippi Flyway Council, agreed that

framework dates should not be extended beyond those currently in use

for the 1997-98 season; however, the representatives agreed the issue

should be reviewed further by the AHM working group and all four Flyway

Councils. Because changes in framework dates have the potential to

affect all States (whether or not they set their seasons as early or

late as possible), the Service believes that the issue must receive a

fair and

comprehensive hearing among all stakeholders. To date, this has not

occurred. Therefore, the Service will continue to use framework dates

of approximately October 1 to January 20 for all AHM regulatory

alternatives for the 1997-98 hunting season, as identified in the June

6 proposed rule.

In considering future requests for either earlier or later

framework dates, such as those described above, the Service will focus

on the following issues:

(1) Possible changes in the size of the harvest.

Experience with hunting seasons opening more than a few days before

October 1 or after January 20 is limited. Mississippi experimented with

a January 31 closing date during 1979-84, and Iowa was permitted an

opening date for a small portion of their regular duck season of

approximately September 20 during 1979-87 and 1994-96 in lieu of an

early teal season. Based on a recent Service assessment, harvests of

mallards and total ducks were higher in years with framework extensions

in both States, relative to surrounding States where a framework

extension was not available. If results from these States are

representative, then proposals to extend framework dates in the Central

Flyway and the Lower Region of the Mississippi Flyway would be expected

to increase the harvest of midcontinent mallards by approximately 13

percent

were higher in years with framework extensions

in both States, relative to surrounding States where a framework

extension was not available. If results from these States are

representative, then proposals to extend framework dates in the Central

Flyway and the Lower Region of the Mississippi Flyway would be expected

to increase the harvest of midcontinent mallards by approximately 13

percent. This increase would be in addition to the 10-15 percent

increase in mallard harvest expected from the proposed increase in

season length under the ``liberal'' alternative. Based on this

assessment, adoption of the Central and Mississippi Flyway proposals

would lead to a more conservative harvest strategy for all States,

whether or not they could take advantage of the extended framework

dates. Current projections suggest that the frequency of ``liberal''

regulations could be reduced by as much as one-half, and that the

frequency of ``very restrictive'' and ``restrictive'' regulations could

double. The Service currently is preparing a final report on this

assessment, which should be available by September 1, 1997.

(2) Re-allocation of hunting opportunity and harvest within and

among Flyways.

Based on the survey conducted by the AHM technical working group,

most States are satisfied with the distribution of hunting opportunity

within and among Flyways. Nationwide, concerns regarding allocation of

hunting opportunity among States ranked last among those concerns with

the current AHM regulatory alternatives. Also, all Flyway Councils

passed a joint recommendation (July 28, 1996) asking the Service to

maintain traditional allocations of hunting opportunity among Flyways

when considering changes to the AHM regulatory alternatives. The

Service agrees with the Flyway Councils that resolving outstanding

disputes over allocation will require development of an appropriate

framework for discussion and that progress is unlikely prior to

promulgation of regulations for the 1997 hunting season.

to

maintain traditional allocations of hunting opportunity among Flyways

when considering changes to the AHM regulatory alternatives. The

Service agrees with the Flyway Councils that resolving outstanding

disputes over allocation will require development of an appropriate

framework for discussion and that progress is unlikely prior to

promulgation of regulations for the 1997 hunting season.

(3) The potential for negative physiological impacts on ducks.

The Service reiterates its concerns that hunting disturbance in

late winter may interfere with important biological functions such as

pair-bonding and inhibit nutrient acquisition necessary for successful

migration and reproduction (61 FR 50664). Information from a recent

study of late-winter mate loss among captive-reared mallards by

Mississippi State University has not alleviated these concerns because

results are preliminary and cannot necessarily be applied to free-

ranging mallards or other species.

The Service is concerned about public comments that hunters in the

southern Mississippi Flyway are not afforded the same hunting

opportunities as their northern counterparts. States of the southern

Mississippi Flyway collectively enjoy hunter success (as measured by

seasonal duck harvest per hunter) that is higher than that in any

region of the country. Moreover, hunter success in the Mississippi

Flyway is about twice as high in southern States as in northern and

mid-latitude States, and this discrepancy has been increasing over

time. Of the six States with the highest hunter success in the country

(i.e., States above the 90th percentile for the 1979-95 average), four

(Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Tennessee) are located in the

southern Mississippi Flyway. These statistics do not seem to support

the contention that hunters in the southern Mississippi Flyway are not

afforded the same opportunity as their counterparts in mid-latitude and

northern States

ter success in the country

(i.e., States above the 90th percentile for the 1979-95 average), four

(Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Tennessee) are located in the

southern Mississippi Flyway. These statistics do not seem to support

the contention that hunters in the southern Mississippi Flyway are not

afforded the same opportunity as their counterparts in mid-latitude and

northern States.

In summary, the Service is not, at this time, extending framework

dates beyond those currently in use. However, the Service seeks further

clarification from the Flyway Councils, States, and the public

regarding the relative importance of this issue and requests comments

concerning the three issues described above. The Service believes

strongly that potential changes to framework dates must be approached

in a methodical and comprehensive manner, and with due consideration of

both biological and sociological impacts.

C. Season Length

Council Recommendations: The Pacific Flyway Council recommended the

``restrictive'' regulatory alternative for their Flyway be modified

from 59 days to 60 days.

Written Comments: The Alabama Department of Conservation and

Natural Resources recommended the ``very restrictive'' alternative be

23 days rather than 20 days to allow for 4 full weekends of hunting.

The Missouri Department of Conservation supported the proposed

change from 59 to 60 days in the ``restrictive'' alternative for the

Pacific Flyway.

The California Waterfowl Association supported the addition of 1

day to the ``restrictive'' alternative in the Pacific Flyway.

Several individuals from Minnesota opposed increases in the season

length under the ``liberal'' alternative, arguing that it would only

benefit the southern States in the Mississippi Flyway.

An individual from Louisiana believed that seasons should be

lengthened by 5 to 10 days.

Individuals from Kansas and Washington believed that season lengths

should be extended as opposed to additional birds in the daily bag

limit

nnesota opposed increases in the season

length under the ``liberal'' alternative, arguing that it would only

benefit the southern States in the Mississippi Flyway.

An individual from Louisiana believed that seasons should be

lengthened by 5 to 10 days.

Individuals from Kansas and Washington believed that season lengths

should be extended as opposed to additional birds in the daily bag

limit.

An individual from Oregon believed that season lengths did not need

to be any longer. Another individual from Oregon expressed support for

lengthening the seasons.

Service Response: The Service concurs with the request for 60 days

in the ``restrictive'' alternative for the Pacific Flyway. This season

length would allow those States opting to split their seasons into 2

segments to open on a Saturday and close on a Sunday in each segment,

as has been traditional in the Pacific Flyway. The Service notes that

this option becomes increasingly important to States as season length

decreases and would not be a primary consideration under more liberal

seasons. Other proposals for modifications to season lengths in the

proposed regulatory alternatives were not compelling.

E. Bag Limits

Council Recommendations: The Mississippi, Central, and Pacific

Flyway Councils endorsed the AHM working group's recommendations, and

subsequent Service proposals, for total duck bag limits. The Atlantic

Flyway Council originally recommended a uniform total duck bag limit of

4 in all Atlantic Flyway regulatory alternatives

proposed regulatory alternatives were not compelling.

E. Bag Limits

Council Recommendations: The Mississippi, Central, and Pacific

Flyway Councils endorsed the AHM working group's recommendations, and

subsequent Service proposals, for total duck bag limits. The Atlantic

Flyway Council originally recommended a uniform total duck bag limit of

4 in all Atlantic Flyway regulatory alternatives

to minimize the frequency of changes. However, in lieu of the Service's

June 6 proposal (i.e., 3 birds in the ``very restrictive'' and

``restrictive'' alternatives and 4 birds in the ``moderate'' and

``liberal'' alternatives), the Atlantic Flyway Council preferred the

AHM working group's original recommendations for total duck bag limits

at the June 25, 1997, public meeting.

All Flyway Councils supported the basic mallard daily bag limits as

recommended by the working group, and eventually proposed by the

Service, in each of the regulatory alternatives. However, the Atlantic

and Pacific Flyway Councils recommended modifications to the hen

mallard daily bag limit in the ``liberal'' alternative. The Atlantic

Flyway Council recommended that there be no hen mallard restrictions

and the Pacific Flyway Council recommended a daily bag limit of 3 hen

mallards instead of 2.

Written Comments: The New Jersey Division of Fish, Game and

Wildlife recommended that there be no hen mallard restrictions in the

``liberal'' alternative.

The South Carolina Department of Natural Resources (South Carolina)

recommended the Service adopt the 6-bird daily bag limits recommended

by the AHM working group and retain hen mallard restrictions outlined

in the ``moderate'' and ``liberal'' regulations alternatives. South

Carolina further believed that restricting the bag limit to 4 under the

``moderate'' and ``liberal'' alternatives unnecessarily restricts

hunter opportunity

al Resources (South Carolina)

recommended the Service adopt the 6-bird daily bag limits recommended

by the AHM working group and retain hen mallard restrictions outlined

in the ``moderate'' and ``liberal'' regulations alternatives. South

Carolina further believed that restricting the bag limit to 4 under the

``moderate'' and ``liberal'' alternatives unnecessarily restricts

hunter opportunity.

The Georgia Department of Natural Resources (Georgia) supported the

intent of the Atlantic Flyway Council's recommendation of a uniform 4-

bird daily bag limit to simplify regulations, improve learning of

harvest strategies, and maintain hunter numbers during years of low

duck populations. However, in lieu of a uniform 4-bird limit, Georgia

expressed support for the original AHM working group recommendations.

