Rule2026-17733
Process for Authorizing Seasonal Migratory Game Bird Hunting
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
August 31, 2026
Effective
August 31, 2026
Issuing agencies
Interior DepartmentFish and Wildlife Service
Abstract
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service or we) is changing the administrative process for authorizing seasonal migratory game bird hunting in the United States. Migratory game bird hunting regulations are currently promulgated annually to provide opportunities for recreation and sustenance; aid Federal, State, and Tribal governments in the management of migratory game birds; and allow harvests at levels compatible with migratory game bird population status and habitat conditions. The Service is adopting a more efficient administrative process for authorizing seasonal migratory game bird hunting. The Service will issue a memorandum to establish the limits and authorize seasonal migratory game bird hunting once every 3 years. The Service will continue to make annual decisions on harvest levels and will update the memorandum sooner than 3 years if changes are prescribed by our decision frameworks. The process eliminates the need for subsequent annual Federal regulation promulgation and rulemaking and is expected to increase efficiency; better meet State, Tribal, and Federal rulemaking constraints; and reduce the complexity and costs. Our goal is to better serve State partners and the hunting public while continuing to meet the legal and conservation purposes of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Tribes are already authorized under a similar process.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 167 (Monday, August 31, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 167 (Monday, August 31, 2026)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55794-55815]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-17733]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 20
[Docket No. FWS-HQ-MB-2024-0206; FF09M32000-267-FXMB1231099BPP0]
RIN 1018-BI04
Process for Authorizing Seasonal Migratory Game Bird Hunting
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service or we) is changing
the administrative process for authorizing seasonal migratory game bird
hunting in the United States. Migratory game bird hunting regulations
are currently promulgated annually to provide opportunities for
recreation and sustenance; aid Federal, State, and Tribal governments
in the management of migratory game birds; and allow harvests at levels
compatible with migratory game bird population status and habitat
conditions. The Service is adopting a more efficient administrative
process for authorizing seasonal migratory game bird hunting. The
Service will issue a memorandum to establish the limits and authorize
seasonal migratory game bird hunting once every 3 years. The Service
will continue to make annual decisions on harvest levels and will
update the memorandum sooner than 3 years if changes are prescribed by
our decision frameworks. The process eliminates the need for subsequent
annual Federal regulation promulgation and rulemaking and is expected
to increase efficiency; better meet State, Tribal, and Federal
rulemaking constraints; and reduce the complexity and costs. Our goal
is to better serve State partners and the hunting public while
continuing to meet the legal and conservation purposes of the Migratory
Bird Treaty Act. Tribes are already authorized under a similar process.
DATES: This rule takes effect on August 31, 2026.
ADDRESSES: Comments and materials we received, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing this final rule, are available for
public inspection on <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> at Docket No. FWS-HQ-
MB-2024-0206, or by appointment, during normal business hours, at the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management,
5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, Virginia.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerome Ford, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Department of the Interior, (703) 358-2606. Individuals in the
United States who are deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have a
speech disability may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access
telecommunications relay services. Individuals outside the United
States should use the relay services offered within their country to
make international calls to the point of contact in the United States.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[[Page 55795]]
Background
Migratory game birds are species designated in the conventions
between the United States and several foreign nations for the
protection and management of migratory birds. The conventions restrict
migratory game bird hunting to the fall-winter period (1 September-10
March) and not more than 3.5 months (interpreted as 107 days) for any
species. Under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA; 16 U.S.C. 703-712),
the Secretary of the Interior is authorized and directed to determine
when and to what extent ``hunting, taking, capture, killing,
possession, sale, purchase, shipment, transportation, carriage, or
export of any such bird, or any part, nest, or egg'' of migratory game
birds can take place compatible with the terms of the conventions, and
to adopt regulations for this purpose (16 U.S.C. 704(a)). The Secretary
is authorized and directed to give ``due regard to the zones of
temperature and to the distribution, abundance, economic value,
breeding habits, and times and lines of migratory flight of such
birds'' (16 U.S.C. 704(a)). This responsibility has been delegated to
the Service as the lead Federal agency for managing and conserving
migratory birds in the United States.
The Service established regulations governing migratory game bird
hunting at title 50 part 20 of the Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR
20). Currently, the Service publishes regulations (50 CFR 20 subpart K)
to authorize seasonal migratory game bird hunting each year. These
regulations set the parameters for open seasons including season dates,
season lengths, shooting hours, daily bag and possession limits, areas
where hunting may occur, and other restrictions based on biological
data. The annual regulations ensure that harvest occurs at levels
compatible with migratory game bird population demographics, including
production and survival, which vary in space and time with habitat
conditions. These conditions may differ over North America, and within
the United States. (For purposes of our regulations, and in this final
rule, the term ``States'' includes the territories of Puerto Rico and
the U.S. Virgin Islands, consistent with 50 CFR 10.12).
Migratory game birds use four primary migratory routes in North
America. Because of the unique biological characteristics and the
relative number of hunters in these routes, the Service adopted the
flyway structure for administering migratory bird resources within the
United States, referred to as the flyways (Atlantic, Mississippi,
Central, and Pacific). The current annual migratory bird hunting
regulations at 50 CFR part 20 subpart K establish regulations for each
administrative flyway including all or portions of States in the 48
conterminous United States. We may have separate regulations in Alaska,
Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Each administrative flyway has a Flyway Council, a formal
organization established through the Association of Fish and Wildlife
Agencies. Flyway Councils are administrative bodies that forge
cooperation among public wildlife agencies for the purpose of
protecting and conserving migratory birds that inhabit North America.
Flyway Councils are composed of one member from each State within the
Flyway, as well as States in Mexico and Provinces in Canada that share
migratory bird populations. The Flyway Councils coordinate and collect
information on the status of migratory game birds, establish regulatory
decision frameworks, review available biological information, and make
recommendations for appropriate parameters for migratory game bird
hunting regulations. However, voting members are only those
representing States and Territories within the United States. Service
representatives participate in the Flyway Councils. Meetings typically
occur every March and September and are open to the public.
To support the annual regulation process, Service biologists
gather, analyze, and interpret biological survey data and provide this
information to all those involved in the process through a series of
published status reports and presentations to Flyway Councils and other
interested parties. The Service considers abundance of migratory game
birds and other biological factors; and therefore, undertake several
surveys throughout the year in conjunction with Service Regional
Offices, the Canadian Wildlife Service, and State and Provincial
wildlife management agencies. To determine the appropriate annual
regulations authorizing hunting for certain game bird species and
populations, we consider factors such as population size and trend,
geographical distribution, reproductive capacity, condition of breeding
and wintering habitat, number of hunters, and anticipated harvest.
The Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee (SRC) and Flyway
Councils recommend to the Service appropriate parameters for State and
Tribal migratory game bird hunting regulations. The SRC conducts
meetings, generally in the spring and fall, to review and discuss
information on the status of migratory game birds and recommendations
from the four Flyway Councils and the Service. The SRC then develops
recommendations for parameters for annual State and Tribal migratory
game bird hunting regulations. In accordance with current regulations
at 50 CFR 20.153, these meetings are open to public observation, and
observers may submit written comments to the Service on the matters to
be discussed. The SRC then submits recommendations to the Service for
review. If approved, they are published in one of the several annual
rulemaking documents for public comment.
Current Process for Authorizing Migratory Game Bird Hunting
The current administrative process for authorizing seasonal
migratory game bird hunting requires annual promulgation of State-
specific Federal regulations to open the hunting season. These annual
regulations expire at the end of the hunting season. The process
involves publishing a series of at least four proposed and final
rulemaking documents in the Federal Register including the following:
(1) A proposed rule (preliminary) that provides the process,
regulatory schedule, and initial proposals for seasons, limits, and
other regulations for annual migratory game bird hunting.
(2) A proposed rule that proposes the parameters within which
States may select hunting seasons. The parameters specify season dates,
season lengths, shooting hours, daily bag and possession limits, areas
where hunting may occur, and other restrictions.
(3) A final rule that establishes the final parameters within which
States and Tribes may select hunting seasons, including season dates,
season length, shooting hours, daily bag and possessions limits, areas
where hunting may occur, and other restrictions. This final rule
incorporates public comments received on the proposed frameworks rule
and recommendations from the Flyway Councils.
(4) A final rule that sets forth the annual regulations in subpart
K of 50 CFR part 20 to authorize the migratory game bird hunting
seasons in each State. This final rule is developed based on a process
where each State submits their selection of annual hunting seasons
within our parameters.
The process of establishing annual migratory game bird hunting
regulations is both complex and time intensive. It begins with
extensive data collection from May through December of the preceding
calendar year, followed by
[[Page 55796]]
several months of coordination with state agencies through the Flyway
Councils. These efforts culminate in regulatory decisions made by the
SRC. Each phase of this process is tightly sequenced, limiting
flexibility in the timing of regulatory actions. Additionally, the
targeted opening date of September 1 for hunting seasons imposes a hard
deadline under which regulations must be finalized through the federal
rulemaking process before any seasons can legally begin. This provides
only a few months to complete a 4-publication rulemaking process every
year. The Service has narrowly met publication deadlines in the last 8
years (2018-2025 hunting seasons; average publication of final rule 7
days prior to the start of the hunting season), placing undue strain on
States, the public, and the Service. We provided a detailed overview of
the current process and administrative schedule in our August 6, 2015,
proposed rule for the 2016-17 migratory game bird hunting season (80 FR
47388).
New Process for Authorizing Seasonal Migratory Game Bird Hunting
To alleviate the time constraint issues, the Service is changing
the process for authorizing seasonal migratory game bird hunting. This
rule will codify in Federal regulations a streamlined process for
authorizing seasonal migratory game bird hunting. This will replace the
need for annual Federal regulation promulgation and reduce the need for
future rulemaking in the Federal Register. The process will be codified
in our regulations at 50 CFR part 20, subparts H and K, and include the
following:
(1) The process for determining the parameters (``authorization
conditions'') within which States and Tribes may establish their annual
regulations;
(2) The process for communicating the authorization conditions to
States and Tribes through a Migratory Game Bird Hunting (MGBH)
memorandum and notice of availability in the Federal Register; and
(3) Authorization for States and Tribes to establish migratory game
bird hunting regulations in accordance with the authorization
conditions set forth in the MGBH memorandum and regulations at 50 CFR
part 20.
Federal regulation of migratory game bird hunting has been in place
since 1918 under the MBTA, which directs the Secretary of the Interior
to authorize hunting based on periodic assessments of bird population
status and habitat conditions. The original regulatory process was
straightforward due to limited biological information and relatively
low hunter participation. As scientific understanding, data
availability, and hunter participation increased, the regulatory
process expanded in complexity to ensure resultant regulations were
based on sound biological principles for conservation and hunting
opportunities.
Over time, the annual rulemaking process has become increasingly
burdensome for States, the public, and the Service due to compressed
publication timelines, administrative inefficiencies, and the growing
volume of technical material required to support annual updates. These
challenges have constrained transparency and limit the ability of
States, Tribes, and the public to plan effectively.
The new process maintains all statutory obligations under the MBTA
while improving administrative efficiency. Section 704(a) grants the
Secretary broad discretion to issue regulations governing take and does
not require annual rulemaking. Likewise, section 704(c)(3) imposes no
annual requirement and ensures consistency with amendments enacted in
the Dingell Act of 2019, including the January 31 framework closing
date for hunting ducks, mergansers, and coots. Together, these
provisions allow continued flexibility in how regulatory decisions are
issued while fully adhering to statutory direction. The new approach
retains annual biological assessments and decision-making but
eliminates unnecessary repetition in the administrative process,
thereby enhancing timeliness, clarity, and public accessibility.
