Proposed Rule2021-13476
Revision of Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp (Duck Stamp) Contest Regulations
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
June 23, 2021
Issuing agencies
Interior DepartmentFish and Wildlife Service
Abstract
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to revise the regulations governing the annual Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp Contest (also known as the Federal Duck Stamp Contest (Contest)). Our proposed amendments would remove the previously specified permanent theme and the mandatory inclusion of an appropriate hunting element within all Contest entries and revise the qualifications of the judging panel to reflect this change. This change would be scheduled to begin with the 2022 Contest.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 86 Issue 118 (Wednesday, June 23, 2021)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 118 (Wednesday, June 23, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32878-32881]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2021-13476]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 91
[Docket No. FWS-HQ-MB-2021-0048; FXMB12330900000//212//FF09M13000]
RIN 1018-BF62
Revision of Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp
(Duck Stamp) Contest Regulations
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
revise the regulations governing the annual Migratory Bird Hunting and
Conservation Stamp Contest (also known as the Federal Duck Stamp
Contest (Contest)). Our proposed amendments would remove the previously
specified permanent theme and the mandatory inclusion of an appropriate
hunting element within all Contest entries and revise the
qualifications of the judging panel to reflect this change. This change
would be scheduled to begin with the 2022 Contest.
DATES: We will accept comments that we receive on or before July 23,
2021. Please note that if you are using the Federal eRulemaking Portal
(see ADDRESSES, below), the deadline for submitting an electronic
comment is 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing date.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
<bullet> Federal eRulemaking Portal: <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">http://www.regulations.gov</a>.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments on Docket No. FWS-HQ-
MB-2021-0048.
<bullet> U.S. Mail: Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-HQ-MB-
2021-0048, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 5275 Leesburg Pike, MS: JAO/
3W, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
We will not accept hand-delivered, emailed, or faxed comments. We
will post all comments on <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. This generally
means that your entire submission--including any personal identifying
information--will be posted on the website. See Public Comments
Procedures and Public Availability of Comments, below, for more
information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerome Ford, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Department of the Interior, (202) 208-1050.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
History of the Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp
(Duck Stamp) Program
On March 16, 1934, Congress passed and President Franklin D.
Roosevelt signed the Migratory Bird Hunting Stamp Act, which was later
amended to become the Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp Act
(16 U.S.C. 718-718j, 48 Stat. 452). Popularly known as the Duck Stamp
Act, the law requires all waterfowl hunters who have attained the age
of 16 to buy an annual stamp. Funds generated from Duck Stamp sales are
used to protect waterfowl and wetland habitat that is incorporated into
the National Wildlife Refuge System from willing sellers and those
interested in obtaining conservation easements.
Over 1.5 million stamps are sold each year, and, as of 2021,
Federal Duck Stamps have generated more than $1.1 billion for the
conservation of more than 6 million acres of waterfowl habitat in the
United States. In addition to waterfowl, numerous other birds, mammals,
fish, reptiles, and amphibians benefit from habitat protected by the
Duck Stamp revenues, including an estimated one-third of the nation's
endangered and threatened species. The healthy wetlands protected by
Duck Stamp funding sequester carbon and contribute to addressing the
impacts of climate change, including absorbing flood waters and storm
surge. These wetlands purify water supplies and provide economic
support to local communities as they attract outdoor recreationists
from many different backgrounds.
History of the Duck Stamp Contest
The first Federal Duck Stamp was designed at President Roosevelt's
request by Jay N. ``Ding'' Darling, a nationally known political
cartoonist for the Des Moines Register and a hunter and wildlife
conservationist. In subsequent years, noted wildlife artists were asked
to submit designs for the stamp. The first Contest was opened in 1949
to any U.S. artist who wished to enter. Since then, the Contest has
attracted large numbers of entrants, and it remains the only art
competition of its kind sponsored by the U.S. Government. The Secretary
of the Interior appoints a panel of judges who have expertise in the
area of art, waterfowl, or philately to select each year's winning
design. Winners receive no compensation for the work, except a pane of
Duck Stamps, based on their winning design, signed
[[Page 32879]]
by the Secretary of the Interior. However, winners maintain the
copyright to their artwork and may sell prints of their designs, which
are sought by hunters, conservationists, and art collectors.