The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (New

York) affirmed their continued support for the Atlantic Flyway

Council's recommendation of a uniform 4-bird daily bag limit in all

alternatives. However, in the interim, in lieu of a uniform 4-bird

limit, New York expressed support for the Service's June 6 Federal

Register proposal. New York believed that a 6-bird daily bag limit

would add to communication challenges to implementing AHM in the

Atlantic Flyway.

The Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission (Florida) strongly

opposed the bag limits proposed by the Service for the Atlantic Flyway

in the June 6 Federal Register. Florida was disappointed that the

Service did not adopt the Atlantic Flyway Council's recommendation of a

uniform 4-bird daily bag limit. Florida further believed that the

Service's proposed regulatory alternatives penalizes the Atlantic

Flyway in the two ``liberal'' alternatives without compensation in the

two restrictive alternatives. In lieu of a uniform 4-bird limit,

Florida preferred the original AHM working group recommendations for

the 1997-98 hunting season

Council's recommendation of a

uniform 4-bird daily bag limit. Florida further believed that the

Service's proposed regulatory alternatives penalizes the Atlantic

Flyway in the two ``liberal'' alternatives without compensation in the

two restrictive alternatives. In lieu of a uniform 4-bird limit,

Florida preferred the original AHM working group recommendations for

the 1997-98 hunting season.

The Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife (Delaware) supported the

season lengths and four regulatory alternatives for the 1997-98 season

but expressed disappointment that the Service did not adopt the

Atlantic Flyway Council's recommended 4-bird uniform daily bag limit.

Delaware believed that providing a uniform 4-bird bag would increase

hunter satisfaction and retain hunter interest in duck hunting and

would provide a clearer picture of the effects of season length

changes. In lieu of a uniform 4-bird limit, Delaware supported the

original AHM working group recommendations for the 1997-98 hunting

season. Delaware also reiterated their support for no mallard hen

restrictions under the ``moderate'' and ``liberal'' alternatives.

The Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife

(Massachusetts) was disappointed with the Service's proposed bag limits

in the Atlantic Flyway. Based on some of their research surveys, they

recommended season length/bag limits of 20/2, 30/3, 45/4, and 60/5 for

the four regulatory alternatives. Massachusetts also continued to

support the removal of mallard hen restrictions in the daily bag limit

and disagreed with the Service's reasoning for the proposed 2-hen bag

limit. Massachusetts contends that increasing the daily bag limit for

hens from 2 to 4 would increase the harvest by only 3.6 percent.

The Alabama Waterfowl Association recommended a 5-bird daily bag

limit with no more than 4 mallards and 1 hen mallard

support the removal of mallard hen restrictions in the daily bag limit

and disagreed with the Service's reasoning for the proposed 2-hen bag

limit. Massachusetts contends that increasing the daily bag limit for

hens from 2 to 4 would increase the harvest by only 3.6 percent.

The Alabama Waterfowl Association recommended a 5-bird daily bag

limit with no more than 4 mallards and 1 hen mallard.

The California Waterfowl Association supported the working group's

recommendation of adding a second hen mallard to the daily bag limits

under the ``moderate'' and ``liberal'' alternatives. They further

recommended adding a third hen mallard under the Pacific Flyway's

``liberal'' alternative.

The Save Hens Alliance did not support an increase in the hen

mallard daily bag limit, indicating that hen restrictions have had a

positive effect on yearly breeding stocks. They further pointed out

that a high percentage of hens surviving until the last few weeks of

the season could be expected to return to breeding areas. As an

alternative, they recommended that an extra drake mallard be added to

the mallard daily bag limit.

The Great Outdoors, L.L.C., urged the Service to not tease the

dedicated duck hunter with regulations that are not sustainable. They

stated that the rebound in duck populations is due to a reversal in

weather patterns, habitat improvements like the Conservation Reserve

Program, and restrictions on season length and bag limits. They further

pointed out that hunters are not requesting these liberalizations in

seasons and believed that liberalizations in the shooting of hens was

not ethical. They also believed that the increased use of zone/split

seasons by States has increased the potential for higher harvests.

Finally, they encouraged the Service to exercise common sense,

restraint, and ethics, which are the foundations upon which

sportsmanship is based

re not requesting these liberalizations in

seasons and believed that liberalizations in the shooting of hens was

not ethical. They also believed that the increased use of zone/split

seasons by States has increased the potential for higher harvests.

Finally, they encouraged the Service to exercise common sense,

restraint, and ethics, which are the foundations upon which

sportsmanship is based.

Delta Waterfowl strongly opposed the proposed increase in the hen

mallard bag limit under the ``moderate'' and ``liberal'' alternatives.

They believed that increasing harvest on hen mallards was not

warranted, that it would not be in the best interest of addressing the

social aspect of waterfowl regulations, that the hunting public does

not support this change.

The LaCrosse County Conservation Alliance of Wisconsin recommended

that the hen mallard daily bag limit remain at 1 hen in the ``liberal''

alternative.

The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) questioned the

proposed bag limits for species other than mallards in the

``restrictive'' and ``very restrictive'' alternatives. HSUS believed

that if mallards declined to the extent that these alternatives were

adopted and the Service was correct in its assertion that mallards are

good indicators of the population status of other species, then these

bag limits should be set at zero until more data are available on these

species.

Individual comments regarding overall bag limits and hen mallard

restrictions varied widely. Several individuals from Louisiana

preferred additional birds in the daily bag limit rather than

additional days of season length. Other individuals from Alabama,

Louisiana, California, Illinois, Indiana,

es, then these

bag limits should be set at zero until more data are available on these

species.

Individual comments regarding overall bag limits and hen mallard

restrictions varied widely. Several individuals from Louisiana

preferred additional birds in the daily bag limit rather than

additional days of season length. Other individuals from Alabama,

Louisiana, California, Illinois, Indiana,

Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Tennessee,

Texas, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming saw no reason to increase bag

limits beyond 5 birds per day. While most supported additional days in

the ``moderate'' and ``liberal'' alternatives, most believed that

current bag limits provided plenty of hunter opportunity. Other

individuals from Arkansas, Minnesota, and Missouri were against any

increase in the daily bag limit, while several commenters from Alabama,

Connecticut, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Tennessee, and

Wisconsin were in favor of a reduced 4-bird daily bag limit. One

individual from Wisconsin supported a 3-bird daily bag limit, while

individuals from Florida and Missouri supported a 6-bird daily bag

limit.

Thirty individuals from Arkansas, Illinois, Louisiana, Michigan,

Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Pennsylvania,

Tennessee, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming were strongly opposed to

any increase in the daily bag limit for hen mallards.

Individuals from California and Nevada expressed support for no

internal bag-limit restrictions, while an individual from Oregon

recommended holding bag limits at the ``restrictive'' alternative

level. Another commenter suggested a nation-wide 3-bird daily bag

limit

ia,

Tennessee, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming were strongly opposed to

any increase in the daily bag limit for hen mallards.

Individuals from California and Nevada expressed support for no

internal bag-limit restrictions, while an individual from Oregon

recommended holding bag limits at the ``restrictive'' alternative

level. Another commenter suggested a nation-wide 3-bird daily bag

limit.

Service Response: The Service concurs with the Atlantic Flyway

Council and others who requested, in lieu of a constant 4-bird bag, a

return to total bag limits in the Atlantic Flyway that were originally

recommended by the AHM working group (i.e., 3 birds in the ``very

restrictive'' and ``restrictive'' alternatives and 6 birds in the

``moderate'' and ``liberal'' alternatives).

Regarding mallard hen restrictions, the Service does not support

the changes in hen restrictions recommended by the Atlantic and Pacific

Flyway Councils. Although the role of sex-specific bag limits in

regulating mallard harvests, total mortality, and recruitment is

uncertain, sex-specific bag limits for mallards have been used since

the early 1970's. Lower female (relative to male) bag limits (hen

restrictions) have been used during 1972-96 in the Central Flyway,

since 1976 in the Mississippi Flyway, and beginning in 1985 in the

Atlantic and Pacific Flyways. These differential regulations were

intended to direct harvest pressure away from females and thus increase

annual survival of females relative to males in the population.

Recent analysis of the effects of mallard hen restrictions have

shown these restrictions to have been effective in decreasing the

harvest of females relative to males. The Service continues to support

the use of regulations for mallards that emphasize protection of

females while allowing optimum recreational opportunity on males

annual survival of females relative to males in the population.

Recent analysis of the effects of mallard hen restrictions have

shown these restrictions to have been effective in decreasing the

harvest of females relative to males. The Service continues to support

the use of regulations for mallards that emphasize protection of

females while allowing optimum recreational opportunity on males.

Therefore, the Service believes that it would be premature to remove

hen restrictions completely without further investigation of the

potential biological and social consequences of such changes. Further,

the Service is concerned about the potential of synergistic effects of

removing all hen restrictions on the harvest of similar appearing

species like mottled ducks or black ducks.

Despite these concerns, the Service supports a moderate increase in

the female mallard bag limit in the ``moderate'' and ``liberal''

alternatives. Even more liberal hen bag limits have been used

frequently in the past when populations were relatively high and no

detrimental resource impacts were apparent. Hunters are free to

exercise self-imposed ethical constraints, but the Service finds no

biological justification at this time for opposing these moderate

increases in female mallard bag limits.