By codifying these provisions in regulations, annual rulemaking
will no longer be required to authorize seasonal migratory game bird
hunting. Future rulemaking will be infrequent and undertaken only if
changes to the underlying process are warranted. The process is similar
to that established for Tribes (50 CFR 20.110) where Tribes are
authorized to establish hunting regulations within our basic
regulations and annual parameters. The process also aligns with the
regulations at 50 CFR 92 authorizing Alaska subsistence hunting, where
the regulations do not expire and thus do not have to be established
annually before seasonal hunting may occur.
We are not making any changes to the biological approach or the
process used to determine the appropriate parameters from which States
and Tribes may establish their migratory game bird hunting regulations.
The Service will continue biological monitoring and assessment
consistent with the programmatic document, ``Second Final Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement: Issuance of Annual Regulations
Permitting the Sport Hunting of Migratory Birds (EIS 20130139).
This rulemaking changes the administrative process for authorizing
seasonal migratory game bird hunting. We are making these changes to
increase efficiency; better meet Federal, State, and Tribal rulemaking
constraints; and reduce the complexity and costs associated with
promulgating annual migratory game bird hunting regulations. Our goal
is to better serve State and Tribal partners and the hunting public
while continuing to meet the legal and conservation purposes of the
MBTA.
The nationwide economic effects generated by migratory game bird
hunting are substantial, as detailed in the most recent annual
rulemaking, estimated at about $2.7 billion in associated economic
activity. Small, incremental adjustments made to Federal migratory bird
hunting authorization conditions (limits) are not expected to
materially alter those underlying economic inputs nor impose additional
Federal costs. As a result, preparing a full Regulatory Impact Analysis
for every annual MGBH memorandum would provide limited additional value
for Federal decision-making. Annual adjustments to season lengths and
bag limits do not substantially impact migratory bird hunters' choices
on how many days to hunt, and available evidence shows hunter
participation remains unchanged by these adjustments. As all previous
annual rulemakings under the current administrative process have been
``economically significant'' actions under section 3(f)(1) of Executive
Order (E.O.) 12866, we intend to continue preparing a regulatory impact
analysis for the primary MGBH memorandum issued every 3 years under the
new process. The analysis will ensure continued sustainable harvest
levels while also minimizing negative economic impacts following the
directives in E.O. 12866 for economically significant actions and the
guidelines in Circular A-4.
Table 1 provides a comparison between the existing and new
processes for each major component in the process of authorizing
seasonal migratory game bird hunting. The following sections describe
the changes in greater detail.
[[Page 55797]]
Table 1--Proposed Changes to the Process for Authorizing Migratory Game Bird Hunting.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component Purpose Current process Proposed process
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulations (50 CFR Part 20 subpart Authorize seasonal Promulgated annually as Codifies the underlying
K). migratory game bird State hunting seasons process for
hunting based on in a series of four authorizing seasonal
biological data. rulemaking documents. migratory game bird
hunting.
Decision Frameworks.................. Provide the structured Described in preambles No change, but are now
set of procedures, in rulemaking applied broadly to all
rules, models, and documents and adjusted species and seasons
information criteria through rulemaking or rather than just
that govern how technical updates. waterfowl.
authorization
conditions are
selected.
Authorization Conditions............. Establish the Included in the Published as the MGBH
parameters (season preamble of proposed memorandum on our
dates, lengths, daily and final rules website and announced
bag and possession published in the in the Federal
limits, shooting Federal Register. Register every 3 years
hours, hunting areas, (or sooner if changes
and other are prescribed by our
restrictions) from decision frameworks).
which States and
Tribes may establish
their annual hunting
seasons.
Migratory Game Bird Hunting Communicate the N/A.................... Posted on our website
memorandum. authorization every 3 years (or
conditions to States sooner if changes are
and Tribes via our prescribed by our
website; announced in decision frameworks);
the Federal Register. availability announced
in the Federal
Register as a notice
with a 30-day comment
period.
State Season Selections.............. Annually establish Published as a final Published as a State
State hunting seasons. rule in the Federal seasons MGBH
Register, codified in memorandum on our
50 CFR 20 subpart K, website for those
authorizing State States that do not
hunting seasons. have their own
regulatory process and
request that we do so;
availability announced
in the Federal
Register.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation Promulgation
This rulemaking changes 50 CFR 20 subparts H, K, and N. In subpart
H, we revise Sec. Sec. 20.71 and 20.72 to provide that a violation of
our regulations or of any State or Tribal law or regulation for
migratory game bird hunting constitutes a violation of Federal law.
However, we retain existing language in subpart H that prohibits take
of migratory game birds except as provided in Federal, State, and
Tribal hunting regulations.
In subpart K, we remove the regulations at Sec. Sec. 20.100-20.107
(annual seasons and limits) and replace them with the procedures and
provisions most recently adopted in earlier rules for establishing
annual regulations for migratory game bird hunting, and we will no
longer establish these through an annual rulemaking process. We retain
in subpart K the current regulations in Sec. 20.108 (nontoxic shot
zones) and Sec. 20.110 (regulations for certain Federal Indian
reservations and ceded lands), as the regulations in these sections are
outside the scope of this rulemaking action. We also codify in our
regulations at Sec. 20.109 (extended seasons for taking migratory game
birds by falconry) the unchanged parameters for special falconry
seasons previously specified annually in preambles to rulemaking
documents since at least the 2000-01 season. For the most recent final
rule adopting the season parameters see 89 FR 68500 at 68518 (under Q.
Special Falconry Regulations, August 26, 2024).
We eliminate subpart N by moving the existing regulations regarding
the Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee and Flyway Councils to
subpart K, which describes the administrative process for authorizing
States and Tribes to establish their regulations for migratory game
bird hunting.
We are also making minor, nonsubstantive terminology changes to
subpart B at Sec. 20.11, subpart C at Sec. 20.21 and Sec. 20.23, and
subpart K at Sec. 20.110 to align with the new process. At Sec.
20.11, we are making additional nonsubstantive edits to correct two
typographical errors. We further update subpart C at Sec. 20.21 to
recognize the split of cackling goose (Branta hutchinsii) from Canada
goose (Branta canadensis) as separate species (see 85 FR 21282, April
16, 2020, and 85 FR 51854 at 51860, August 21, 2020) and to clarify the
regulatory language consistent with the final rule on hunting methods
for resident Canada geese (73 FR 65274, November 3, 2008).
Migratory Game Bird Hunting Memorandum
The Service will publish a notice in the Federal Register making
available on our website the Migratory Game Bird Hunting (MGBH)
memorandum setting forth the authorization conditions from which States
and Tribes may establish their seasonal migratory game bird hunting
regulations. Authorization conditions include season dates, season
lengths, shooting hours, daily bag and possession limits, areas where
hunting may occur, and other restrictions for migratory game bird
hunting.
The MGBH memorandum will authorize seasonal hunting for certain
designated migratory game bird groups or species of in the conterminous
United States, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin
Islands. Migratory game birds are defined in regulations at 50 CFR part
20, subpart B, at Sec. 20.11 as those species included in the terms of
the Conventions for the protection of migratory birds and belonging to
five families of birds and for which open seasons are authorized in 50
CFR part 20. Open hunting seasons may include certain designated
members of the avian families Anatidae (ducks, geese, and swans);
Columbidae (doves and pigeons); Gruidae (cranes); Rallidae (rails,
coots, and gallinules); and Scolopacidae (shorebirds including woodcock
and snipe). The Service maintains a list at 50 CFR 10.13 of all species
considered migratory birds and protected by the MBTA, and we review and
update this list regularly (see 88 FR 49310, July 31, 2023, for the
most recent
[[Page 55798]]
update). There are currently 185 migratory game bird species that may
be subject to open hunting seasons based on the game bird families
identified in Sec. 20.11 and associated species at Sec. 10.13. The
regulations for the 2024-25 hunting seasons established open hunting
seasons in at least some part of the United States for 93 of these
species. We will not authorize hunting through the MGBH memorandum for
any migratory game bird species group (e.g., ducks) or specific species
that was not authorized in the 2024-25 hunting season (89 FR 68500,
August 26, 2024) without initiating a rulemaking. We do not currently
expect that there will be a need to add any species to the list of game
birds with open hunting seasons as this has generally been unchanged
for decades.
To determine the authorization conditions, we will annually apply
the most current information on game bird demographics and habitat
conditions to the decision frameworks previously adopted through
rulemaking or notice published in the Federal Register to establish the
authorization conditions. Decision frameworks are the structured set of
procedures, rules, models, and information criteria that govern the
selection of appropriate annual regulations from a set of alternatives
based on the status of migratory game bird populations and habitat
conditions. Decision frameworks are described in more detail below
under ``Determination of the Authorization Conditions for Migratory
Game Bird Hunting.'' This rulemaking does not change the decision
frameworks or their use in making determinations, consistent with the
MBTA and the four associated conventions.
The Federal Register notice will include references to the
supporting biological data we used in preparing the MGBH memorandum and
announce availability of the memorandum at the address indicated in FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT and on our website at <a href="https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-birds">https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-birds</a>. The MGBH memorandum will include
recommendations from the Flyway Councils, if applicable. The Service
will issue the MGBH memorandum to set the authorization conditions for
migratory game bird hunting once every 3 years on or before February
28. The Service will continue to make annual decisions on harvest
levels and will update the memorandum sooner than 3 years if changes
are prescribed by our decision frameworks. In this case, we will
publish an updated notice and MGBH memorandum on or before February 28
with the specific changes. With respect to the 2026-27 season, the MGBH
memorandum will be available shortly after the publication of this
final rulemaking, no later than August 31 (and the provision at Sec.
20.121(b) will become effective for the next season); the comment
period will still be 30 days.
The notice of availability of the MGBH memorandum in the Federal
Register will provide for a comment period of at least 30 days. We will
consider all comments received but may not respond in detail to
nonsubstantive comments. Consistent with our current process, we will
summarize all relevant, substantive comments that we receive during the
comment period. If comments warrant changes to the MGBH memorandum or
if administrative or nonsubstantive corrections are identified, we will
update the memorandum clearly identifying such changes without further
public comment. Substantive comments that are determined by the Service
to not warrant changes may be responded to after the closing date in
any subsequent notice or MGBH memorandum.
States and Tribes will establish regulations for migratory game
bird hunting seasons through their own development processes that are
within the Federal authorization conditions set forth in the MGBH
memorandum and in accordance with Federal regulations. State and Tribal
regulations for migratory game bird hunting will be federally
authorized provided they are within the Federal authorization
conditions provided in the MGBH memorandum and notice in the Federal
Register, our regulations at 50 CFR part 20, and any other applicable
Federal regulations.
The Service will no longer continue the current practice of
publishing State annual hunting regulations as Federal regulations. We
recognize that this may be a transition for some states. Therefore, the
Service will continue to publish State annual hunting regulations for
as long as there is a demonstrated need for those few (less than 6)
States that do not currently have their own processes for issuing
annual migratory game bird hunting regulations and request that we do
so. These State annual regulations will be published as a Federal MGBH
memorandum, separate from the memorandum with the authorization
conditions, available at the address indicated in FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT and on our website at <a href="https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-birds">https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-birds</a> when they become available in about July each year.
Proposed Administrative Schedule
The Service will continue to have public Flyway and SRC meetings,
public review of notifications in the Federal Register, and public
review of the MGBH memorandum. The schedule will continue to be based
on the current (2013) ``Second Final Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement: Issuance of Annual Regulations Permitting the Sport Hunting
of Migratory Birds'' (see full reference in Required Determinations,
National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)). The
substantive process for biological monitoring and assessment to
determine the appropriate parameters from which States and Tribes may
establish their migratory game bird hunting regulations will remain
unchanged and will still occur annually whether a new MGBH memorandum
is due to be published that year.