Waterfowl hunters have been the greatest contributors to the
program, as they are required to purchase Duck Stamps in order to hunt
waterfowl. Many individuals not engaged in hunting also purchase Duck
Stamps to contribute to conservation or for the stamp's artistic value.
The 2020 Final Rule and 2021 Contest
On May 8, 2020, the Service published a final rule (85 FR 27313)
revising the regulations at 50 CFR part 91 governing the annual Federal
Duck Stamp Contest. The Contest regulations made permanent the theme
``celebrating our waterfowl hunting heritage'' for all future Contests.
The regulations require the inclusion of a waterfowl hunting-related
scene or accessory in every entry but do not specify what accessories
to include. Requirements for the judging panel specified that all
judges would have one or more prerequisite qualifications, which could
include the ability to recognize waterfowl hunting accessories. An
image of a drake lesser scaup with a lanyard and duck calls was chosen
as the winner of the 2020 Contest, and this image will appear on the
2021-2022 Federal Duck Stamp when it is released for sale in July 2021.
The 2021 Contest species and regulations, with the permanent theme
and mandatory inclusion of waterfowl hunting-related accessories or
scenes in all entries, have been widely publicized and remain in effect
for the 2021 Contest with the entry period beginning on June 1, 2021.
The Service encourages artists to continue with their entries for the
2021 Contest and to adhere to the theme, entry qualifications, and
judging requirements as published in the current regulations. This
proposed rule, even if finalized before the 2021 Contest, will be
applicable beginning with the 2022 Contest and each Contest thereafter.
Proposed Changes to the Regulations at 50 CFR Part 91
With this proposed rule, we propose to remove the permanent
``celebrating our waterfowl hunting heritage'' theme and the mandatory
inclusion of an appropriate hunting-related element in Contest entries,
and accordingly revise the qualifications for selection as a judge and
the scoring criteria for the Contest, beginning with the 2022 Contest,
as described below. Since the implementation of the 2020 rule requiring
the inclusion of a mandatory hunting-related element, many Duck Stamp
Contest artists have continued to express their dissatisfaction with
this element being a requirement for all entries. The Service has
proposed this change to allow artists more freedom of expression when
designing their entries.
Currently, Sec. 91.14 explains that a live portrayal of any
bird(s) of the five or fewer identified eligible waterfowl species must
be the dominant feature of the design. In the May 8, 2020, final rule,
we added to Sec. 91.14 a paragraph (b) containing an additional
permanent requirement that all Contest entries must also include one or
more elements that reflect the theme ``celebrating our waterfowl
hunting heritage.'' We propose to remove this requirement. Removing
this requirement would not preclude artists from including other
appropriate elements (e.g., hunting dogs, decoys, and hunting scenes)
in their artwork as long as an eligible waterfowl species is in the
foreground, portrayed alive, and is clearly the focus of attention.
Paragraph (b) of Sec. 91.21 outlines the qualifications of the
judging panel. In the May 8, 2020, final rule, we revised Sec.
91.21(b) to add ``an understanding and appreciation of the waterfowl
hunting heritage and ability to recognize waterfowl hunting
accessories'' as a prerequisite for the judges, among the other
qualifications. We propose to remove that prerequisite from the
qualifications of Contest judges.
Finally, Sec. 91.23 sets forth the scoring criteria for the
competition. In the May 8, 2020, final rule, we revised the criteria to
include that Contest entries would also be judged on how well they
illustrate the theme of ``celebrating our waterfowl hunting heritage.''
We propose to remove that judging requirement.
Public Comments Procedures
To ensure that any final action resulting from this proposed rule
will be as accurate and as effective as possible, we request that you
send relevant information for our consideration. We will accept public
comments we receive on or before the date listed above in DATES. We are
striving to ensure that any final rule resulting from this proposed
rule would allow sufficient time for artists to prepare their
submissions by the June 1, 2022, opening of the 2022 Contest entry
submission period. The comments that will be most useful are those
supported by quantitative information or studies and those that include
citations to, and analyses of, the applicable laws and regulations.
Please make your comments as specific as possible and explain the basis
for them. In addition, please include sufficient information with your
comments to allow us to authenticate any scientific or commercial data
you include.