G. Special Seasons/Species Management

i. Canvasbacks

Council Recommendations: The Upper-Region Regulations Committee of

the Mississippi Flyway Council recommended the Service continue its use

of the Office of Migratory Bird Management's January 1994 ``Draft--

Canvasback Harvest Management: An Interim Strategy'' to guide the 1997-

98 regulatory decisions on canvasback.

Written Comments: Individuals from California, Michigan, and North

Carolina requested a 2-bird daily bag limit for canvasbacks.

ii. Pintails

f

the Mississippi Flyway Council recommended the Service continue its use

of the Office of Migratory Bird Management's January 1994 ``Draft--

Canvasback Harvest Management: An Interim Strategy'' to guide the 1997-

98 regulatory decisions on canvasback.

Written Comments: Individuals from California, Michigan, and North

Carolina requested a 2-bird daily bag limit for canvasbacks.

ii. Pintails

Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council originally did

not endorse the ``Proposed Interim Strategy for Northern Pintail

Harvest Regulations'' circulated for Councils' review in February of

this year. However, the Council subsequently commented that the revised

interim pintail harvest strategy appeared to be a reasonable stepping

stone to adaptive harvest management of pintails and allowed for a

greater growth rate than the original proposal. The Council reiterated

its concern that the final AHM pintail model be a true continental

model addressing all stocks of pintails.

The Upper-Region Regulations Committee of the Mississippi Flyway

Council, and the Central Flyway Council did not endorse the Pacific

Flyway Council's ``Proposed Interim Strategy for Northern Pintail

Harvest Regulations'' as circulated for Councils' review in February of

this year.

The Central Flyway Council recommended an interim, prescriptive

method for determining pintail daily bag limits based on the breeding

population size. The pintail limit would be 1 with a breeding

population below 3.0 million; 2 with a breeding population between 3.0

and 4.5 million; 3 with a breeding population between 4.5 and 5.6

million; and equal to the overall daily bag limit with a breeding

population above 5.6 million.

The Pacific Flyway Council recommended adoption of a revised

``Proposed Interim Harvest Strategy.'' The Council's revised interim

strategy included several modifications intended to address the

concerns expressed by the other Flyway Councils and by the Service

technical review

between 4.5 and 5.6

million; and equal to the overall daily bag limit with a breeding

population above 5.6 million.

The Pacific Flyway Council recommended adoption of a revised

``Proposed Interim Harvest Strategy.'' The Council's revised interim

strategy included several modifications intended to address the

concerns expressed by the other Flyway Councils and by the Service

technical review. The revised interim strategy was presented to the

Service and the other three Flyway Councils at the April 22, 1997, AHM

meeting in Arlington, VA, and presented in the June 6 Federal Register.

At the June 26 meeting of the Service Regulations Committee, all

four Flyway Council representatives gave conditional endorsement to the

Pacific Flyway's April 22, 1997, revised interim pintail strategy with

the additional constraints proposed by the Service in the June 6

Federal Register.

The revised strategy is based on a mathematical model of the

continental pintail population, which assumes that:

(1) the size of the continental population can be effectively

monitored through spring surveys in the northcentral U.S., Central

Canada, and Alaska,

(2) mortality due to hunting is additive to natural mortality,

(3) harvest in Canada and Alaska is relatively constant from one

year to the next,

(4) crippling loss is constant and proportional to the size of

the retrieved harvest,

(5) recruitment of young birds can be reasonably predicted based

on the distribution of breeding pintails, and

he northcentral U.S., Central

Canada, and Alaska,

(2) mortality due to hunting is additive to natural mortality,

(3) harvest in Canada and Alaska is relatively constant from one

year to the next,

(4) crippling loss is constant and proportional to the size of

the retrieved harvest,

(5) recruitment of young birds can be reasonably predicted based

on the distribution of breeding pintails, and

(6) harvest of pintails can be reasonably predicted based on the

length of the season and pintail bag limit in each Flyway.

The model predicts allowable harvest of pintails in the lower 48

States based on the current size of the pintail breeding population,

anticipated recruitment, anticipated natural mortality, anticipated

mortality due to hunting, and the desired size of the population in the

following spring.

Public-Hearing Comments: Mr. Robert McDowell, representing the

Atlantic

Flyway Council, commented that the interim pintail harvest strategy

appeared to be reasonable but reiterated the Flyway's concerns that a

true continental model be developed which addressed all stocks,

including those wintering in the Atlantic Flyway.

Written Comments: The Arizona Game and Fish Department supported

the pintail strategy proposed by the Pacific Flyway Council and the

Service.

The Missouri Department of Conservation questioned the value of an

interim pintail strategy for 2 to 3 years until the development of an

adaptive approach; however, they supported the Service's compromise.

The New Jersey Division of Fish, Game and Wildlife (New Jersey)

commented that the revised interim pintail harvest strategy appeared to

be a reasonable stepping stone to adaptive harvest management of

pintails and allowed for a greater growth rate than the original

proposal. New Jersey was concerned that the final AHM pintail model

should be a true continental model addressing all stocks of pintails

Jersey Division of Fish, Game and Wildlife (New Jersey)

commented that the revised interim pintail harvest strategy appeared to

be a reasonable stepping stone to adaptive harvest management of

pintails and allowed for a greater growth rate than the original

proposal. New Jersey was concerned that the final AHM pintail model

should be a true continental model addressing all stocks of pintails.

The California Waterfowl Association urged adoption of a pintail

interim AHM model for determining alternative daily bag limits for the

1997-98 hunting season.

The Nevada Waterfowl Association suggested increasing the daily bag

limit on male pintails for the last third of the season to help reduce

the high male to female ratio.

An individual from Louisiana recommended a daily bag limit of 2

pintails, only 1 of which could be a hen, under the ``liberal''

alternative.

An individual from Oregon was concerned about potential increases

in pintail harvest given the population status of pintails and an

individual in Louisiana believed that the pintail season should be

closed since the population had not recovered despite good breeding

conditions. Another individual from Michigan urged the Service to treat

the pintail as it had the canvasback.

Service Response: The Service remains concerned about the overall

status of the continental population of northern pintails. The pintail

breeding population in May 1997, was estimated to be 3,558,000, a 30

percent increase from last year. The breeding population of northern

pintails has doubled from the low of 1,803,400 in 1991, but remains 20

percent below the long-term average and 43 percent below the population

objective established in the North American Waterfowl Management Plan.

The Service recognizes the value of developing a strategy for

determining pintail hunting regulations that is technically sound and

explicitly promotes growth of the pintail population

tails has doubled from the low of 1,803,400 in 1991, but remains 20

percent below the long-term average and 43 percent below the population

objective established in the North American Waterfowl Management Plan.

The Service recognizes the value of developing a strategy for

determining pintail hunting regulations that is technically sound and

explicitly promotes growth of the pintail population. The Service

believes that ultimately pintail hunting regulations should be guided

by a formal AHM process. This year, a cooperative effort began to

develop the needed technical foundation for a more formal incorporation

of pintails into the AHM process. The Service recognizes and greatly

appreciates the support for this effort provided by the Flyway Councils

and participating non-governmental organizations. However, since it

likely will require about three more years to complete the development

and implementation of this new process, the Service believes there is

merit in adopting an interim prescriptive strategy for the management

of pintail harvest until the species can be fully addressed by the AHM

process.

In the July 22, 1996, Federal Register (61 FR 37994), the Service

indicated that the adoption of any interim strategy would be dependent

on how the strategy addressed three key concerns: (1) explicit harvest-

management objectives, (2) comprehensive model development for

continental pintails, and (3) a consideration of the regulatory

constraints imposed by the adaptive harvest strategy for mid-continent

mallards. We believe that the strategy recommended by the Pacific

Flyway Council more satisfactorily addresses these elements than does

the strategy recommended by the Central Flyway

licit harvest-

management objectives, (2) comprehensive model development for

continental pintails, and (3) a consideration of the regulatory

constraints imposed by the adaptive harvest strategy for mid-continent

mallards. We believe that the strategy recommended by the Pacific

Flyway Council more satisfactorily addresses these elements than does

the strategy recommended by the Central Flyway. Therefore, the Service

proposed in the June 6 Federal Register to adopt the revised interim

harvest strategy proposed by the Pacific Flyway Council, with the

following modifications: (1) the maximum pintail daily bag limit under

any regulatory alternative in any Flyway would be limited to 3

pintails, and (2) that this interim strategy will be replaced by a more

fully adaptive approach at the earliest opportunity. Further, we

believe the interim pintail harvest strategy should be thoroughly

reviewed in about 3 years, regardless of whether a more adaptive

approach is available at that time. The Service will employ the interim

pintail prescription proposed by the Pacific Flyway and the additional

constraints listed above to determine appropriate pintail bag limits in

all Flyways beginning in the 1997-98 hunting season.

The technical details of the Strategy are available by writing

directly to MBMO at the address indicated under the caption ADDRESSES.

iii. September Teal Seasons

Council Recommendations: The Lower-Region Regulations Committee of

the Mississippi Flyway Council recommended the continuance of the

experimental September teal/wood duck seasons in Kentucky and Tennessee

for the 1997-98 season with no change from the 1996-97 season

frameworks.

The Central Flyway Council recommended a 3-year experimental teal

harvest strategy in the Central Flyway based on the breeding population

of blue-winged teal

egulations Committee of

the Mississippi Flyway Council recommended the continuance of the

experimental September teal/wood duck seasons in Kentucky and Tennessee

for the 1997-98 season with no change from the 1996-97 season

frameworks.