<bullet> April-May: SRC meeting for proposed changes to the
decision frameworks or hunting regulations.
<bullet> April-June: Spring game bird population surveys.
<bullet> August: Completion of game bird population status reports
and hunter activity and harvest report.
<bullet> September: Biological data are applied to federally
established decision frameworks. Preliminary outcomes from the decision
frameworks are prepared as the draft authorization conditions for
migratory game bird hunting.
<bullet> September: Flyway Council meetings.
<bullet> October: SRC meeting for proposed deviations and changes
to the decision frameworks or hunting regulations.
<bullet> December-January: Winter game bird population surveys.
<bullet> January: The draft annual authorization conditions for
migratory game bird hunting are updated to account for new data.
<bullet> On or before February 28 (every 3 years): The
authorization conditions for annual migratory game bird hunting are set
forth and communicated via the MGBH memorandum and notice of
availability is published in the Federal Register with a public comment
period of not less than 30 days. An off-year MGBH memorandum may be
published if changes are prescribed by our decision frameworks.
<bullet> March: Flyway Council meetings.
<bullet> April: If warranted, the MGBH memorandum may be revised
for administrative corrections.
<bullet> May: Each State's proposed annual regulations for
migratory game bird hunting is due to the Service by May 31.
<bullet> July: Federal policy memorandum with State annual hunting
regulations
[[Page 55799]]
posted on the Service website annually for up to 3 years after the
final rule, upon request by the States.
<bullet> February-August: States and Tribes develop their
regulations for annual migratory game bird hunting.
<bullet> 1 September-10 March: Annual migratory game bird hunting
occurs.
Figure 1 provides an overview of the new process and timing for
authorizing seasonal migratory game bird hunting including biological
assessment, regulatory meetings, announcing the authorization
conditions, and establishment of State and Tribal hunting seasons.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR31AU26.024
Determination of the Authorization Conditions for Migratory Game Bird
Hunting
Like the current administrative process, we will determine
authorization conditions using decision frameworks based on the U.S.
Code and the Code of Federal Regulations or adopted in the Federal
Register as a final rule or notice. Decision frameworks refer to
principles, processes, and practices that inform actions and outcomes
(Lockie and Rockloff, 2005). In general, a decision framework
identifies key components necessary for an organization or individual
to make a decision and provides an overview of the process and
transparency in decision making. By adhering to decision frameworks,
decisionmakers can improve consistency, reduce biases, and ensure
alignment with overarching goals and values. Our decision frameworks
account for our goals and objectives, are developed in cooperation with
State and Tribal governments, foster healthy and productive populations
of game birds, and provide appropriate opportunities for the public to
hunt those species. Some of our decision frameworks are complex, while
others are simple, due to varying amounts of data and our understanding
of population demographics and relationships to environmental
conditions. In this final rule, we define a decision framework as a
structured set of procedures, rules, models, and information criteria
for selecting the appropriate authorization conditions from a fixed set
of regulatory alternatives, each with a different expected harvest
level, based on the harvest management objectives and status,
demographics, and environmental conditions of the applicable migratory
game bird population.
The authorization conditions for 24 species or species groups are
currently established based on 16 decision frameworks, and some have
been in use for about 32 years. For example, adaptive harvest
management (AHM) decision frameworks for duck harvest management, a
specific kind of decision framework including a formal mechanism for
reducing uncertainty over time, were first implemented in 1995. The
decision frameworks for determination of authorization conditions for
hunting migratory game birds are listed in table 2 below. We will
maintain a list of current decision frameworks used to determine
authorization conditions and post these on the Service's website
<a href="https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-birds">https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-birds</a> with the MGBH memorandum
setting forth the authorization conditions.
Table 2--Decision Frameworks for Determination of Authorization
Conditions (Federal limits) for Hunting Migratory Game Birds
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species, species group, or
season Decision framework References
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Special youth and veterans- Special youth and 16 U.S.C. 704(c);
active military personnel veterans 84 FR 42996,
waterfowl hunting days. waterfowl hunting August 19, 2019.
days.
[[Page 55800]]
Special early teal seasons in Special early teal 90 FR 40178,
the Atlantic, Mississippi, and season guidelines. August 18, 2025.
Central flyways.
Special early teal-wood duck Special early teal- 90 FR 40178,
seasons in the Atlantic and wood duck season August 18, 2025.
Mississippi flyways. guidelines.
Bonus blue-winged teal bag Bonus blue-winged 90 FR 40178,
limits. teal bag limit August 18, 2025.
guidelines.
Ducks in the Atlantic Flyway.... AHM protocol for 16 U.S.C. 704(c);
eastern ducks. 83 FR 47868,
September 21,
2018;
65 FR 58152,
September 27,
2000.
Ducks in the Mississippi and AHM protocol for 16 U.S.C. 704(c);
Central flyways. mid-continent 85 FR 15870, March
mallards. 19, 2020;
73 FR 43290, July
24, 2008;
65 FR 58152,
September 27,
2000;
60 FR 37314, July
19, 1995.
Ducks in the Pacific Flyway..... AHM protocol for 16 U.S.C. 704(c);
western mallards. 73 FR 43290, July
24, 2008.
Northern pintail................ AHM protocol for 90 FR 17300, April
northern pintail. 24, 2025;
75 FR 44856, July
29, 2010.
Scaup........................... AHM protocol for 73 FR 43290, July
scaup. 24, 2008;
73 FR 51124,
August 29, 2008.
Black ducks in the Atlantic and International AHM 77 FR 49868,
Mississippi flyways. protocol for August 17, 2012.
black ducks.
Eastern mallards in the Atlantic AHM protocol for 87 FR 66247,
Flyway. eastern mallards. November 3, 2022;
88 FR 6054,
January 30, 2023.
Canvasbacks..................... Canvasback 81 FR 17302, March
decision support 28, 2016.
tool.
Brant seasons in the Pacific Pacific brant 90 FR 40178,
Flyway. harvest strategy. August 18, 2025;
85 FR 51854,
August 21, 2020;
84 FR 42996,
August 19, 2019.
Dove seasons in the Eastern, National mourning 78 FR 52658,
Central, and Western management dove harvest August 23, 2013.
units. strategy.
Sandhill crane seasons in the Rocky Mountain 80 FR 51090,
Central and Pacific flyways. population August 21, 2015.
sandhill crane
harvest strategy.
American woodcock seasons in the American woodcock 80 FR 51090,
Eastern and Central management harvest strategy. August 21, 2015
units. (removed
``interim'' label
from the
strategy, which
was then
considered
operational);
75 FR 52873,
August 30, 2010.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Currently, determination of some authorization conditions depends
on Flyway Council recommendations based on formal Council harvest
strategies (e.g., goose and swan seasons) and ad hoc decisions (e.g.,
coot and gallinule seasons). These Flyway Council harvest strategies
and ad hoc decisions have been consolidated into five general decision
frameworks, one for each of the four flyways and one for seasons that
span multiple flyways. These five decision frameworks are being adopted
by the Service in this final rule. These general decision frameworks
prescribe authorization conditions that generally do not change among
years and are based on the authorization conditions most recently
published as a final rule in the Federal Register (89 FR 68500, August
26, 2024). These authorization conditions have been demonstrated to be
sustainable over the range of migratory game bird population status and
habitat conditions. A copy of the Service's general decision frameworks
is available at the address indicated in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT, or at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, or from our website at
<a href="https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-birds">https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-birds</a>.
As with the current administrative process, this new process
applies biological data (e.g., game bird abundance, habitat conditions,
hunter activity, and harvest information) to decision frameworks to
inform appropriate selections of regulatory alternatives for the
authorization conditions for migratory game bird hunting. We will adopt
the outcome of the decision frameworks as the authorization conditions
for migratory game bird hunting. In circumstances where urgent
biological considerations arise, selecting more conservative
authorization conditions may be necessary to support resource
protection. In such instances, we would coordinate closely with the
Flyway Councils and SRC and provide explanations through the MGBH
memorandum, all which are open for public comment. These situations are
expected to be infrequent and would inform subsequent updates to the
decision frameworks through the formal rulemaking process. Examples
provided below illustrate how such circumstances have been infrequent
and addressed historically.
We note that the Service and Flyway Councils have not recommended
deviation from the prescriptions of the general duck season decision
frameworks since they were first implemented in 1995. Thus, for about
32 years, we have applied current biological data to established
decision frameworks and accepted the outcomes as the authorization
conditions for the general duck seasons. However, a notable example of
a more restrictive deviation from a species-specific decision framework
occurred for the northern pintail season in 2002 (67 FR 59110,
September 19, 2002) and 2003 (68 FR 55784, September 26, 2003), when
unforeseen circumstances (record low numbers, combined with the poor
production forecast) indicated that a departure from the pintail
decision framework was justified and consistent with the Council
recommendations we received in those years. The Councils and Service
revised the decision framework for northern pintails in 2004
[[Page 55801]]
to incorporate the new information (69 FR 52970, August 30, 2004).
Also, the Atlantic Flyway Council and Service recommended more
restrictive authorization conditions for the Atlantic Flyway population
of Canada geese for the 2022-23 hunting season in deviation from the
Council's harvest strategy (87 FR 42598 at 42603 (Atlantic Flyway
Council recommendations under 4.B.), July 15, 2022). This restrictive
deviation was based on unforeseen circumstances including an unusually
high degree of uncertainty in the population estimate that year (95
percent confidence interval of 92,000-235,000 pairs), lack of
population status data in 2020 and 2021 due to the coronavirus, and the
lack of productivity data.
The two cases of restrictive deviations from decision frameworks in
the last 32 years indicate that such departures are unlikely.
Restrictive deviations are unlikely because unforeseen circumstances
rarely occur given the long-term nature of monitoring programs, some
since 1955, and our decision frameworks are developed based on observed
long-term demographic data. If the Councils and SRC recommend any
liberalization beyond the authorization conditions prescribed by the
decision framework, those changes will be reviewed by the Service, and,
if supported, we will initiate a rulemaking to revise the decision
framework.
In some cases, for reasons outside our control, we may need to
temporarily and minimally deviate from our decision frameworks to
address missing data. For example, due to the coronavirus pandemic and
associated travel restrictions and human health concerns in the United
States and Canada, certain migratory bird monitoring surveys were
cancelled in 2020 and 2021. As such, the Waterfowl Breeding Population
and Habitat Survey, which provides status information for many species
of waterfowl, including those used in our AHM decision frameworks, were
cancelled during those years. When unforeseen data gaps occur, as in
2020 and 2021, the Service may need to use time series forecasting
tools and population and habitat models to make inference to current
population status as needed in established decision frameworks. Such
deviations would be limited to those necessary to determine appropriate
authorization conditions in existing decision frameworks. Any deviation
would be described in the MGBH memorandum, with any longer-term
adjustments to decision frameworks addressed through future rulemaking.
Temporary deviations from decision frameworks to address data gaps fall
within the scope of existing regulatory authority and maintain intent
of established decision frameworks. These temporary adjustments apply
the best available data and scientific methods within the established
framework and are critical to making informed decisions about
appropriate authorization conditions for the current season when this
would otherwise not be possible in the case of missing data. The
compulsory, minimal, and urgent nature of these temporary deviations
are appropriately communicated through the MGBH memorandum rather than
through a separate rulemaking.
