# 62 FR 39712: Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed Frameworks for Early-Season Migratory Bird Hunting Regulations and Final Regulatory Alternatives for the 1997-98 Duck Hunting Season

> Federal · Regulations · In force

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FR_PRORULE_97-19397

## Section

- **Citation:** 62 FR 39712
- **Heading:** Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed Frameworks for Early-Season Migratory Bird Hunting Regulations and Final Regulatory Alternatives for the 1997-98 Duck Hunting Season
- **Jurisdiction:** Federal
- **Kind:** Regulations
- **Status:** In force
- **Text as of:** August 14, 2026
- **Source:** Compiled text
- **Location:** Federal Register / Vol. 62 / 62 FR 39712

## Text

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 f

[Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.]

## Nearby sections

- [62 FR 55 Oranges and Grapefruit Grown in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas; Reapportionment of Membership on the Texas Valley Citrus Committee](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FR_PRORULE_96-33328.md)
- [62 FR 71 Recomputation of Life Insurance Reserves](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FR_PRORULE_96-32855.md)
- [62 FR 84 Television Broadcasting Services; Pueblo, CO](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FR_PRORULE_96-33340.md)
- [62 FR 348 Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace; Stuart, VA](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FR_PRORULE_97-79.md)
- [62 FR 373 Radio Broadcasting Services; Cloudcroft, New Mexico](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FR_PRORULE_97-40.md)
- [62 FR 691 National Standards for Traffic Control Devices; Revision of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices; Markings, Signals, and Traffic Control Systems for Railroad-Highway Grade Crossings](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FR_PRORULE_96-33405.md)
- [62 FR 695 Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Ohio](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FR_PRORULE_97-195.md)
- [62 FR 949 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Industrie Model A320 and A321 Series Airplanes](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FR_PRORULE_97-252.md)
- [62 FR 1064 Proposed amendment of Class E airspace, Jackson, Wyoming](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FR_PRORULE_97-313.md)
- [62 FR 1065 Establishment of Class E Airspace; Gregory, SD, Gregory Municipal Airport](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FR_PRORULE_97-312.md)
- [62 FR 1071 Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace; Milton, FL](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FR_PRORULE_97-306.md)
- [62 FR 1298 Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & Whitney JT8D Series Turbofan Engines](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FR_PRORULE_97-469.md)
- [62 FR 1705 Atlantic Swordfish Fishery; Atlantic Shark Fishery; Public Hearings on Draft Amendment 1 to the Fishery Management Plan for Sharks of the Atlantic Ocean](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FR_PRORULE_97-698.md)
- [62 FR 1705 Royalty Rate Reduction for Stripper Oil Properties](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FR_PRORULE_97-738.md)

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FR_PRORULE_97-19397. Check the current official text before relying on it. Not legal advice.