The Central Flyway Council recommended a 3-year experimental teal

harvest strategy in the Central Flyway based on the breeding population

of blue-winged teal. When the 3-year running average breeding

population of blue-winged teal is 4.7 million or greater, the Council's

recommended harvest strategy would consist of two changes to the

current September teal season frameworks. First, in those Central

Flyway States currently allowed a September teal season, an additional

7 days of hunting (for a total of 16 days) and 1 additional teal (for a

total of 5 teal) would be allowed. Second, for Central Flyway

production States, the recommended harvest strategy would provide for a

season of up to 7 days, beginning no earlier than September 20, and a

daily bag limit of 4 ducks, 3 of which must be teal. The Council

further recommended that the Service work with the States to

cooperatively develop an experimental design and criteria to adequately

evaluate the proposed expansion of teal harvest.

Written Comments: The Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks

(Kansas), Nebraska Game and Parks Commission (Nebraska), North Dakota

Game and Fish Department (North Dakota), Oklahoma Department of

Wildlife Conservation (Oklahoma), South Dakota Department of Game, Fish

and Parks (South Dakota), and Texas Parks and Wildlife Department

(Texas) supported the Central Flyway proposal for September teal

seasons. Kansas and Texas commented that additional harvest provided by

the proposed season expansion will not be excessive or negatively

impact future teal populations. Kansas and Texas indicated that ongoing

work associated with implementation of the Adaptive Harvest Management

Program should not preclude completion of this management initiative

he Central Flyway proposal for September teal

seasons. Kansas and Texas commented that additional harvest provided by

the proposed season expansion will not be excessive or negatively

impact future teal populations. Kansas and Texas indicated that ongoing

work associated with implementation of the Adaptive Harvest Management

Program should not preclude completion of this management initiative.

Kansas said they are willing to satisfy requirements associated with

evaluation and monitoring associated with implementation of this

proposed strategy. Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas indicated that this

strategy will encourage the development and maintenance of wetland

habitat and promote hunting by youth hunters. Nebraska pointed out that

their duck breeding population was 17 percent above the most recent

five-year average and would appreciate the additional

opportunity that would be provided by the Central Flyway proposal.

North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming indicated that approval of the

Central Flyway proposal would provide additional opportunity for

northern States at a time when teal populations are at an all-time

high. North Dakota commented that implementation of this proposal is

currently appropriate because the Central Flyway preseason duck banding

program will provide information for evaluations. North Dakota pointed

out that their blue-winged teal population estimate for this year is

115 percent above the long-term average.

Several individuals recommended higher daily bag limits for teal

given the current population level. Two individuals from Texas

recommended a 5-teal daily bag limit while an individual from Missouri

recommended a 6-teal limit. Another individual from Texas questioned

why the Service was reluctant to increase the teal season length and

bag limit.

Service Response: It is important that any proposal for expanding

the current teal season include a comprehensive evaluation plan and be

coordinated within and among the Flyways

ommended a 5-teal daily bag limit while an individual from Missouri

recommended a 6-teal limit. Another individual from Texas questioned

why the Service was reluctant to increase the teal season length and

bag limit.

Service Response: It is important that any proposal for expanding

the current teal season include a comprehensive evaluation plan and be

coordinated within and among the Flyways. Identifying the full scope of

any expansion is important, because it will dictate how extensive the

evaluation plan must be.

The Central Flyway proposal does not include an evaluation plan. As

previously stated, the evaluation plan must include study objectives,

experimental design, decision criteria, and identification of data

needs. The evaluation plan should address not only potential impacts to

teal populations, but also impacts to nontarget species and the ability

of hunters to comply with special-season regulations. Further, the

September teal season bag limit should be limited to teal and not

expanded to include other species, as was contained in the Central

Flyway's proposal.

In an effort to further define what would comprise an acceptable

evaluation plan, the Service suggests that any plan should consider the

following: (1) description of the population dynamics of teal (e.g.,

how the populations respond to changes in the environment, harvest

pressure, etc.), (2) current and predicted harvest pressure on teal,

(3) the levels of regulations to be considered, (4) the harvest

allocation among and within (i.e., production vs. nonproduction states)

Flyways, (5) the acceptable attempt rate at nontarget species (i.e.,

the rate at which hunters attempt to shoot ducks other than teal), and

ns respond to changes in the environment, harvest

pressure, etc.), (2) current and predicted harvest pressure on teal,

(3) the levels of regulations to be considered, (4) the harvest

allocation among and within (i.e., production vs. nonproduction states)

Flyways, (5) the acceptable attempt rate at nontarget species (i.e.,

the rate at which hunters attempt to shoot ducks other than teal), and

(6) staff and financial resources to conduct the evaluation.

iv. September Duck Seasons

Council Recommendations: The Upper-Region Regulations Committee of

the Mississippi Flyway Council recommended that Iowa be allowed to open

the second segment of their split duck season no earlier than October

10, instead of October 15.

Service Response: Although this is primarily a late-season issue,

the Service understands Iowa's concern for reaching a decision on the

issue at this time. The Service concurs with this minor change in

Iowa's framework.

vi. Youth Hunt

Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended

the continuance of the youth waterfowl hunt day and requested the

Service announce their intent in June. The Council further recommended

that ducks, coots, mergansers, moorhens, brant and snow geese be open

to harvest on the special day and requested clarification of whether

youth may participate in other open migratory bird hunting seasons on

that day.

The Upper-Region Regulations Committee of the Mississippi Flyway

Council recommended that youth waterfowl hunt day bag limits be the

same as the regular-season bag limits and include ducks, geese, and

coots, with framework dates 14 days outside the regular duck-season

framework dates instead of 10.

The Lower-Region Regulations Committee of the Mississippi Flyway

Council recommended the inclusion of geese and coots in a 2-day youth

waterfowl hunting season, with framework dates 14 days outside of the

regular duck-season framework dates instead of 10

bag limits and include ducks, geese, and

coots, with framework dates 14 days outside the regular duck-season

framework dates instead of 10.

The Lower-Region Regulations Committee of the Mississippi Flyway

Council recommended the inclusion of geese and coots in a 2-day youth

waterfowl hunting season, with framework dates 14 days outside of the

regular duck-season framework dates instead of 10.

The Pacific Flyway Council recommended continuation of the youth

hunt that allows States to select outside the general season and

frameworks.

Public-Hearing Comments: Mr. Robert McDowell, representing the

Atlantic Flyway Council, encouraged the Service to make an early

announcement regarding the Youth Waterfowl Hunt Day and asked to

include Atlantic brant, snow geese, and moorhens along with ducks as

legal game.

Written Comments: The New Jersey Division of Fish, Game and

Wildlife encouraged the Service to make an early announcement of their

intention to hold another youth hunting day. They also recommended that

ducks, moorhens, brant and snow geese be open to harvest on the special

day.

An individual from Wisconsin supported the establishment of a

special youth hunt for the 1997-98 hunting season. Another commenter

from Nebraska thanked the Service for the establishment of the youth

hunt last year.

Service Response: The Service appreciates the recommendations from

the Flyway Councils regarding the continuation of a youth waterfowl

hunting day for this hunting season. While the Service recognizes that

there will be those organizations and individuals opposed to the

establishment of this day on the basis of general opposition to hunting

as a desirable outdoor recreational activity, the Service reiterates

its belief that recreational sport hunting is a proper and compatible

use of a renewable natural resource

h waterfowl

hunting day for this hunting season. While the Service recognizes that

there will be those organizations and individuals opposed to the

establishment of this day on the basis of general opposition to hunting

as a desirable outdoor recreational activity, the Service reiterates

its belief that recreational sport hunting is a proper and compatible

use of a renewable natural resource. The Service is further directed by

various legislation to regulate the hunting of migratory waterfowl and

views its role as one of permitting recreational harvest opportunities

consistent with long-term resource conservation for all Americans. As

part of this objective, the Service believes a well-educated and

properly trained hunting constituency is in the best interest of the

resource and views a youth hunting day as an educational opportunity to

help ensure safe, high-quality hunting for future generations of

Americans. The Service believes that this proposal is consistent with

its responsibility to provide general education and training in the

wise recreational uses of our nation's valuable wildlife resources and

provides the best and safest learning environment for our youth who are

interested in hunting.

Regarding the Councils' recommendation on the framework dates, the

Service agrees that the period 14 days prior to and after the outside

framework dates for the regular duck season provides sufficient

flexibility for States to provide this opportunity to their

constituents.

The Service recognizes the potential opportunity that inclusion of

geese in the youth waterfowl hunt might provide. However, due to season

closures and restrictions in place to protect certain populations of

Canada geese in various parts of the country, the Service believes this

complication is not appropriate at this point but is certainly a matter

for consideration in future regulatory cycles

e Service recognizes the potential opportunity that inclusion of

geese in the youth waterfowl hunt might provide. However, due to season

closures and restrictions in place to protect certain populations of

Canada geese in various parts of the country, the Service believes this

complication is not appropriate at this point but is certainly a matter

for consideration in future regulatory cycles. Further, this proposal

does not preclude the inclusion of geese from the daily bag if the

goose season is open at the time of the special youth hunt.

Therefore, the Service believes this opportunity should be offered

during the 1997-98 hunting season and proposes the following

guidelines:

(1) States may select 1 day per duck-hunting zone, designated as

``Youth Waterfowl Hunting Day'', in addition to their regular duck

seasons.

(2) The day must be held outside any regular duck season on

either a weekend, holiday, or other non-school day when youth

hunters would have the maximum opportunity to participate.