Any technical updates or adjustments to the federally established
decision frameworks will be published in a notice in the Federal
Register to allow for public review and comment. This is similar to the
current process for determining authorization conditions and hunting
regulations, pursuant to which technical updates to decision frameworks
are not adopted through rulemaking; rather, they are recommended by the
SRC and supported by the Flyway Councils. In a recent example, the
Service approved technical updates to the AHM decision framework for
mid-continent mallards in 2020 (85 FR 51854 at 51855-51856 (under
1.A.), August 21, 2020) and the national mourning dove harvest strategy
for the Eastern Management Unit in 2023 (SRC transcripts; May 31,
2023), Central Management Unit in 2024 (SRC transcripts; May 14, 2024),
and Western Management Unit in 2024 (SRC transcripts; November 19,
2024) based on recommendations from the Flyway Councils with
application in the same regulatory cycle. All four of these decision
framework technical updates involved replacement of the predictive
population models with updated state-of-the-art models cooperatively
developed by the Service, Flyway Councils, and university researchers.
These technical updates are discussed at public meetings including
the Flyway Council and SRC meetings and are open to public comment.
After receiving support from the Flyway Councils and SRC, technical
updates or changes to decision frameworks will be published in a
Federal Register via notice or rulemaking and in the MGBH memorandum
and made available for public comment. We expect changes to decision
frameworks to be infrequent and will consider timing of Federal
Register publication based on urgency and possible combination with
other actions to minimize need for future publications.
Population Status and Harvest
We periodically publish reports that provide detailed information
on the status and harvest of certain migratory game bird species. These
reports contain descriptions of species population segments referenced
in status assessments. These reports are available at the address
indicated in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or from our website at
<a href="https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/population-status">https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/population-status</a>, https://
<a href="http://www.fws.gov/library/collections/migratory-bird-hunting-activity-and-harvest-reports">www.fws.gov/library/collections/migratory-bird-hunting-activity-and-harvest-reports</a>, and <a href="https://www.fws.gov/project/adaptive-harvest-management">https://www.fws.gov/project/adaptive-harvest-management</a>.
We will use the most recently published reports in the development
of annual authorization conditions for migratory game bird hunting.
These reports currently include the following:
<bullet> Adaptive Harvest Management;
<bullet> American Woodcock Population Status;
<bullet> Band-tailed Pigeon Population Status;
<bullet> Migratory Bird Hunting Activity and Harvest;
<bullet> Mourning Dove Population Status;
<bullet> Status and Harvests of Sandhill Cranes, Mid-continent,
Rocky Mountain, Lower Colorado River Valley and Eastern Populations;
and
<bullet> Waterfowl Population Status.
Additional information, status reports, and special assessments may
be provided by the Service and each of the four Flyway Councils.
Our long-term objectives continue to include providing
opportunities to harvest portions of certain migratory game bird
populations and to limit harvests to levels compatible with each
population's ability to maintain healthy, viable numbers. The Service's
goals and objectives for migratory game bird harvest management are
specified in a 2013 supplemental environmental impact statement (notice
of availability published at 78 FR 32686, May 31, 2013) and the
proposed rule that published at 52 FR 7900, March 13, 1987. Migratory
game bird hunting seasons provide opportunities for recreation and
sustenance, and aid Federal, State, and Tribal governments in the
management of migratory game birds.
Review of Public Comments and Flyway Council Recommendations
We periodically receive recommendations on the authorization
conditions and other policies and regulations for migratory game bird
hunting from the four Flyway Councils at the SRC meetings, generally
held in
[[Page 55802]]
spring and fall. We may also receive public comments from the SRC
meetings and notices published in the Federal Register. We consider all
comments we receive but may provide detailed responses only to
substantive comments. Based on such comments, and any additional
information we receive, we may change the authorization conditions,
particularly for administrative corrections, or we may defer any
changes until the next MGBH memorandum. Any administrative corrections
to the authorization conditions will be made immediately through the
MGBH memorandum available at the address indicated in FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT or on the Service's Migratory Bird Program website.
These corrections will be identified either in the response to public
comments or published in a revised notice if warranted based on the
nature of the public comments. These corrections will include any
errors made in the authorization conditions based on the application of
biological data to established decision frameworks or significant
typographical errors. Any recommendations for changes to regulations
will be considered through a rulemaking process with at least a 30-day
public review and comment period.
Adaptive Harvest Management Approach for Duck Harvest Management
We will continue to use our AHM decision frameworks to determine
appropriate regulatory alternatives for annual duck hunting as
described in earlier rulemaking for annual migratory game bird hunting
regulations (89 FR 68500, August 26, 2024). AHM is a tool that permits
sound resource decisions in the face of uncertain regulatory impacts
and provides a mechanism for reducing that uncertainty over time. We
use an AHM decision framework to evaluate four regulatory alternatives,
each with a different expected harvest level, and choose the optimal
alternative for duck hunting authorization conditions based on the
status and demographics of mallards for the Mississippi, Central, and
Pacific Flyways, and based on the status and demographics of four duck
species (green-winged teal, common goldeneye, ring-necked duck, and
wood duck) in the Atlantic Flyway. We have species-specific AHM
decision frameworks that guide appropriate authorization conditions for
species of special concern, including black ducks, scaup, northern
pintails, and mallards in the Atlantic Flyway (eastern mallards),
within the general duck hunting regulations. These protocols have
species-specific regulatory alternatives but share some aspects of the
regulatory alternatives for the general duck seasons.
We currently use independent optimizations to determine the
appropriate regulatory alternative based on the status of mallards in
the Mississippi, Central, and Pacific Flyways and status of the four
duck species mentioned above in the Atlantic Flyway. This means that we
develop authorization conditions for mid-continent mallards, western
mallards, and eastern ducks independently based on the breeding ducks
that contribute primarily to each Flyway. These species-populations are
a surrogate for the status of ducks in general in each flyway. We
provided an overview of the AHM decision frameworks for general duck
hunting authorization conditions in each Flyway in an August 26, 2024,
rule (89 FR 68500).
The regulatory alternatives considered in the general duck season
AHM decision frameworks associated with each flyway were described in a
January 21, 2025, proposed rule (90 FR 7056). Regulatory alternatives
include opening and closing dates, season lengths, daily bag limits,
and shooting hours. Current regulatory alternatives for each of the
four flyways include restrictive (relatively short seasons and low
daily bag limits), moderate (intermediate season lengths and daily bag
limits), liberal (longer seasons, higher daily bag limits), and closed
seasons. The authorization conditions within each of these alternatives
may vary by flyway. The differences in season lengths and daily bag
limits among flyways reflect the historic differences in waterfowl
abundance and hunter numbers in these regions. Each regulatory
alternative has an associated target harvest rate for one or more
species as a representative of all duck species.
AHM decision frameworks are used with the most current population
status, habitat, and harvest survey data to govern the selection of one
of the regulatory alternatives (i.e., closed, restrictive, moderate, or
liberal). These regulatory alternatives apply to all duck species
except those for which species-specific decision frameworks exist or,
in some cases, for species or population segments in which additional
restrictions have been established. For example, additional
restrictions within the general duck seasons are used to limit the
harvest of certain less abundant species (e.g., scaup, northern
pintail, black duck, eastern mallards, canvasback, redhead, wood duck,
and mottled duck).
The basic structure of the current regulatory alternatives for AHM
was adopted in 1997 (beginning with the 1997-98 general duck hunting
season; 62 FR 31298, June 6, 1997). Changes to these alternatives have
been infrequent and are detailed in the January 21, 2025, proposed rule
(90 FR 7056). The alternatives were last revised beginning with the
2021-22 hunting season based on recommendations of the Flyway Councils
(85 FR 51854, August 21, 2020).
We anticipate that, under the AHM approach, the regulatory
alternatives will remain the same over time, because the optimization
process assumes that the expected harvest rates resulting from the
various alternatives remain constant over long-term (about 100 years)
forecasting. That process accounts for the uncertainty resulting from
the difference between projected harvest rates and actual harvest rates
in any given year. Recognizing that constituents may favor periodic
adjustments to the regulatory alternatives, we will adopt a regular
process to review and incorporate possible modifications.
Although in the past the Service adopted the regulatory
alternatives annually, that process does not account for the need to
maintain predictable harvest projections for the optimization step in
the current AHM process. We expect annual changes to the regulatory
alternatives to have a negative impact on our ability to predict the
harvest associated with each regulatory alternative. This approach
would result in greater uncertainty in forecasting the impacts of the
regulatory alternatives for a given set of environmental and biological
conditions.
We will adopt in regulations the same regulatory alternatives for
the general duck seasons that have been in effect since the 2021-22
season. (See 90 FR 17300 at 17302 (under B. Regulatory Alternatives),
April 24, 2025, for the most recent rulemaking document that adopted
the alternatives used prior to this final rule and 90 FR 7056 at 7061
(under B. Regulatory Alternatives), January 21, 2025, for a description
of the alternatives and their history.) We also will codify in
regulations restrictions on the frequency of changes to these
regulatory alternatives because of the need to maintain predictable
harvest projections for the optimization step in the AHM decision
frameworks. We intend to have the first open review and possible
modification of these regulatory alternatives no sooner than 2026. The
last modification occurred in 2021. Establishing duck regulatory
alternatives for 5-year periods was the preferred alternative in the
``Second Final Supplemental Environmental
[[Page 55803]]
Impact Statement: Issuance of Annual Regulations Permitting the Sport
Hunting of Migratory Birds'' (see full reference in Required
Determinations, National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.)).
The intent for open review and possible modification of these
regulatory alternatives should begin with an announcement of the intent
by either the Service or Flyway Councils at an SRC meeting at least 1
year prior to possible adoption of modifications. The modification of
the regulatory alternatives for general duck seasons will be a
rulemaking process with both proposed and final rules. We will include
a regulatory impact analysis as part of these periodic rulemakings and
continue work to expand the robustness of the analyses we completed in
earlier rulemaking actions under the current hunting regulations
process (see the 2025-26 hunting season final rule, 90 FR 40178 at
40192, August 18, 2025, and economic analysis at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> at Docket No. FWS-HQ-MB-2024-0127).
We note that we are codifying the alternatives for general duck
hunting in regulations. However, regulatory alternatives from other
decision frameworks are specified only in the preambles to rulemaking
documents, not in the Code of Federal Regulations. We are codifying the
duck hunting alternatives because the alternatives for general duck
hunting apply in some aspects to multiple decision frameworks including
those for duck species of special concern (e.g., black ducks,
canvasbacks, eastern mallards, northern pintail, scaup), some brant and
goose seasons, special youth and veterans-active military personnel
waterfowl hunting days, merganser seasons, and some webless species
(e.g., snipe, coots). Also, regulatory alternatives for general duck
hunting have in part been prescribed by Congress in an amendment to the
MBTA (16 U.S.C. 704(c); 84 FR 42996, August 19, 2019), and because we
are codifying in regulations restrictions on the frequency of changes
to these regulatory alternatives to facilitate the AHM process.
Duck Zones and Split Seasons
Background
Zones and split seasons are designed to distribute hunting
opportunities and harvests according to temporal, geographic, and
demographic variability in waterfowl and other migratory game bird
populations. For ducks, States have been allowed the option of
splitting their allotted hunting days into two or three temporal
segments to take advantage of species-specific peaks of abundance or to
satisfy hunters in different areas who want to hunt during the peak of
waterfowl abundance in their area. However, the split-season option
does not fully satisfy many States that wish to provide a more
equitable distribution of harvest opportunities. Therefore, we also
have allowed the establishment of independent seasons in up to four
geographic zones within States for the purpose of providing more
equitable distribution of harvest opportunity for hunters throughout
the State.
In 1978, we prepared an environmental assessment (EA) on the use of
zones to set duck hunting regulations. A primary tenet of the 1978 EA
was that zoning would be used to provide equitable distribution of duck
hunting opportunities within a State or region. The intent was not to
increase total annual waterfowl harvest in the zoned areas; target
harvest levels were to be adjusted downward if they exceeded
traditional levels because of zoning.