You must submit your comments and materials concerning this
proposed rule by one of the methods listed above in ADDRESSES. We will
not accept comments hand-delivered or those sent by email or fax or to
an address not listed in ADDRESSES. If you submit a comment via <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">http://www.regulations.gov</a>, your entire comment--including any personal
identifying information, such as your address, telephone number, or
email address--will be posted on the website. Please note that comments
submitted to this website are not immediately viewable. When you submit
a comment, the system receives it immediately. However, the comment
will not be publicly viewable until we post it, which might not occur
until several days after submission.
If you mail a hardcopy comment directly to us that includes
personal information, you may request at the top of your document that
we withhold this information from public review. However, we cannot
guarantee that we will be able to do so. To ensure that the electronic
docket for this rulemaking is complete and all comments we receive are
publicly available, we will post all hardcopy comments on <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">http://www.regulations.gov</a>.
In addition, all comments and materials we receive, as well as
supporting documentation used in preparing this proposed rule, will be
available for public inspection via <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">http://www.regulations.gov</a>. Search
for FWS-HQ-MB-2021-0048, which is the docket number for this
rulemaking.
Public Availability of Comments
As stated above in more detail, before including your address,
phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information
in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment,
including your personal identifying information, may be made publicly
available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold
your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot
guarantee that we will be able to do so.
Required Determinations
National Environmental Policy Act
This proposed rule is categorically excluded. It reflects an
administrative modification of procedures and the
[[Page 32880]]
impacts are limited to administrative effects (516 DM 8.5(a)(3)). A
detailed statement under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) is therefore not required.
Endangered Species Act Consideration
Of the species on our List of Eligible Species, only two species
are currently listed as endangered or threatened under section 4 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.). No legal complications arise from the dual listing as the two
lists are developed under separate authorities and for different
purposes. Because this proposed rule is strictly administrative in
nature, it has no effect on endangered or threatened species. Thus, it
does not require consultation under section 7 of the ESA.
Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)
Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant rules. OIRA has
determined that this proposed rule is not significant.
Executive Order (E.O.) 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866
while calling for improvements in the Nation's regulatory system to
promote predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best,
most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory
ends. The executive order directs agencies to consider regulatory
approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of
choice for the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible,
and consistent with regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes
further that regulations must be based on the best available science
and that the rulemaking process must allow for public participation and
an open exchange of ideas. We have developed this rule in a manner
consistent with these requirements.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (as amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996),
whenever a Federal agency is required to publish a notice of rulemaking
for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make available for
public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that describes the
effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small businesses, small
organizations, and small government jurisdictions) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.). However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the
head of an agency certifies that the rule would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Thus, for a
regulatory flexibility analysis to be required, impacts must exceed a
threshold for ``significant impact'' and a threshold for a
``substantial number of small entities.'' See 5 U.S.C. 605(b). SBREFA
amended the Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal agencies to
provide a statement of the factual basis for certifying that a rule
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. The changes we propose are intended primarily to
clarify the requirements for the Contest. These changes would affect
individuals, not businesses or other small entities as defined in the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. Currently, Duck Stamp sales average
approximately 1.5 million each year. Active waterfowl hunters, the only
people required to purchase an annual stamp, number approximately 1.1
million each year. Duck Stamps are also purchased by stamp and wildlife
art collectors, bird watchers, and other conservationists, and a
current stamp can be used for access at any national wildlife refuge
that has an entry fee. Many hunters also purchase multiple stamps for
different purposes. We are currently unable to quantify numbers of
stamps purchased by each user group; we do not anticipate being able to
attribute any variability in sales due to the proposed changes in the
Contest. In recent years, when no theme is required, we have received
an average of 200 entries per year to the Contest. We anticipate that
the number of entries into the Federal Duck Stamp Contest will range
between 140 and 250 in any given year.
We therefore certify that, if adopted, this proposed rule would not
have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small
entities as defined under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. A Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis is not required. Accordingly, a Small Entity
Compliance Guide is not required.
Clarity of This Rule
We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we publish must:
(a) Be logically organized;
(b) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
(c) Use clear language rather than jargon;
(d) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
(e) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us
comments by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To better help us
revise the rulemaking, your comments should be as specific as possible.