(3) The day could be held up to 14 days before or after any

regular duck-season frameworks or within any split of a regular duck

season.

(4) The daily bag limit may include ducks, mergansers, coots,

moorhens, and gallinules and would be the same as that allowed in

the regular season. Flyway species restrictions would remain in

effect.

(5) Youth hunters must be 15 years of age or younger.

(6) An adult at least 18 years of age must accompany the youth

hunter into the field. This adult could not duck hunt but may

participate in other seasons that are open on the special youth day.

4. Canada Geese

A. Special Seasons

would be the same as that allowed in

the regular season. Flyway species restrictions would remain in

effect.

(5) Youth hunters must be 15 years of age or younger.

(6) An adult at least 18 years of age must accompany the youth

hunter into the field. This adult could not duck hunt but may

participate in other seasons that are open on the special youth day.

4. Canada Geese

A. Special Seasons

Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended a

3-year experimental September Canada goose season in New Jersey with a

framework closing date of the first Saturday in October. The Council

also recommended an experimental framework closing date of October 5

for the Long Island, New York, 1997 September Canada Goose Season.

The Pacific Flyway Council recommended several modifications to the

existing special September goose seasons. The Council recommended

expansion of the Washington September Canada goose hunt zone to include

all of Washington for 7 consecutive days. In California, the Council

recommended the establishment of a new 9-day season, with a 2-bird

daily bag and possession limit, in Humboldt County, California. Harvest

of up to 200 birds would be controlled through a regulated permit

system. In Oregon, the Council recommended that the framework in

Clatsop, Columbia, Multnomah, Washington, Clackamas, Marion, Yamhill,

Polk, Linn, Benton, Lane, Lincoln, and Tullamook Counties be 14

consecutive days between September 1 and 20 with a daily bag and

possession limit of 5 and 10 birds, respectively.

Public-Hearing Comments: Mr. Robert McDowell, representing the

Atlantic Flyway Council, reiterated support for New Jersey's request

for extension of the special September Canada goose season to the first

Saturday in October and New York's request to extend to October 5 and

cited that all criteria have been met. These additional days would

increase the harvests of resident geese and help to reduce nuisance

complaints.

r. Robert McDowell, representing the

Atlantic Flyway Council, reiterated support for New Jersey's request

for extension of the special September Canada goose season to the first

Saturday in October and New York's request to extend to October 5 and

cited that all criteria have been met. These additional days would

increase the harvests of resident geese and help to reduce nuisance

complaints.

Written Comments: The Maryland Department of Natural Resources

opposed the extension of the framework closing date in New Jersey's

September Canada goose season to the first Saturday in October. They

believed that there will be an insufficient number of migrant

neckbanded geese in the migrant population to evaluate the impacts of

this proposed change. They further believed that due to potential

differences in vulnerability to harvest between resident and migrant

geese, the addition of hunting days in early October could lead to even

higher than expected migrant goose harvest.

The New Jersey Division of Fish, Game and Wildlife supported the

modification of the framework closing date in New Jersey to the first

Saturday in October. They estimated that the additional days would

allow hunters to harvest an additional average of 1,600 resident Canada

geese which would help slow population growth and reduce the number and

severity of nuisance goose complaints. In response to Maryland's

comments, they pointed out several other techniques for assessing

migrant harvest during special seasons, such as the continuing

telemetry studies and the initiation of Atlantic Population (AP)

preseason breeding ground banding in 1997. New Jersey contends that use

of these data sets will greatly enhance the understanding of arrival

dates of AP geese and will replace the dependence on the disappearing

migrant neck bands. New Jersey further pointed out that their proposal

meets the criteria established by the Atlantic Flyway Council and the

Service for special Canada goose seasons targeting resident Canada

geese

ing in 1997. New Jersey contends that use

of these data sets will greatly enhance the understanding of arrival

dates of AP geese and will replace the dependence on the disappearing

migrant neck bands. New Jersey further pointed out that their proposal

meets the criteria established by the Atlantic Flyway Council and the

Service for special Canada goose seasons targeting resident Canada

geese.

Service Response: At the request of the Atlantic Flyway Council,

the Service temporarily extended framework closing dates in the

Atlantic Flyway on resident geese in 1996 to September 25, without

evaluation in most areas, and on an experimental basis to September 30

in New Jersey and North Carolina. Presently, New Jersey has completed

only one year of its agreed upon 3-year evaluation.

Although extending the framework closing dates into early October

in New Jersey and New York would increase harvests of resident geese

and help to alleviate nuisance problems, the Service believes that

further evaluation is needed before all parties are comfortable that

the harvest of migrant geese will not exceed 10 percent of the harvest.

Also, the Service is concerned that sample sizes of neck-banded migrant

geese are no longer sufficient to estimate the percentage of migrant

geese in the early seasons with any degree of reliability. Both New

Jersey's and New York's proposals indicate that the harvests of migrant

geese increases rather dramatically after October 1 and there is little

capability to measure precisely the percentage of migrant harvest.

Thus, the Service does not support New Jersey's request until it

completes its 3-year evaluation. However, based on the observations

presented, the Service would support New York extending its season on

Long Island from September 25 until September 30 on a 3-year

experimental basis

atically after October 1 and there is little

capability to measure precisely the percentage of migrant harvest.

Thus, the Service does not support New Jersey's request until it

completes its 3-year evaluation. However, based on the observations

presented, the Service would support New York extending its season on

Long Island from September 25 until September 30 on a 3-year

experimental basis.

With respect to the Pacific Flyway Councils' recommendations, the

Service supports the change to a 7-day Statewide season in Washington

and the new season proposal for California, as both of these

recommendations conform to the existing Service criteria for special

Canada goose seasons. The Service also endorses the proposal for a 14

day experimental season in Oregon between September 1 and 20. The

Service notes that a 3 year evaluation of that portion of the season

occurring after September 15 is required. The Service is particularly

concerned about possible impacts on Dusky Canada geese. The Service

specifically requires monitoring be conducted for the presence of neck

banded dusky Canada geese throughout the hunt area during this period

as a part of the experimental evaluation. Additionally, the Service

requires Oregon to submit an annual report of their evaluation by July

15 each year describing the results of this monitoring program. These

results will be reviewed prior to continuation of the experiment during

the 3-year experimental period and modifications of the area open to

hunting during this period will be required if Dusky Canada geese are

found to be present during the season.

B. Regular Seasons

Council Recommendations: The Upper-Region Regulations Committee of

the Mississippi Flyway Council recommended Michigan and Wisconsin be

allowed to open their regular Canada goose season as early as September

7, 1997, in Michigan's Upper Peninsula and September 20, 1997, in

Wisconsin.

Service Response: The Service concurs.

9. Sandhill Cranes

e present during the season.

B. Regular Seasons

Council Recommendations: The Upper-Region Regulations Committee of

the Mississippi Flyway Council recommended Michigan and Wisconsin be

allowed to open their regular Canada goose season as early as September

7, 1997, in Michigan's Upper Peninsula and September 20, 1997, in

Wisconsin.

Service Response: The Service concurs.

9. Sandhill Cranes

Council Recommendations: The Central Flyway and Pacific Flyway

Councils recommended that in Montana, sandhill cranes in Wheatland

County and that portion of Sweet Grass County north of I-90 be

delineated as Rocky Mountain Population sandhill cranes. Thus,

management of these

cranes, including harvest, would be guided by the Rocky Mountain

Population Sandhill Crane Management Plan, rather than the Mid-

Continent Population Sandhill Crane Management Plan.

Service Response: The Service agrees with this minor change.

14. Woodcock

Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended

framework dates of October 6 to January 31, a 30-day season and 3-bird

daily bag limit. The Council urged the Service to make assessment of

the relative effects of harvest and habitat on woodcock populations a

high priority.

The Mississippi Flyway Council recommended adoption of an interim

woodcock harvest strategy for the Central region until such time as

Regional Woodcock Management Plans and a long-term harvest strategy are

completed. The interim harvest strategy would consist of the following:

The following harvest restrictions would be implemented when the

cumulative change since 1968 in the number of woodcock heard in the

Singing-ground Survey exceeds 51 percent for the Central Management

Region:

(1) Season framework dates would be the Saturday nearest

September 22 through January.

erm harvest strategy are

completed. The interim harvest strategy would consist of the following:

The following harvest restrictions would be implemented when the

cumulative change since 1968 in the number of woodcock heard in the

Singing-ground Survey exceeds 51 percent for the Central Management

Region:

(1) Season framework dates would be the Saturday nearest

September 22 through January.

(2) The daily bag limit would be reduced from 5 to 3 birds.

Public-Hearing Comments: Mr. Robert McDowell, representing the

Atlantic Flyway Council, expressed reluctant support for the

recommendation for more restrictive framework dates and season lengths

for woodcock. However, he indicated that given the proposed September

20 opening framework in the Mississippi and Central Flyway States,

perhaps October 1, rather than October 6, would be a more appropriate

opening date for the Atlantic Flyway. He encouraged the Service to

assess the relative roles of harvest and habitat changes in woodcock

population declines.

Mr. Charles D. Kelley, representing the Southeastern Association of

Fish and Wildlife Agencies, acknowledged the problem with declining

woodcock populations and encouraged the Service to work with the States

to address the problem of diminishing woodcock habitat.

Mr. William H. Goudy, representing the Ruffed Grouse Society,

expressed concern about the lost recreational opportunity that will

result from reduced season lengths and bag limits, particularly in the

Mississippi Flyway. Although the change in bag limits would be

acceptable, he regretted the loss in days. He indicated that the

population data on which the Service bases its decisions is flawed and

subject to criticism and that there is no information on what effects

the changes in regulations will have. He expressed support for the

expanded use of zones for woodcock hunting.