In 1990, we conducted a review of the use of zones and split
seasons. We determined that the ability to detect the impacts of zones
and splits on waterfowl demographics and harvest was poor because of
the absence of adequate study designs and experimental controls,
limitations in monitoring capacities, imprecise parameter estimates,
and low power to detect changes in parameter estimates. Substantial
concern remained about the unknown consequences of zones and split
seasons on duck populations and harvest redistribution among States and
flyways, potential reduced effectiveness of regulations (season length
and bag limit) to reduce duck harvest if needed, and the administrative
burden associated with changing regulations annually. Consequently, we
established guidelines to provide a framework for controlling the
proliferation of zones and split seasons. The guidelines identified a
limited number of zone and split-season configurations that could be
used for duck hunting and restricted the frequency of changes in State
selection among these configurations to the first year of each 5-year
interval (e.g., 2021 for the 2021-25 hunting seasons). The first
hunting season that States could change their zone and split-season
configurations was in 1991, with subsequent opportunities in the 1996,
2001, 2006, 2011-2012, 2016-2017, and 2021 hunting seasons. The Service
approved extension of the general 1-year period for States to change
their zone and split-season configurations in 2011 and 2016 to 2 years
due to special circumstances.
In 2011, we prepared a new EA analyzing proposed changes to the
guidelines for zones and split seasons. Revised guidelines were
finalized in the preamble to a 2011 proposed rule (76 FR 53536, August
26, 2011). In 2020, at the request of the four Flyway Councils, we
modified the existing guidelines for duck zones and split seasons to
allow an additional configuration including two zones with up to three
season segments per zone for use beginning with the 2021 duck hunting
season (85 FR 51854, August 21, 2020). States that select this new
configuration must conduct an evaluation of impacts to hunter dynamics
(e.g., hunter numbers, satisfaction) and harvest during the 5-year
period it is implemented (e.g., 2021-25 hunting seasons) and need to
involve human dimensions specialists in the assessment. The purpose of
the evaluation was to provide information to allow the Service and
States to better understand how the additional zone and split-season
configurations might influence hunter recruitment, retention, and
reactivation (also known as R3) efforts, and whether additional options
run counter to our mutual objectives including the desire to simplify
regulations and waterfowl population concerns.
Previously, we established guidelines for duck zones and split
seasons for each 5-year period via rulemaking (proposed and final
rules) regardless of changes to the guidelines. We now will codify the
existing guidelines for duck zones and split seasons (85 FR 51854,
August 21, 2020), with minor clarifications, in our regulations. By
codifying existing guidelines in regulations, we will need to undertake
rulemaking only if we decide to modify the guidelines. To modify the
guidelines for duck zones and split seasons, we will initiate a new
rulemaking and issue proposed and final rules. Any changes to the
guidelines will apply beginning the first year of the subsequent 5-year
interval to maintain consistency in configurations within the
intervals. At least 1 year prior to the possible adoption of any
modifications, either the Service or Flyway Councils will announce at
an SRC meeting their intent to review and possibly modify the
guidelines.
Special Case Duck Zone and Split Seasons
When we first implemented guidelines for duck zones and split
seasons in 1991, several States had completed experiments with zone and
split-season arrangements different from
[[Page 55804]]
our original options. We offered those States a one-time opportunity to
continue those arrangements, with the stipulation that only minor
changes could be made to zone boundaries. If any of those States now
wish to change their zone and split arrangement:
(1) The new arrangement must conform to one of the currently
allowable configurations; and
(2) The State may not revert to the special case arrangement that
it previously had in place.
Guidelines for Duck Zones and Split Seasons
The following guidelines for zones and split seasons apply only for
the regular duck season:
(1) A zone is a geographic area or portion of a State, with a
contiguous boundary, for which independent dates may be selected for
the regular duck season.
(2) States wishing to change their duck zone and split-season
configurations may do so the first year of the 5-year period that it
would apply (i.e., 2026, 2031, 2036, 2041, and continuing at 5-year
intervals).
(3) Once a zone and split-season configuration is selected, it must
remain in place for 5 consecutive years.
(4) Only minor (less than one county in size) zone boundary changes
are allowed for any special case arrangement, and such changes are
allowed only the first year of the 5-year period during which it would
apply.
(5) Minor (less than one county in size) zone boundary changes may
be allowed for any State to resolve law enforcement or other boundary
clarification issues resulting from implication of a new configuration.
Changes will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis and must be approved
by the respective Flyway Council and the SRC.
(6) Consideration of changes for management-unit boundaries is not
subject to the guidelines and provisions governing the use of zones and
split seasons for ducks.
Configurations for Duck Zones and Split Seasons
Any State may continue their zone and split-season configuration
used in the previous 5-year period. If changes are made, the zone and
split-season configuration must conform to one of the following five
options:
(1) One zone (same as no zones) with up to three season segments;
(2) Two zones with up to two season segments in each zone;
(3) Two zones with up to three season segments in each zone;
(4) Three zones with up to two season segments in each zone; or
(5) Four zones with a continuous season (i.e., no segments) in each
zone.
Because the two zones and three season segments configuration is
new, States that select this configuration must conduct a one-time
evaluation of impacts to hunter dynamics (e.g., hunter numbers,
satisfaction) and harvest during the 5-year period it is implemented
(e.g., 2021-25 period).
Mallard Management Units
For the States that have a recognized management unit (Columbia
Basin Management Unit in the Pacific Flyway, High Plains Management
Unit in the Central Flyway) and include a non-management unit portion,
an independent two-segment duck season with no zones can be selected
for the management unit. The remainder of the State in the non-
management unit portion can be zoned and have split seasons according
to existing guidelines. In the Central Flyway, additional duck season
days afforded to the management unit must occur on or after the
Saturday nearest December 10.
Process for Selecting Duck Zone and Split-Season Configurations
States wishing to change their duck hunting zone and split-season
configuration selection from within our established guidelines must
provide their selected configuration and zone descriptions to the
Service's Migratory Bird Program by the end of August in the year prior
to the first year of the 5-year period that the selection would apply.
However, we encourage States to submit their selections and zone
boundaries as soon as possible. The Service's Migratory Bird Program
will approve State selections once they are determined to be consistent
with the above guidelines and zones and split-season configurations and
boundary descriptions are complete. Any discrepancies between the State
selections and the zone and split-season guidelines and configurations
will be addressed by the SRC at their fall meeting, generally held in
October. States may continue their zone and split-season configuration
used in the previous 5-year period, and we will assume this is the case
unless we receive configuration selections and zone descriptions from
the State by the deadline for requesting configuration changes. We will
publish State-selected duck zone and split-season configurations and
zone descriptions in the MGBH memorandum.
Dove Zones and Split Seasons
Background
In 2004, we recognized the need to work with the States to review
our current policy regarding zoning for dove hunting (69 FR 52970,
August 30, 2004). We asked the Flyway Councils and Mourning Dove
Management Unit Technical Committees to review the current policies
regarding the use of zones and split seasons for dove hunting, with a
view toward establishing guidelines for the use of these harvest-
management tools, as has been done for ducks. Items considered included
the number of zone and split-season configurations among which each
State may choose, the frequency with which each State may change their
configuration selection, and the need for a restricted framework
opening date in southern zones. In 2006, we adopted a set of guidelines
for dove zones and split seasons applicable in the Eastern and Central
Mourning Dove Management Units (EMU and CMU) based on recommendations
of the Atlantic, Mississippi, and Central Flyway Councils for use
beginning with the 2007 hunting season and conforming to those 5-year
periods used for ducks, for example, 2021-25 hunting seasons (71 FR
51406, August 29, 2006). These guidelines were not extended to the
Western Management Unit (WMU) at the time because they were not
endorsed by the Pacific Flyway Council and no dove zones occurred in
the WMU. Furthermore, the framework season length in the WMU was 30
consecutive days, except in Arizona and California where the season
length was 60 days and could be split into two segments.
The season length in the WMU was expanded to 60 days beginning with
the 2014 hunting season (78 FR 52658 at 52662, August 23, 2013, and 79
FR 51402 at 51405, August 28, 2014). The Pacific Flyway Council
requested the same flexibility for zones and split seasons that we have
afforded the EMU and CMU, with the exception that the WMU would be
allowed only two season segments in one or both zones rather than
three. Thus, in 2020, we extended the guidelines for dove zones and
split seasons to the WMU, with the exception that seasons may be split
into no more than two segments (85 FR 51854, August 21, 2020).
Similar to the situation for ducks, described above, we previously
established guidelines for dove zones and split seasons for each 5-year
period via rulemaking (proposed and final rules) regardless of changes
to the guidelines. We now adopt the existing
[[Page 55805]]
guidelines for dove zones and split seasons (85 FR 51854, August 21,
2020), with minor clarifications, in our regulations. By codifying
existing guidelines in regulations, we will need to undertake
rulemaking only if we decide to modify the guidelines. To modify the
guidelines for dove zones and split seasons, we will initiate a new
rulemaking and issue proposed and final rules. Any changes to the
guidelines will apply beginning the first year of the 5-year interval
to maintain consistency in configurations within the intervals. At
least 1 year prior to the possible adoption of any modifications,
either the Service or Flyway Councils will announce at an SRC meeting
their intent to review and possibly modify the guidelines.
Special Case Dove Zone and Split Seasons
When we first implemented the guidelines for dove zones and split
seasons in 2006, some States had completed experiments with zone and
split-season arrangements different from our original options. We
offered those States a one-time opportunity to continue those
arrangements (special case), with the stipulation that only minor
changes could be made to zone boundaries. If any of those States now
wish to change their zone and split arrangement:
(1) The new arrangement must conform to one of the currently
allowable configurations; and
(2) The State may not revert to the special case arrangement that
it previously had in place.
Guidelines for Dove Zones and Split Seasons
The following guidelines for zones and split seasons apply only for
the regular dove season:
(1) A zone is a geographic area or portion of a State, with a
contiguous boundary, for which independent seasons may be selected for
the regular dove season.
(2) States wishing to change their dove zone and split-season
configurations may do so the first year of the 5-year period that it
would apply (i.e., 2026, 2031, 2036, 2041, and continuing at 5-year
intervals).
(3) Once a zone and split-season configuration is selected, it must
remain in place for 5 consecutive years.
(4) Only minor (less than one county in size) zone boundary changes
would be allowed for any special case arrangement, and such changes are
allowed only beginning the first year of the 5-year period during which
it would apply.
(5) Minor (less than one county in size) zone boundary changes may
be allowed for any State to resolve law enforcement or other boundary
clarification issues resulting from implication of a new configuration.
Changes will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis and must be approved
by the respective Flyway Council and the SRC.
Configurations for Dove Zones and Split Seasons
Any State may continue their dove zone and split-season
configuration selected in the previous 5-year period. If changes are
made, the zone and split-season configuration must conform to one of
the following two options:
(1) One zone (same as no zones) with up to three season segments;
or
(2) Two zones with up to three season segments in each zone, except
in the WMU where the season in one or both zones may be split into two
segments.
Process for Selecting Dove Zone and Split-season Configurations
The process for States to select their dove hunting zone and split-
season configuration is the same as that for selecting the duck hunting
zone and split-season configuration. States wishing to change their
dove zone and split-season configuration selection from within our
established guidelines must provide their selected configuration and
zone descriptions to the Service's Migratory Bird Program by the end of
August in the year prior to the first year of the 5-year period that
the selection would apply. However, we encourage States to submit their
selections and zone boundaries as soon as possible. The Service's
Migratory Bird Program will approve State selections once they are
determined to be consistent with the above guidelines and zones and
split-season configurations and boundary descriptions are complete. Any
discrepancies between the State selections and the zone and split-
season guidelines and configurations will be addressed by the SRC at
their fall meeting, generally held in October. States may continue
their zone and split-season configuration used in the previous 5-year
period, and we will assume this is the case unless we receive
configuration selections and zone descriptions from the State by the
deadline for requesting configuration changes. We will publish State-
selected dove zone and split-season configurations and zone
descriptions in the MGBH memorandum.