For example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections or
paragraphs that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences are
too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful,
etc.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)
This rulemaking is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This proposed rule:
(a) Would not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million
or more.
(b) Would not cause a major increase in costs or prices for
consumers; individual industries; Federal, State, or local government
agencies; or geographic regions.
(c) Would not have significant adverse effects on competition,
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of
U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA)
This rule does not contain any new collections of information that
require approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). OMB has
previously approved the information collection requirements associated
with the Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp (Duck
Stamp) Contest and assigned OMB Control Number 1018-0172. You may view
the information collection request(s) at <a href="http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain">http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain</a>. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays
a currently valid OMB control number.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This proposed rule would not impose an unfunded mandate on State,
local, or Tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100
million per year. The rulemaking does not have a significant or unique
effect on State, local, or Tribal governments or the private sector. A
statement containing the information required by the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not required.
[[Page 32881]]
Civil Justice Reform
In accordance with E.O. 12988, the Office of the Solicitor has
determined that this proposed rule does not unduly burden the judicial
system and that it meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of the Order.
Takings
In accordance with E.O. 12630, this proposed rule does not have
significant takings implications. A takings implication assessment is
not required.
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
On May 18, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13211 on
regulations that significantly affect energy supply, distribution, or
use. This proposed rule would revise the current regulations at 50 CFR
part 91 that govern the Federal Duck Stamp Contest. This rule would not
significantly affect energy supplies, distribution, or use. Therefore,
this action is a not a significant energy action and no Statement of
Energy Effects is required.
Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes
Under the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994, ``Government-
to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal Governments'' (59
FR 22951), and 512 DM 2, we have evaluated possible effects on
federally recognized Indian Tribes and have determined that there are
no effects. Individual Tribal members must meet the same regulatory
requirements as other individuals who enter the Federal Duck Stamp
Contest.
Federalism
These proposed revisions to part 91 do not contain significant
Federalism implications. A federalism summary impact statement under
Executive Order 13132 is not required.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 91
Hunting, Wildlife.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we propose to amend part 91, subchapter G of chapter
I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 91--MIGRATORY BIRD HUNTING AND CONSERVATION STAMP CONTEST
0
1. The authority citation for part 91 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 16 U.S.C. 718j; 31 U.S.C. 9701.
0
2. Revise Sec. 91.14 to read as follows:
Sec. 91.14 Restrictions on subject matter for entry.
A live portrayal of any bird(s) of the five or fewer identified
eligible waterfowl species must be the dominant feature of the design.
The design may depict more than one of the eligible species. The
judges' overall mandate is to select the best design that will make an
interesting, useful, and attractive duck stamp that will be accepted
and prized by hunters, stamp collectors, conservationists, and others.
The design must be the contestant's original hand-drawn creation. The
entry design may not be copied or duplicated from previously published
art, including photographs, or from images in any format published on
the internet. Photographs, computer-generated art, or art produced from
a computer printer or other computer/mechanical output device (airbrush
method excepted) are not eligible to be entered into the contest and
will be disqualified. An entry submitted in a prior contest that was
not selected for a Federal or State stamp design may be submitted in
the current contest if the entry meets the criteria set forth in this
section.
0
3. Amend Sec. 91.21 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 91.21 Selection and qualification of contest judges.
* * * * *
(b) Qualifications. The panel of five judges will comprise
individuals who have one or more of the following prerequisites:
Recognized art credentials, knowledge of the anatomical makeup and the
natural habitat of the eligible waterfowl species, an understanding of
the wildlife sporting world in which the Duck Stamp is used, an
awareness of philately and the role the Duck Stamp plays in stamp
collecting, and demonstrated support for the conservation of waterfowl
and wetlands through active involvement in the conservation community.
* * * * *
0
4. Revise Sec. 91.23 to read as follows:
Sec. 91.23 Scoring criteria for contest.
Entries will be judged on the basis of anatomical accuracy,
artistic composition, and suitability for reduction in the production
of a stamp.
Shannon A. Estenoz,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks,
Exercising the Delegated Authority of the Assistant Secretary for Fish
and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2021-13476 Filed 6-22-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on June 23, 2021.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.