Public-Hearing Comments: Mr

lyway. Although the change in bag limits would be

acceptable, he regretted the loss in days. He indicated that the

population data on which the Service bases its decisions is flawed and

subject to criticism and that there is no information on what effects

the changes in regulations will have. He expressed support for the

expanded use of zones for woodcock hunting.

Public-Hearing Comments: Mr. Robert McDowell, representing the

Atlantic Flyway Council, stressed that the decline in woodcock numbers

was of great concern and supported the proposed harvest restrictions,

but questioned the ability to assess the role of harvest in woodcock

population dynamics.

Written Comments: The New Jersey Division of Fish, Game, and

Wildlife supported the Atlantic Flyway Council's recommended framework

dates of October 6 to January 31, a 30-day season and 3-bird daily bag

limit. Although they believed that the population declines were the

result of habitat changes and harvest played little or no role in the

declines, they realized that the data bases regarding woodcock

populations are not adequate to assess the role of harvest in woodcock

population dynamics. They further urged the Service to make assessment

of the relative effects of harvest and habitat on woodcock populations

a high priority.

The Louisiana Wildlife Federation (LWF) urged the Service to

reconsider and allow for a 65-day season and a 5-bird daily bag limit

in the Central Region. The LWF was concerned that the proposed

reductions would reduce participation and needed support for woodcock

conservation.

Two individuals from Michigan and one from Ohio supported more

restrictive woodcock hunting regulations with two indicating that

restrictions were overdue. They also noted the importance of habitat

management.

Three individuals from Wisconsin and one from Michigan supported

reducing the bag limit from 5 to 3 birds but expressed concerns about

other possible regulatory changes

conservation.

Two individuals from Michigan and one from Ohio supported more

restrictive woodcock hunting regulations with two indicating that

restrictions were overdue. They also noted the importance of habitat

management.

Three individuals from Wisconsin and one from Michigan supported

reducing the bag limit from 5 to 3 birds but expressed concerns about

other possible regulatory changes. Three of these individuals indicated

a shorter season would be acceptable but felt that the framework

opening date should remain September 15, noting that hunting

opportunity in northern areas would be affected disproportionately by a

later framework opening date.

An individual from Wisconsin felt that changes in regulations

should only be made when it is certain that they will help the

population. He also indicated the season should begin before October 1

and that it should not be shorter than 45 days.

An individual from Michigan indicated that based on his personal

observations, woodcock populations have not declined. He felt that an

opening date later than September 15 would take away the best time to

hunt and suggested different opening and closing dates based on

latitude. Another individual from Michigan implied that regulations

should not be changed unless hunting mortality is causing the

population declines. She also listed a number of questions related to

woodcock population ecology she believes the Service should answer,

presumably before changing regulations.

An individual from Kentucky thought that reducing the woodcock

harvest would help a little but would not solve the problem. He noted

the importance of habitat management.

Seventeen individuals from Louisiana, one individual from

Pennsylvania, and one from Vermont opposed changes in regulations,

generally citing habitat changes and/or weather as the causes of the

woodcock population decline

An individual from Kentucky thought that reducing the woodcock

harvest would help a little but would not solve the problem. He noted

the importance of habitat management.

Seventeen individuals from Louisiana, one individual from

Pennsylvania, and one from Vermont opposed changes in regulations,

generally citing habitat changes and/or weather as the causes of the

woodcock population decline. Many of these individuals were concerned

that more restrictive regulations would reduce the number of woodcock

hunters and thus, support for woodcock conservation. Four of these

individuals indicated that the Service should improve its ability to

monitor woodcock populations before restricting hunting regulations.

An individual from Louisiana was not opposed to restrictions

provided that accurate data indicate that hunting pressure is the major

cause of the population declines.

Three individuals from Texas opposed more restrictive hunting

regulations based on the presumption that the Singing-ground Survey is

statistically flawed and potentially biased.

Service Response: Woodcock populations have declined significantly

since the 1960s, and in recent years reproductive success has been

poor. The Service is very concerned about the ongoing declines in

woodcock populations. Although hunting mortality is not believed to be

the major force driving the declines, the Service believes some

restrictions to woodcock harvest management are appropriate given the

current status and trends of woodcock populations and the limited

information on the role of hunting mortality and other factors in

woodcock population dynamics. While habitat changes appear to be the

primary cause of the woodcock population declines, other factors,

including hunting

the declines, the Service believes some

restrictions to woodcock harvest management are appropriate given the

current status and trends of woodcock populations and the limited

information on the role of hunting mortality and other factors in

woodcock population dynamics. While habitat changes appear to be the

primary cause of the woodcock population declines, other factors,

including hunting

mortality, may be contributing to the declines, and the importance of

these factors may increase as populations, reproductive success, and

the habitat base decline. Thus, the Service believes that hunting

regulations should be commensurate with woodcock population status and

rates of decline. A combination of changes in framework dates, bag

limits, and season length are necessary in order to achieve a

significant reduction in harvest that is shared throughout the range of

the woodcock.

Therefore, in response to continuing long-term declines in the

woodcock population, the Service is proposing several framework

changes. In the Eastern Region, the Service concurs with the

recommendation from the Atlantic Flyway Council and proposes framework

dates of October 6 through January 31, season length of 30 days, and a

daily bag limit of 3 birds. New Jersey may continue to select 2 zones

with a reduced season length of 24 days in each zone. In the Central

Region, the Service proposes framework dates of the Saturday nearest

September 22 (September 20 this year) through January 31, a reduced

season length of 45 days (from 65 days), and a bag limit reduction from

5 to 3 birds.

The Service's proposal is intended to reduce harvest, but not

reduce the number of patricipatory hunters. The proposed restrictions

represent a compromise to achieve a reduction in harvest while still

allowing reasonable recreational opportunity

mber 22 (September 20 this year) through January 31, a reduced

season length of 45 days (from 65 days), and a bag limit reduction from

5 to 3 birds.

The Service's proposal is intended to reduce harvest, but not

reduce the number of patricipatory hunters. The proposed restrictions

represent a compromise to achieve a reduction in harvest while still

allowing reasonable recreational opportunity.

The Service also acknowledges that existing woodcock surveys are

somewhat limited compared to surveys for some other migratory bird

species, and believes this is one of the reasons a cautious approach to

harvest management is appropriate. Although the Service always seeks to

improve its monitoring programs whenever practical, woodcock

populations are inherently difficult to monitor because of the bird's

inconspicuous nature and preference for areas with dense vegetation.

Although some aspects of the Singing-ground Survey may warrant scrutiny

and/or improvement, the current survey provides the only index to

changes in abundance of breeding populations of woodcock and the

results are used with confidence to guide the decision-making process.

Improved information on total woodcock harvest and hunter success will

be available when the Harvest Information Program, currently being

implemented by the Service and State wildlife agencies, is fully

implemented. Unfortunately, this information is not likely to clarify

the relationship between hunting mortality and population status.

The Service notes that a 30-day season with an October 1 framework

opening date would result in little or no reduction in harvest in the

northern states in the Atlantic Flyway, where much of the harvest in

the Flyway occurs. Thus, the Service concurs with the original October

6 recommendation by the Atlantic Flyway Council, which was not

predicated on the establishment of specific regulations in the

Mississippi and Central flyways

ith an October 1 framework

opening date would result in little or no reduction in harvest in the

northern states in the Atlantic Flyway, where much of the harvest in

the Flyway occurs. Thus, the Service concurs with the original October

6 recommendation by the Atlantic Flyway Council, which was not

predicated on the establishment of specific regulations in the

Mississippi and Central flyways.

The Service believes zoning has the potential to increase the

harvest of woodcock, and therefore does not support the expanded use of

zoning at a time when more restrictive woodcock hunting regulations are

being established to bring harvest opportunities to a level more

commensurate with current woodcock population status.

The Service seeks active participation by the Flyway Councils to

address the major factors behind long-term population declines, and to

develop a long-term harvest strategy for woodcock.

17. White-winged and White-tipped Doves

Council Recommendations: The Central Flyway Council recommended

removing the restriction of no more than 6 white-winged doves in the

aggregate daily bag limit during the regular mourning dove season in

Texas.

Service Response: The Service supports removing the restriction on

the number of white-winged doves allowed within the aggregate daily bag

limit during the regular dove season in Texas. White-winged doves have

been expanding their distribution and density northward in Texas.

Populations have doubled since 1989 with an estimated 702,000

whitewings nesting in a 17-county area north of the Lower Rio Grande

Valley (LRGV) which, historically, was the only area occupied by the

birds. No increase in harvest is expected for whitewings in the LRGV.

In the remainder of the State, a harvest increase of 15 percent is

projected.

18. Alaska

on and density northward in Texas.

Populations have doubled since 1989 with an estimated 702,000

whitewings nesting in a 17-county area north of the Lower Rio Grande

Valley (LRGV) which, historically, was the only area occupied by the

birds. No increase in harvest is expected for whitewings in the LRGV.

In the remainder of the State, a harvest increase of 15 percent is

projected.

18. Alaska

Council Recommendations: The Pacific Flyway Council recommended an

experimental tundra swan season in the Kotzebue Sound region of

Alaska's Game Management Unit (GMU 23), which would be consistent with

the Pacific Flyway Management Plan's harvest and permit guidelines for

the Western Population of [Tundra] swans, and current guidelines for

conducting experimental seasons (3-year evaluation). The recommended

season framework would be September 1 - October 31 with a 3-swan per

season limit (by sequential permit) and a maximum of 300 permits in the

GMU.