Special Seasons
Special seasons may be used for species considered to be
underutilized, to address nuisance problems with overabundant species,
or to provide special hunting opportunities. Special seasons differ
from regular seasons in that they entail additional hunting opportunity
outside the established regular seasons but within the 107-day limit
mandated by the MBTA. Special seasons are used only for species whose
migration and distribution provide opportunities outside the period in
which regular seasons are held and when harvest can be achieved without
appreciable impacts to nontarget species. An important tenet of special
seasons is that harvest pressure can be effectively directed primarily
at target species or population segments that can be temporally and
geographically isolated to avoid nontarget take. Currently, special
seasons include: (1) Early teal seasons in the Atlantic, Mississippi,
and Central Flyways; (2) bonus blue-winged teal bag limits in certain
States in the Mississippi and Central Flyways; (3) early teal and wood
duck seasons in Florida, Kentucky, and Tennessee; (4) waterfowl hunting
days for youth and veterans-active military personnel; and (5) early
seasons on overabundant resident Canada and cackling geese.
The Service has required that States implementing special seasons
conduct experiments to assess the biological impacts of those seasons
on both target and nontarget species. However, the Service eliminated
experimental evaluation requirements for special seasons on
overabundant resident Canada and cackling geese, except: (1) in areas
where previous evaluations indicate an unacceptable level of take of
migrant Canada and cackling geese; and (2) in areas where evaluations
have not been conducted and one could reasonably expect an unacceptable
level of take of migrant Canada and cackling geese (e.g., areas in
northern States). All special seasons require Flyway Council
endorsement, and Flyway Councils may request evaluation of any special
season as part of the approval process if they believe such evaluations
to be warranted. Additionally, if conditions are believed to have
changed, new evaluations can be conducted for areas in which prior
evaluations failed with respect to the take of migrant Canada and
cackling geese. The Service may periodically reevaluate special seasons
on a case-by-case basis to determine whether they are still justified
and will continue to require experiments for any new special seasons
other than those
[[Page 55806]]
described for overabundant resident Canada and cackling geese. Any new
special seasons will be established through a new rulemaking process,
which we expect to be infrequent, involving a proposed and final rule.
Experimental Seasons
Experimental seasons are used to evaluate expansion of regular
seasons to new areas; the use of zones and splits in duck, dove, and,
in some cases, goose seasons; special seasons; and alternative
regulations for regular or special seasons. The Service may require
implementing States to conduct research for at least 3 years to assess
the environmental effects of experimental seasons, including on target
and nontarget species. The Service may also require a memorandum of
understanding with any State that implements experimental seasons.
Experimental seasons may be authorized for up to 5 years, after which a
new request must be submitted. A season may be offered on an
experimental basis or change from experimental status to operational
status upon approval by the respective Flyway Council(s) and the SRC.
Any new experimental season will be established through a new
rulemaking process, which we expect to be infrequent, involving a
proposed and final rule. Change in season status from experimental to
operational will be included in the MGBH memorandum.
Relationship to Regulations for Crow Hunting
Crows are in the family Corvidae and were not initially identified
as a migratory bird in the four bilateral conventions for the
protection of migratory birds. The family was added to the list of
migratory birds with the convention amendment with Mexico in 1972.
However, crows were not identified as a game bird; Corvidae are not one
of the five families that comprise migratory game birds. At the time
Federal protection was extended to Corvidae, some States had existing
hunting seasons for crows. Therefore, Federal regulations were
established to allow crow hunting; see 50 CFR part 20, subpart L, at
Sec. 20.133, hunting regulations for crows. Federal regulations allow
States to establish dates and durations of hunting seasons, bag and
possession limits, and methods of taking crows, subject to limitations
defined in Sec. 20.133. The hunting season on crows can have a maximum
of 124 days within a calendar year because of specific provisions
included in the convention with Mexico and must be outside the peak
crow nesting period. Some States allow crow hunting 4 days a week,
extending the open season nearly 8 months. Most States have no daily
bag limit on crows. Crows may also be taken under a depredation order
as defined in Sec. 21.150, the depredation order for blackbirds,
cowbirds, crows, grackles, and magpies.
Migratory bird hunting regulations at 50 CFR part 20 apply to game
birds and crows. Thus, we make the distinction in our regulations
between migratory bird hunting (crows included) and migratory game bird
hunting (crows excluded). Thus, crow hunting regulations (Sec. 20.133)
are not affected by this rulemaking regarding the administrative
process for authorizing migratory game bird hunting. However, this
rulemaking action revises Sec. 20.133 to authorize Tribes to establish
crow hunting regulations along with the States to be consistent with
our Tribal migratory game bird hunting regulations at Sec. 20.110 (see
88 FR 60375, September 1, 2023).
Flyways and Management Units
We generally establish the authorization conditions for migratory
game bird hunting for the conterminous U.S. States by flyway or
management unit/region. We will include the authorization conditions
for Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands in
separate sections near the end of the MGBH memorandum. The States
included in the flyways and management units/regions are described
below:
Flyways
Atlantic Flyway: Includes Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia,
Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Vermont,
Virginia, and West Virginia.
Mississippi Flyway: Includes Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana,
Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri,
Ohio, Tennessee, and Wisconsin.
Central Flyway: Includes Colorado (east of the Continental Divide),
Kansas, Montana (Counties of Blaine, Carbon, Fergus, Judith Basin,
Stillwater, Sweetgrass, Wheatland, and all counties east thereof),
Nebraska, New Mexico (east of the Continental Divide except the
Jicarilla Apache Indian Reservation), North Dakota, Oklahoma, South
Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming (east of the Continental Divide).
Pacific Flyway: Includes Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada,
Oregon, Utah, Washington, and those portions of Colorado, Montana, New
Mexico, and Wyoming not included in the Central Flyway.
Mallard Management Units
High Plains Management Unit: Roughly defined as that portion of the
Central Flyway that lies west of the 100th meridian.
Columbia Basin Management Unit: In Washington, all areas east of
the Pacific Crest Trail and east of the Big White Salmon River in
Klickitat County; and in Oregon, the counties of Gilliam, Morrow, and
Umatilla.
Mourning Dove Management Units
Eastern Management Unit: All States east of the Mississippi River,
and Louisiana.
Central Management Unit: Arkansas, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas,
Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota,
Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming.
Western Management Unit: Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada,
Oregon, Utah, and Washington.
Woodcock Management Regions
Eastern Management Region: Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia,
Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Vermont,
Virginia, and West Virginia.
Central Management Region: Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana,
Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi,
Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota,
Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin.
Summary of Comments and Responses
The proposed rule, which appeared in the June 26, 2026, Federal
Register, opened the public comment period for the process of
authorizing seasonal migratory game bird hunting. We received written
comments from 28 individuals and organizations on the rule including
those from the four Flyway Councils, Alaska Migratory Bird Co-
management Council, Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, 14
States, 2 non-government organizations (California Waterfowl
Association and Animal Counsel), and 7 individuals. Two individuals
opposed hunting of migratory birds, except subsistence harvest. All
other comments provided general support for the increased efficiency
and timeliness of the process for authorizing seasonal migratory game
bird hunting in this rulemaking except for the concerns identified
below. Due to the number of comments, this
[[Page 55807]]
summary presents major themes (issues) occurring throughout the
comments.
Issue: Opposition to a 3-year cycle for issuance of the notice and
memorandum to authorize seasonal migratory game bird hunting because of
lack of coordination with the Flyway Councils and Alaska Migratory Bird
Co-management Council on this specific aspect of the regulatory process
and lack of assessment of the implications, cost-benefit analysis, and
NEPA compliance (all commentors except two anti-hunting).
Response: We made no change in reference to the 3-year cycle. We
reiterate that the Service will continue to make annual decisions on
harvest levels and will update the MGBH memorandum codifying the
authorization conditions each year if any changes are prescribed by our
decision frameworks and current biological data. We believe this
confirmation of the continued annual decision-making on appropriate
harvest levels and annual publication of the MGBH memorandum for any
prescribed changes addresses commentor concerns. However, we will
strive to find efficiencies in the issuance of the MGBH memorandum. We
currently envision issuance of the full memorandum to establish the
limits and authorize seasonal migratory game bird hunting once every
three years and then publishing only changes to these authorization
conditions prescribed by our decision frameworks on years 2 and 3. We
will continue to coordinate with the Flyway Councils and the Alaska
Migratory Co-management Council in the implementation of this new
regulatory process.
Issue: Some states do not have their own migratory game bird
hunting regulations process and currently depend on the Service to open
and publish their hunting seasons.
Response: The Service will no longer continue the current practice
of publishing State annual hunting regulations as Federal regulations.
Because State season selections are made entirely by the States within
the established Federal limits and do not involve any decision-making
by the Federal government, there is no need for State season selections
to be part of the Federal rulemaking to authorize season migratory game
bird hunting.
We worked with the Flyway Councils and all State attorneys' offices
to discuss this new process starting in July 2022 and August 2023. Only
two States in the three western most Flyways have requested that we
publish their seasons while they develop their own regulatory process.
Several States have requested that we do not publish their hunting
regulations because Federal and State regulations may differ in some
cases if the State changes regulations, but still within the Federal
limits, or is more restrictive than the Federal publication of State
seasons. The potential for inconsistencies exists and differences would
be confusing to the public.
Although most States have their own regulations process for
migratory game bird hunting, we recognize that about six States do not
and these States currently depend on the Service to publish their
regulations. The Service proposed to continue to publish annual hunting
regulations for these States as a policy memorandum for up to 3 years
from publication of this final rule. We revised this final rule to
publish State hunting seasons as a policy memorandum for as long as
there is a demonstrated need for those few States that do not have
their own regulatory process and request that we do so. In this case,
we will publish the seasons on a State-by-State basis and not on a
Flyway-wide basis. These State annual regulations will be published as
a Federal MGBH memorandum, separate from the memorandum with the
authorization conditions, available at the address indicated in FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT and on our website at <a href="https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-birds">https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-birds</a> when they become available in about July each
year.
Issue: Reference to the frequency and necessity of SRC meetings is
outside of the scope of this rulemaking (change in Federal
administrative process) and inconsistent with SEIS 2013.
Response: In this final rule, we removed the two references to the
frequency and necessity of SRC meetings and retain the two SRC meetings
in the annual process consistent with SEIS 2013. However, we do expect
the efficiency of the SRC meetings may be improved because the Flyway
Councils will not need to make recommendations for season limits when
supporting the prescribed limits from our decision frameworks, changed
or unchanged from the previous year. We believe the Service and Flyway
Councils will be able to focus on changes that are not anticipated from
our decision frameworks.
Issue: Clarity of the rule regarding how the documents in the new
process work together.
Response: We made changes to table 1 to improve clarity in the
comparison of documents in the current process versus the new process.
Specifically, in this final rule, we revised text in the table from the
proposed rule to increase clarity, and we added a row to include State
season selections. Also, we added figure 1 in this final rule to help
increase clarity of the new process and timing for authorizing seasonal
migratory game bird hunting including biological assessment, regulatory
meetings, announcing the authorization conditions, and establishment of
State and Tribal hunting seasons. Lastly, although terms in the new
process are defined in the preamble of the proposed and final rules,
for convenience, we advise the reader to see the list of definitions in
the regulation promulgation section, specifically at Sec. 20.107
Definitions.
Issue: Concern for the loss of a Federal repository for State
seasons (selections) as the Federal Register with State season
selections previously provided.