The Pacific Flyway Council recommended an increase in Alaska's dark

goose daily bag and possession limits from 4 and 8 to 6 and 12,

respectively in GMU 9(D) and the Unimak Island portion of Unit 10.

The Pacific Flyway Council recommended an increase in Alaska's

falconry bag limits to 6 daily and 12 in possession for migratory birds

in the aggregate. Restrictive species limits would not be applied.

Service Response: The Service concurs with the proposal to offer an

experimental Tundra swan season in GMU 23 consistent with the

management plan and hunt guidelines in the Flyway Management plan. The

Service also supports the change in the dark goose bag and possession

limits in Units 9(D) and the Unimak Island portion of Unit 10. The

Service finds no compelling rational for the request to alter the

falconry bag and possession limits in Alaska and will maintain the

existing national falconry bag and possession limits in all States.

23. Other

A. Compensatory Days

way Management plan. The

Service also supports the change in the dark goose bag and possession

limits in Units 9(D) and the Unimak Island portion of Unit 10. The

Service finds no compelling rational for the request to alter the

falconry bag and possession limits in Alaska and will maintain the

existing national falconry bag and possession limits in all States.

23. Other

A. Compensatory Days

Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council requested the

Service grant compensatory days for States in their Flyway that are

closed to waterfowl hunting statewide on Sunday by State law. The

Council's requested compensatory days would apply to waterfowl seasons

only and not to other migratory game birds. The compensatory request

includes the States of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland,

Massachusetts, New Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and

West Virginia. The Council believes that allowing granting this request

at this time will allow integration of these changes into AHM

evaluations of harvest rates in the Flyway and selection of appropriate

regulatory alternatives.

Public-Hearing Comments: Mr. Robert McDowell, representing the

Atlantic Flyway Council, offered to modify the Flyway's original

request for compensatory days to states closed to Sunday hunting by

restricting it to only those states with existing statewide

prohibitions in place prior to its implementation. This action prevents

any states from enacting new laws to close Sunday hunting in order to

be eligible for compensatory days.

Written Comments: The South Carolina Department of Natural

modify the Flyway's original

request for compensatory days to states closed to Sunday hunting by

restricting it to only those states with existing statewide

prohibitions in place prior to its implementation. This action prevents

any states from enacting new laws to close Sunday hunting in order to

be eligible for compensatory days.

Written Comments: The South Carolina Department of Natural

Resources asserted that Sunday closures of waterfowl hunting are State

issues and should not be addressed by the Service. South Carolina

further asserted that if the Service grants compensatory days to States

that are currently closed on Sundays by State law, then compensatory

days should also be granted to States that enact Sunday closures in the

future.

The Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife recommended that the

Service grant compensatory days in lieu of Sunday hunting on a 1 for 1

basis to restricted States with no penalty to unrestricted States.

The Maryland Department of Natural Resources (Maryland) requested

that the Service grant compensatory days to the 10 Atlantic Flyway

States that are closed to waterfowl hunting on Sunday by State law.

They believe that compensatory days would enable these States to

equally share in the recreational benefits derived from the Atlantic

Flyway's waterfowl resource. Maryland supported the Federal closure of

Sunday in Maryland for the taking of wild waterfowl if the Service

deemed this approach necessary to provide compensatory days. However,

Maryland further requested the Service give consideration to the

current Sunday hunting exception Maryland grants falconers.

The New Jersey Division of Fish, Game and Wildlife (New Jersey)

requested the Service grant compensatory days for States in their

Flyway that are closed to waterfowl hunting statewide on Sunday by

State law. New Jersey's requested compensatory days would apply to

waterfowl seasons only and not to other migratory game birds

on to the

current Sunday hunting exception Maryland grants falconers.

The New Jersey Division of Fish, Game and Wildlife (New Jersey)

requested the Service grant compensatory days for States in their

Flyway that are closed to waterfowl hunting statewide on Sunday by

State law. New Jersey's requested compensatory days would apply to

waterfowl seasons only and not to other migratory game birds. The

compensatory request includes the States of Connecticut, Delaware,

Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, North Carolina,

Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia.

Service Response: In 1995, the Service committed to working with

the Atlantic Flyway Council to review and better clarify the issue of

compensatory days for those States prohibiting Sunday hunting in an

attempt to resolve this long-standing issue. In the past, the Service

has maintained the policy that this problem is an individual State

issue, to be resolved by each State removing their self-imposed

restrictions. However, recognizing the difficulties involved with

changing State law, the Service is sympathetic to the loss of hunting

opportunity that results from the existing prohibitions on Sunday

hunting. A recent Service assessment suggests that compensatory days

for Sunday closures will result in a slight percent increase in the

harvest rates of mallards breeding in eastern Canada and the

northeastern U.S., which would be accompanied by a small percent

decrease in average breeding population size. A similar effect is

expected on other species, although a formal assessment for all duck

species is not yet available. Thus, after examining the various

technical and policy concerns, the Service believes that any additional

harvest impacts can be adjusted by changing regulatory frameworks where

needed and that various administrative and procedural concurs can be

managed. Therefore, during the 1997-98 hunting season, the Service

proposes to offer compensatory days to States in accordance to the

following guidelines:

ter examining the various

technical and policy concerns, the Service believes that any additional

harvest impacts can be adjusted by changing regulatory frameworks where

needed and that various administrative and procedural concurs can be

managed. Therefore, during the 1997-98 hunting season, the Service

proposes to offer compensatory days to States in accordance to the

following guidelines:

(1) Only States in the Atlantic Flyway that prohibit Sunday

hunting Statewide by State law prior to 1997 are eligible

(Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey,

North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia).

(2) All Sundays will be closed to all take (including extended

falconry) of migratory waterfowl (including mergansers and coots) by

Federal rulemaking. Other migratory game species are not eligible

for compensatory days.

(3) Season days must run consecutively within prescribed

framework dates and season length, excluding the Sunday closure, and

conform to existing split-season criteria. Total season days

(including extended falconry) must not exceed 107 days.

Public Comment Invited

The Service intends that adopted final rules be as responsive as

possible to all concerned interests, and wants to obtain the comments

and suggestions from all interested areas of the public, as well as

other governmental agencies. Such comments, and any additional

information received, may lead to final regulations that differ from

these proposals. However, special circumstances involved in the

establishment of these regulations limit the amount of time the Service

can allow for public comment

wants to obtain the comments

and suggestions from all interested areas of the public, as well as

other governmental agencies. Such comments, and any additional

information received, may lead to final regulations that differ from

these proposals. However, special circumstances involved in the

establishment of these regulations limit the amount of time the Service

can allow for public comment. Specifically, two considerations compress

the time in which the rulemaking process must operate: (1) the need to

establish final rules at a point early enough in the summer to allow

affected State agencies to appropriately adjust their licensing and

regulatory mechanisms; and (2) the unavailability, before mid-June, of

specific, reliable data on this year's status of some waterfowl and

migratory shore and upland game bird populations. Therefore, the

Service believes allowing comment periods past the dates specified is

contrary to public interest.

Comment Procedure

It is the policy of the Department of the Interior to afford the

public an opportunity to participate in the rulemaking process,

whenever practical. Accordingly, interested persons may participate by

submitting written comments to the Chief, MBMO, at the address listed

under the caption ADDRESSES. The public may inspect comments during

normal business hours at the Service's office address listed under the

caption ADDRESSES. The Service will consider all relevant comments

received and will try to acknowledge received comments, but may not

provide an individual response to each commenter.

NEPA Consideration

comments to the Chief, MBMO, at the address listed

under the caption ADDRESSES. The public may inspect comments during

normal business hours at the Service's office address listed under the

caption ADDRESSES. The Service will consider all relevant comments

received and will try to acknowledge received comments, but may not

provide an individual response to each commenter.

NEPA Consideration

NEPA considerations are covered by the programmatic document,

``Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement: Issuance of Annual

Regulations Permitting the Sport Hunting of Migratory Birds (FSES 88-

14),'' filed with EPA on June 9, 1988. The Service published a Notice

of Availability in the June 16, 1988, Federal Register (53 FR 22582).

The Service published its Record of Decision on August 18, 1988 (53 FR

31341). Copies of these documents are available from the Service at the

address indicated under the caption ADDRESSES.

Endangered Species Act Consideration

As in the past, the Service will design hunting regulations to

remove or alleviate chances of conflict between migratory game bird

hunting seasons and the protection and conservation of endangered and

threatened species. Consultations are presently under way to ensure

that actions resulting from these regulatory proposals will not likely

jeopardize the continued existence of endangered or threatened species

or result in the destruction or adverse modification of their critical

habitat. Findings from these consultations will be included in a

biological opinion and may cause modification of some regulatory

measures proposed in this document. The final frameworks will reflect

any modifications. The Service's biological opinions resulting from its

Section 7 consultation are public documents and will be available for

public inspection in the Service's Division of Endangered Species and

MBMO, at the address indicated under the caption ADDRESSES.

Regulatory Flexibility Act; Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 and the

Paperwork Reduction Act

The final frameworks will reflect

any modifications. The Service's biological opinions resulting from its

Section 7 consultation are public documents and will be available for

public inspection in the Service's Division of Endangered Species and

MBMO, at the address indicated under the caption ADDRESSES.