Response: The Service's Migratory Bird Program, Branch of
Monitoring and Data Management, maintains a database of State season
selections. Under the new process, States are still required to submit
their season selections to the Migratory Bird Program each year and we
will continue to maintain this database of season selections. This data
will continue to be available upon request.
Issue: Publish the regulatory impact analysis (RIA) anytime there
is a proposed change in a decision framework.
Response: The Service believes that the most appropriate RIA is on
the relative changes prescribed by the data and our decision frameworks
once every 3 years and on the duck season regulatory alternatives used
in the duck hunting decisions frameworks any time there is a proposal
for change to these. There is information in the proposed rule, and
this final rule, that explains the economic significance of migratory
game bird hunting and our past work to understand the economic impacts
associated with the duck regulatory alternatives and desire to continue
to build on this work. Changes to decision frameworks in of themselves
will not have any economic impact or benefit in their impact
assessment, but rather the decisions from these based on current
biological status.
Required Determinations
National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
The programmatic document, ``Second Final Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement: Issuance of Annual Regulations
Permitting the Sport Hunting of Migratory Birds (EIS 20130139),'' filed
[[Page 55808]]
with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on May 24, 2013,
addresses criteria of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) compliance by the Service for issuance of the
annual framework regulations for hunting of migratory game bird
species. We published a notice of availability in the Federal Register
on May 31, 2013 (78 FR 32686), and our Record of Decision on July 26,
2013 (78 FR 45376). This EIS and Record of Decision continue to apply
to the new process for authorizing seasonal game bird hunting. Further,
the new hunting regulations process is more compliant with these NEPA
documents than the current process. Specifically, there were two
preferred alternatives in the NEPA documents that are only now being
implemented with the new process. These include the frequency of review
and adoption of duck regulatory packages and zones and split season
guidelines. The preferred alternative in both cases is to establish
these packages and guidelines for at least a 5-year period, with
changes limited to not sooner than every 5 years, and then after that
only when necessary (see above under Adaptive Harvest Management
Approach for Duck Harvest Management, and Duck Zones and Split Seasons,
and Dove Zones and Split Seasons for more details). We currently
propose and finalize these regulations every year or 5 years regardless
of changes. We address NEPA compliance for zones and split hunting
seasons through the preparation of environmental assessments, the most
recent being the Zones and Split Seasons for Duck Hunting and its
corresponding 2011 finding of no significant impact.
This final rule is administrative in nature and is categorically
excluded. It revises the process for transmitting authorization
conditions for seasonal migratory game bird hunting to States and
Tribes. Importantly, it does not alter the substantive annual
biological monitoring and assessment process that determines those
conditions.
The categorical exclusion determination is based on primarily 43
CFR 46.210(i) (in addition to 43 CFR 46.205 and 46.215), which provides
that policies, directives, regulations, and guidelines of
administrative, financial, legal, technical, or procedural nature
qualify for categorical exclusion. The environmental effects of this
action are too broad or speculative to lend themselves to meaningful
analysis and are addressed in an environmental action statement, which
is part of the record for this final rule and available for public
inspection as provided in ADDRESSES, Document availability.
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), provides that the Secretary shall insure that any
action authorized, funded, or carried out is not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of any endangered species or threatened species
or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical
habitat. We conducted a formal consultation to ensure that actions
resulting from these regulations will not likely jeopardize the
continued existence of endangered or threatened species or result in
the destruction or adverse modification of their critical habitat.
Findings from this consultation are included in a biological opinion,
which concludes that the regulations are not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or result
in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. The
biological opinion resulting from this section 7 consultation is part
of the record for this rule and available for public inspection as
provided in ADDRESSES, Document availability.
Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Order (E.O.) 12866),
Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review (E.O. 13563), and Unleashing
Prosperity Through Deregulation (E.O. 14192)
E.O. 12866 provides that the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reviews all
significant rules as defined by that E.O. This rulemaking action will
serve only to change the administrative process for authorizing States
and Tribes to establish their regulations for migratory game bird
hunting. OIRA has determined that this rule is significant under
section 3(f) of E.O. 12866.
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.
E.O. 13653 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. By eliminating annual rulemaking, the Service will
save about $80,000 per year in printing costs, reduce staff workload by
at least 50 percent, and reduce 200 hours of managerial workload
reviewing and surnaming documents. A regulatory impact analysis
associated with the change in our internal administrative process was
prepared and is available upon request from the person listed above
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or from <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> at Docket No. FWS-HQ-MB-2024-0206.
We have developed this final rule in a manner consistent with these
requirements. This final rule is an E.O. 14192 deregulatory action.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121)), whenever an agency is required to
publish a notice of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must
prepare and make available for public comment a regulatory flexibility
analysis that describes the effect of the rule on small businesses,
small organizations, and small government jurisdictions. However, no
regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of an agency
certifies the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
We have examined this final rule's potential effects on small
entities as required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act and determined
that this action will not have an economic impact on any small
entities. This proposed final rule is administrative in nature, and the
affected entities are State and Tribal governments. The rulemaking
action changes only our internal administrative process for authorizing
States and Tribes to establish seasonal migratory game bird hunting
regulations. The annual process is largely a cooperative effort between
the Service and the States and Tribes. The change in our administrative
process eliminates the need for annual rulemaking and is expected to
increase efficiency; better meet State, Tribal, and Federal rulemaking
constraints; and reduce the complexity and costs associated with
promulgating annual migratory game bird hunting regulations.
This is not a major rule under subtitle E of SBREFA (5 U.S.C.
804(2)). This final rule will not have an annual effect on the economy
of $100 million or
[[Page 55809]]
more; will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers,
individual industries, or Federal, State, or local government agencies,
or geographic regions; and will 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 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
This final rule does not contain any new collection of information
that requires approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). OMB
has previously approved the information collection requirements
associated with migratory game bird surveys and the procedures for
establishing annual migratory bird hunting seasons under the following
OMB control numbers:
<bullet> 1018-0019, ``North American Woodcock Singing Ground
Survey'' (expires 02/28/2027).
<bullet> 1018-0023, ``Migratory Bird Surveys, 50 CFR 20.20''
(expires 09/30/2028). Includes Migratory Bird Harvest Information
Program, Migratory Bird Hunter Surveys, Sandhill Crane Survey, and
Parts Collection Survey.
<bullet> 1018-0171, ``Establishment of Annual Migratory Bird
Hunting Seasons, 50 CFR part 20'' (expires 10/30/2027).
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 (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)
We have determined and certify, in compliance with the requirements
of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502 et seq., that this
final rulemaking does not include any Federal mandate that may result
in the expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted
for inflation) in any one year and does not significantly or uniquely
affect small governments.
Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)
The Department, in promulgating this final rule, has determined
that this rulemaking action will not unduly burden the judicial system
and that it meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of E.O.
12988.
Takings Implication Assessment (E.O. 12630)
In accordance with E.O. 12630, this final rule, authorized by the
MBTA, does not have significant takings implications and does not
affect any constitutionally protected property rights. This final rule
would not result in the physical occupancy of property, the physical
invasion of property, or the regulatory taking of any property. In
fact, this final rulemaking action would allow hunters to exercise
otherwise unavailable privileges and, therefore, will reduce
restrictions on the use of private and public property.
Energy Effects (E.O. 13211)
E.O. 13211 requires agencies to prepare statements of energy
effects when undertaking certain actions. This rule is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy and has not been designated by OIRA as a significant energy
action. Therefore, no statement of energy effects is required.
Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes
In accordance with E.O. 13175 (``Consultation and Coordination with
Native American Indian Tribal Governments'') and the Department of the
Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we considered possible effects of this
final rule on federally recognized Indian Tribes with respect to
impacts to Tribes' treaty rights to hunt waterfowl. We have determined
that there are de minimis effects on Indian Tribes for that aspect of
their treaty rights. Through this process to establish and announce
authorization conditions for migratory game bird hunting, we regularly
coordinate with Tribes that are affected. Tribes could attend spring
and fall Flyway Council meetings, participate in SRC meetings, and
provide comments on Federal Register publications concerning
authorization conditions for migratory game bird hunting, and, whenever
needed, we hold informal consultations with Tribes regarding trust
resources, trust assets, health, and safety. This final rule will not
have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian Tribes.
This final rule is administrative in nature and does not directly
affect any specific Tribal lands, treaty rights, or Tribal trust
resources. In addition, this final rule will not interfere with the
ability of Tribes to manage themselves or their funds or to regulate
migratory bird activities on Tribal and ceded lands. Therefore, we
preliminarily conclude that this rulemaking action does not have
``Tribal implications'' under section 1(a) of E.O. 13175. Thus, formal
government-to-government consultation is not required by E.O. 13175 and
related policies of the Department of the Interior. We will continue to
collaborate with Tribes on concerns related to migratory game bird
hunting regulations.
We routinely provide Federal Register publications and biological
status reports pertaining to migratory bird management, authorization
conditions, and regulations online for all States and Tribes, and other
interested parties. Upon being notified of any concern regarding
proposed and final regulations, we have initiated consultation, and we
will continue to consult with Tribes when necessary and requested by
Tribes.
Federalism Effects (E.O. 13132)
Due to the migratory nature of certain species of birds, the
Federal Government has been given responsibility over these species by
the MBTA. We prescribe authorization conditions from which States and
Tribes may establish their annual regulations for migratory game bird
hunting seasons. This final rule changes only the Federal internal
administrative process for establishing the authorization conditions
and preserves the ability of the States and Tribes to establish hunting
seasons that meet their individual needs. We maintain our regulations
at 50 CFR 20.110 (Regulations for certain Federal Indian reservations
and ceded lands) recognizing Tribal sovereignty to exercise reserved
hunting rights and, for some Tribes, recognition of their authority to
regulate hunting by both Tribal and nontribal members on their
reservation. Consistent with our longstanding policy, we continue to
recognize that, in certain cases, conflicts may arise between specific
States and Tribes on aspects of Tribal treaty rights. The Service
actively supports the parties reaching a mutually agreeable solution to
such conflicts.
Any State or Tribe may be more restrictive in its regulations than
the Federal authorization conditions and regulations at any time. The
authorization conditions are developed in a cooperative process with
the States and the Flyway Councils. This process allows States to
participate in the development of the authorization conditions from
which they will establish their own hunting regulations.
[[Page 55810]]
This final rule will not have substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with E.O. 13132, these
regulations do not have federalism implications and do not warrant the
preparation of a federalism summary impact statement.
Reference Cited
Lockie, S., and S. Rockloff. 2005. Decision Frameworks: Assessment
of the social aspects of decision frameworks and development of a
conceptual model. Coastal CRC Discussion Paper. Norman Gardens,
Australia: Central Queensland University.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 20
Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Transportation, Wildlife.
Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, for the reasons described in the preamble, the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service is amending title 50, chapter I, subchapter
B, part 20, of the Code of Federal Regulations as set forth below:
PART 20--MIGRATORY BIRD HUNTING
0
1. The authority citation for part 20 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 703 et seq. and 742a-j.
Subpart B--Definitions
0
2. Amend Sec. 20.11 by:
0
a. Revising the introductory text and paragraph (a) introductory text;
0
b. In paragraph (b)(1), remove the word ``precribed'' and add in its
place the word ``prescribed''; and
0
c. In paragraph (c)(5), remove the word ``aggegate'' and add in its
place the word ``aggregate''.
These revisions read as follows:
Sec. 20.11 What terms do I need to understand?