Regulatory Flexibility Act; Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 and the

Paperwork Reduction Act

In the March 13, 1997, Federal Register, the Service reported

measures

it took to comply with requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act

and E.O. 12866. One measure was to prepare a Small Entity Flexibility

Analysis (Analysis) in 1996 documenting the significant beneficial

economic effect on a substantial number of small entities. The Analysis

estimated that migratory bird hunters would spend between $254 and $592

million at small businesses. Copies of the Analysis are available upon

request from the Office of Migratory Bird Management. This proposed

rule was not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget

under E.O. 12866.

The Service examined these proposed regulations under the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995. The various information collection requirements

are utilized in the formulation of migratory game bird hunting

regulations. OMB has approved these information collection requirements

and assigned clearance numbers 1018-0015 and 1018-0023.

Unfunded Mandates

The Service has determined and certifies in compliance with the

requirements of the Unfunded Mandates Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502 et seq., that

this rulemaking will not impose a cost of $100 million or more in any

given year on local or State government or private entities.

Civil Justice Reform--Executive Order 12988

The Department, in promulgating this proposed rule, has determined

that these regulations meet the applicable standards provided in

Sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 20

this rulemaking will not impose a cost of $100 million or more in any

given year on local or State government or private entities.

Civil Justice Reform--Executive Order 12988

The Department, in promulgating this proposed rule, has determined

that these regulations meet the applicable standards provided in

Sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 20

Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Transportation, Wildlife.

The rules that eventually will be promulgated for the 1997-98

hunting season are authorized under 16 U.S.C. 703-711, 16 U.S.C. 712,

and 16 U.S.C. 742 a-j.

Dated: July 16, 1997.

Joseph E. Doddridge,

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.

Proposed Regulations Frameworks for 1997-98 Early Hunting Seasons

on Certain Migratory Game Birds

Pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and delegated

authorities, the Department of the Interior approved the following

proposed frameworks which prescribe season lengths, bag limits,

shooting hours, and outside dates within which States may select for

certain migratory game birds between September 1, 1997, and March 10,

1998.

General

Dates: All outside dates noted below are inclusive.

Shooting and Hawking (taking by falconry) Hours: Unless otherwise

specified, from one-half hour before sunrise to sunset daily.

Possession Limits: Unless otherwise specified, possession limits

are twice the daily bag limit.

Area, Zone, and Unit Descriptions: Geographic descriptions are

contained in a later portion of this document.

Compensatory Days in the Atlantic Flyway: In the Atlantic Flyway

States of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New

Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia,

where Sunday hunting is prohibited statewide by State law, all Sundays

are closed to all take of migratory waterfowl (including mergansers and

coots).

Special September Teal Season

s document.

Compensatory Days in the Atlantic Flyway: In the Atlantic Flyway

States of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New

Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia,

where Sunday hunting is prohibited statewide by State law, all Sundays

are closed to all take of migratory waterfowl (including mergansers and

coots).

Special September Teal Season

Outside Dates: Between September 1 and September 30, an open season

on all species of teal may be selected by Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado

(Central Flyway portion only), Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky,

Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, New Mexico (Central Flyway portion

only), Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas in areas delineated by

State regulations.

Hunting Seasons and Daily Bag Limits: Not to exceed 9 consecutive

days, with a daily bag limit of 4 teal.

Shooting Hours: One-half hour before sunrise to sunset, except in

Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, and Ohio, where the hours are

from sunrise to sunset.

Special September Duck Seasons

Florida: An experimental 5-consecutive-day season may be selected

in September. The daily bag limit may not exceed 4 teal and wood ducks

in the aggregate.

Kentucky and Tennessee: In lieu of a special September teal season,

an experimental 5-consecutive-day season may be selected in September.

The daily bag limit may not exceed 4 teal and wood ducks in the

aggregate, of which no more than 2 may be wood ducks.

Iowa: Iowa may hold up to 5 days of its regular duck hunting season

in September. All ducks which are legal during the regular duck season

may be taken during the September segment of the season. The September

season segment may commence no earlier than the Saturday nearest

September 20 (September 20). The daily bag and possession limits will

be the same as those in effect last year, but are subject to change

during the late-season regulations process. The remainder of the

regular duck season may not begin before October 10.

on

may be taken during the September segment of the season. The September

season segment may commence no earlier than the Saturday nearest

September 20 (September 20). The daily bag and possession limits will

be the same as those in effect last year, but are subject to change

during the late-season regulations process. The remainder of the

regular duck season may not begin before October 10.

Scoter, Eider, and Oldsquaw Ducks (Atlantic Flyway)

Outside Dates: Between September 15 and January 20.

Hunting Seasons and Daily Bag Limits: Not to exceed 107 days, with

a daily bag limit of 7, singly or in the aggregate of the listed sea-

duck species, of which no more than 4 may be scoters.

Daily Bag Limits During the Regular Duck Season: Within the special

sea duck areas, during the regular duck season in the Atlantic Flyway,

States may choose to allow the above sea duck limits in addition to the

limits applying to other ducks during the regular duck season. In all

other areas, sea ducks may be taken only during the regular open season

for ducks and must be included in the regular duck season daily bag and

possession limits.

Areas: In all coastal waters and all waters of rivers and streams

seaward from the first upstream bridge in Maine, New Hampshire,

Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New York; in any waters

of the Atlantic Ocean and in any tidal waters of any bay which are

separated by at least 1 mile of open water from any shore, island, and

emergent vegetation in New Jersey, South Carolina, and Georgia; and in

any waters of the Atlantic Ocean and in any tidal waters of any bay

which are separated by at least 800 yards of open water from any shore,

island, and emergent vegetation in Delaware, Maryland, North Carolina

and Virginia; and provided that any such areas have been described,

delineated, and designated as special sea-duck hunting areas under the

hunting regulations adopted by the respective States.

Special Early Canada Goose Seasons

Atlantic Flyway

any bay

which are separated by at least 800 yards of open water from any shore,

island, and emergent vegetation in Delaware, Maryland, North Carolina

and Virginia; and provided that any such areas have been described,

delineated, and designated as special sea-duck hunting areas under the

hunting regulations adopted by the respective States.

Special Early Canada Goose Seasons

Atlantic Flyway

General Seasons

Canada goose seasons of up to 15 days during September 1-15 may be

selected for the Montezuma Region of New York; the Lake Champlain

Region of New York and Vermont; the Counties of Caroline, Cecil,

Dorchester, and Talbot in Maryland; Delaware; and Crawford County in

Pennsylvania. Seasons not to exceed 20 days during September 1-20 may

be selected for the Northeast Hunt Unit of North Carolina. Seasons may

not exceed 25 days during September 1-25 in the remainder of the

Flyway, except

Georgia and Florida, where the season is closed. Areas open to the

hunting of Canada geese must be described, delineated, and designated

as such in each State's hunting regulations.

Daily Bag Limits: Not to exceed 5 Canada geese.

Experimental Seasons

Experimental Canada goose seasons of up to 30 days during September

1-30 may be selected by New Jersey, New York (Long Island Zone), North

Carolina (except in the Northeast Hunt Unit), and South Carolina.

Experimental Canada goose seasons of up to 25 days during September 1-

25 may be selected in Crawford County, Pennsylvania. Areas open to the

hunting of Canada geese must be described, delineated, and designated

as such in each State's hunting regulations.

Daily Bag Limits: Not to exceed 5 Canada geese.

Mississippi Flyway

orth

Carolina (except in the Northeast Hunt Unit), and South Carolina.

Experimental Canada goose seasons of up to 25 days during September 1-

25 may be selected in Crawford County, Pennsylvania. Areas open to the

hunting of Canada geese must be described, delineated, and designated

as such in each State's hunting regulations.

Daily Bag Limits: Not to exceed 5 Canada geese.

Mississippi Flyway

General Seasons

Canada goose seasons of up to 15 days during September 1-15 may be

selected, except in the Upper Peninsula in Michigan, where the season

may not extend beyond September 10, and in the Michigan Counties of

Huron, Saginaw and Tuscola, where no special season may be held. The

daily bag limit may not exceed 5 Canada geese. Areas open to the

hunting of Canada geese must be described, delineated, and designated

as such in each State's hunting regulations.

Central Flyway

General Seasons

Canada goose seasons of up to 15 days during September 1-15 may be

selected. The daily bag limit may not exceed 5 Canada geese. Areas open

to the hunting of Canada geese must be described, delineated, and

designated as such in each State's hunting regulations.

Pacific Flyway

General Seasons

Wyoming may select an 8-day season on Canada geese between

September 1-15. This season is subject to the following conditions:

1. Where applicable, the season must be concurrent with the

September portion of the sandhill crane season.

2. All participants must have a valid State permit for the

special season.

3. A daily bag limit of 2, with season and possession limits of

4 will apply to the special season.

Oregon may select an experimental special Canada goose season of up

to 15 days during the period September 1-20. Daily bag limits may not

exceed 5 Canada geese. At a minimum, Oregon must provide an annual

evaluation of the number of Dusky Canada geese present in the hunt zone

during the period September 16-20 and agree to adjust seasons as

necessary to avoid any potential harvest of Dusky Canada geese

y select an experimental special Canada goose season of up

to 15 days during the period September 1-20. Daily bag limits may not

exceed 5 Canada geese. At a minimum, Oregon must provide an annual

evaluation of the number of Dusky Canada geese present in the hunt zone

during the period September 16-20 and agree to adjust seasons as

necessary to avoid any potential harvest of Dusky Canada geese.

Washington may select a special Canada goose season of up to 15

days during the period September 1-15. Daily bag limits may not exceed

3 Canada geese.

Idaho may select a 15-day season

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.