In addition to definitions contained in part 10 of this chapter, as
used in this part, the following terms will be construed, respectively,
to mean and to include:
(a) Migratory game birds means those migratory birds included in
the terms of conventions between the United States and any foreign
country for the protection of migratory birds, for which hunting is
authorized in this part and which belong to the following families:
* * * * *
Subpart C--Taking
0
3. In Sec. 20.21, revise paragraphs (b)(2) and (g)(2) to read as
follows:
Sec. 20.21 What hunting methods are illegal?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) A hunting season only for Canada and cackling geese during the
period of September 1 to September 30, provided:
(i) The season occurs within the Atlantic, Central, and Mississippi
Flyways (see Sec. 20.107 for definitions of the flyways);
(ii) All other waterfowl and crane hunting seasons, excluding
falconry, are closed; and
(iii) The State notifies the Service's Migratory Bird Program by
May 31 each year of its intention to authorize the additional hunting
method in its regulations for the seasonal hunting of migratory game
birds.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(2) A hunting season only for Canada and cackling geese during the
period of September 1 to September 30, provided:
(i) The season occurs within the Atlantic, Central, and Mississippi
Flyways (see Sec. 20.107 for definitions of the flyways);
(ii) All other waterfowl and crane hunting seasons, excluding
falconry, are closed; and
(iii) The State notifies the Service's Migratory Bird Program by
May 31 each year of its intention to authorize the additional hunting
method in its regulations for the seasonal hunting of migratory game
birds.
* * * * *
0
4. Revise Sec. 20.23 to read as follows:
Sec. 20.23 Shooting and hawking hours.
No person may take migratory game birds except during the hours
open to shooting, which includes hawking (taking by falconry), as
prescribed in subpart K of this part and 50 CFR 21.180 and 21.183 of
this chapter.
Subpart H--Federal, State, and Foreign Law
0
5. Revise Sec. 20.71 to read as follows:
Sec. 20.71 Violation of Federal law.
No person shall at any time, by any means or in any manner, take,
possess, transport, or export any migratory bird, or any part, nest, or
egg of any such bird, in violation of any act of Congress or any
regulation, including the regulations in this part and the
authorization conditions (see Sec. 20.107 for a definition) for
migratory bird hunting and in accordance with Sec. 20.125(a), issued
pursuant thereto.
0
6. Revise Sec. 20.72 to read as follows:
Sec. 20.72 Violation of State and Tribal law.
No person shall at any time, by any means or in any manner, take,
possess, transport, or export any migratory bird, or any part, nest, or
egg of any such bird, in violation of any applicable law or regulation
of any State or Tribe. A violation of State or Tribal law or
regulation, including State regulations in a Federal policy memorandum
posted on a Service website, for migratory bird hunting constitutes a
violation of Federal law.
0
7. Revise subpart K to read as follows:
Subpart K--Process for Issuing Authorization Conditions for Migratory
Game Bird Hunting
Sec.
20.100 General provisions.
20.107 Definitions.
20.108 Nontoxic shot zones.
20.109 Extended seasons, limits, and hours for taking migratory game
birds by falconry.
20.110 Regulations for certain Federal Indian reservations and ceded
lands.
20.115 Duck and dove zone and split-season configurations.
20.117 Duck season regulatory alternatives.
20.119 Establishing the authorization conditions.
20.121 Notification of the authorization conditions.
20.123 Special and experimental seasons.
20.125 Requirements for States.
20.127 Requirements for hunters.
20.129 Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee.
20.130 Flyway Councils.
Sec. 20.100 General provisions.
(a) The taking, possession, transportation, and other uses of
migratory birds is prohibited unless it is specifically provided for in
regulations developed in accordance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
Consequently, migratory game bird hunting is prohibited except as
authorized in regulations in this part and in accordance with the
authorization conditions (see Sec. 20.107 for a definition) for State
and Tribal migratory bird hunting regulations.
(b) Authorization conditions will be based on data including, but
not limited to, migratory game bird population status and trends,
habitat conditions, and anticipated harvest. The authorization
conditions will be periodically adjusted to account for bird abundance
and other biological factors.
(c) In the Atlantic Flyway States of Connecticut, Maine, Maryland,
Massachusetts, New Jersey, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania, if Sunday
hunting of migratory game birds is prohibited statewide by State law or
[[Page 55811]]
regulation, all Sundays are closed to the take of all migratory game
birds.
Sec. 20.107 Definitions.
For the purpose of this subpart, the following terms will be
construed, respectively, to mean and to include:
Area means a federally established geographic boundary within which
migratory game bird hunting may occur.
Authorization conditions means the selected Federal regulatory
alternatives from our decision frameworks within which States and
Tribes may establish regulations for the seasonal hunting of migratory
game birds in accordance with Federal regulations.
(1) The selected regulatory alternatives may change periodically
based on the status of populations and environmental conditions and
will include the regulatory parameters most directly related to
maintaining harvests at levels compatible with a game bird population's
ability to be self-sustaining.
(2) Authorization conditions specify the bracket dates, season
lengths, shooting hours, bag and possession limits, areas where hunting
may occur, and other restrictions, conditions, and requirements
associated with the seasonal hunting of migratory game birds.
Bracket dates means the earliest and latest dates for migratory
game bird hunting open seasons.
Decision framework means a structured set of procedures, rules,
models, and information criteria for selecting the appropriate
authorization conditions from a fixed set of regulatory alternatives,
each with a different expected harvest level, based on the harvest
management objectives and status, demographics, and environmental
conditions of the applicable migratory game bird population. Decision
frameworks used by the Service are based on the U.S. Code and Code of
Federal Regulations or published in the Federal Register as a final
rule.
Flyway means a geographically bounded administrative region.
(1) Atlantic Flyway is Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia,
Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Vermont,
Virginia, and West Virginia.
(2) Mississippi Flyway is Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana,
Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri,
Ohio, Tennessee, and Wisconsin.
(3) Central Flyway is Colorado (east of the Continental Divide),
Kansas, Montana (Counties of Blaine, Carbon, Fergus, Judith Basin,
Stillwater, Sweetgrass, Wheatland, and all counties east thereof),
Nebraska, New Mexico (east of the Continental Divide except the
Jicarilla Apache Indian Reservation), North Dakota, Oklahoma, South
Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming (east of the Continental Divide).
(4) Pacific Flyway is Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon,
Utah, Washington, and those portions of Colorado, Montana, New Mexico,
and Wyoming not included in the Central Flyway.
Flyway Council means the representatives from each State within
that Flyway. Additionally, representatives from Puerto Rico and the
U.S. Virgin Islands are included in the Atlantic Flyway Council, and
representatives from Alaska are included in the Pacific Flyway Council.
(1) The Council recommends actions necessary for science-based and
sustainable harvest management of migratory birds to the Service.
(2) The Flyway Councils are advised by the Flyway technical
committees, which evaluate population and habitat information and make
recommendations to the Councils on matters of migratory bird
conservation.
Hunting permit means a federally authorized, State-issued license
authorizing specific limited take for hunting migratory game birds,
valid only for the individual whose name and address appears on the
authorization.
Migratory Game Bird Hunting Memorandum means the policy memorandum
that sets forth and communicates the authorization conditions within
which States and Tribes may establish regulations for the seasonal
hunting of migratory game birds in accordance with Federal regulations.
Season length means the maximum number of days hunting may occur
within the bracket dates for migratory game bird hunting seasons.
Season segment means a consecutive-day period within the total
season length for migratory game bird hunting seasons.
Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee means the Service
Migratory Bird Regulations Committee (Service Regulations Committee or
SRC), which is responsible for considering recommendations from the
Service and Flyway Councils and recommending authorization conditions
and modifications to decision frameworks and migratory game bird
hunting regulations to the Director of the Service.
Zone means a geographic contiguous boundary for which an
independent hunting season for a species or group of species may be
established to distribute hunting opportunities and harvests according
to temporal, geographic, and demographic variability in game bird
populations. Zones are established by States and approved by the
Service.
Zone and split-season configurations means an alternative
combination of zones and season segments that a State may use for duck
and dove hunting in a 5-year period, as provided in Sec. 20.115.
Sec. 20.108 Nontoxic shot zones.
Beginning September 1, 1991, the contiguous 48 United States, and
the States of Alaska and Hawaii, the Territories of Puerto Rico and the
Virgin Islands, and the territorial waters of the United States, are
designated for the purpose of Sec. 20.21(j) as nontoxic shot zones for
hunting waterfowl, coots, and certain other species. ``Certain other
species'' refers to those species, other than waterfowl or coots, that
are affected by reason of being included in aggregate bags and
concurrent seasons.
Sec. 20.109 Extended seasons, limits, and hours for taking migratory
game birds by falconry.
(a) In accordance with 50 CFR 21.82, falconry is a permitted means
of taking migratory game birds in any State except for Hawaii. General
hunting regulations, including seasons and shooting hours, apply to
falconry.
(b) States and Tribes may establish an extended season for taking
migratory game birds in accordance with the following:
(1) Bracket dates: September 1-March 10.
(2) Season lengths: For all hunting methods combined, the combined
length of the extended season, regular season, and any special or
experimental seasons must not exceed 107 days for any species or group
of species in a geographical area. Each extended season may be split
into three segments.
(3) Daily bag limits: Falconry daily bag limits for all permitted
migratory game birds must not exceed 3 birds in the aggregate during
extended falconry seasons, any special or experimental seasons, and
regular hunting seasons in each State or Tribe, including those that do
not establish an extended falconry season. Regular season bag limits do
not apply to falconry. The falconry bag limit is not in addition to
shooting limits.
(4) Hawking hours: One-half hour before sunrise until sunset except
as otherwise restricted by State or Tribal regulations.
[[Page 55812]]
Sec. 20.110 Regulations for certain Federal Indian reservations and
ceded lands.
(a) Tribal sovereignty. The Service recognizes Tribal sovereignty
to exercise reserved hunting rights and, for some Tribes, recognition
of their authority to regulate hunting by both Tribal and nontribal
members on their reservation. Accordingly, Tribes may independently
establish special (separate from the State or States in which the
reservation is located) migratory game bird hunting regulations.
Migratory birds may be taken if the take is consistent with the
regulations in this section and applicable Tribal hunting regulations.
(b) Applicability. Special Tribal migratory game bird hunting
regulations may be established by Tribes that have reserved hunting
rights on Federal Indian reservations (including off-reservation trust
lands) and ceded lands. These regulations also may be applied to the
establishment of migratory game bird hunting regulations for nontribal
members on all lands within the reservations where Tribes have full
wildlife-management authority over such hunting, or where the Tribes
and affected States otherwise have reached agreement over hunting by
nontribal members on non-Indian lands within the reservation.
(c) Special regulations. Special Tribal migratory game bird hunting
regulations must be consistent with the annual March 11 to August 31
closed season mandated by the 1916 Convention Between the United States
and Great Britain (for Canada) for the Protection of Migratory Birds,
as amended by the Protocol Between the Government of Canada and the
Government of the United States of America Amending the 1916 Convention
Between the United Kingdom and the United States of America for the
Protection of Migratory Birds in Canada and the United States, and with
these provisions:
(1) Tribes may establish on-reservation hunting regulations, for
both Tribal and nontribal members, with hunting seasons that may differ
from those in the State(s) in which the reservations are located.
(i) Regulations for both Tribal and nontribal members: Opening and
closing dates, season length, and daily bag and possession limits for
nontribal members on the reservations must be within the authorization
conditions for migratory game bird hunting, and all Federal hunting
regulations in this part also apply to nontribal hunters. Tribes may
choose to set the same opening and closing dates, season length, and
daily bag and possession limits for hunting by Tribal members and
nontribal members on their reservations, or, in accordance with the
provisions in paragraph (c)(1)(ii) of this section, Tribes may choose
to establish regulations for Tribal members only.
(ii) Regulations for Tribal members only: Tribes may establish on-
reservation hunting regulations by Tribal members only, with hunting
regulations that may differ from the authorization conditions for
bracket dates, season length, and daily bag and possession limits. All
Federal hunting regulations in this part apply.
(A) For a short-term experimental hunting season, a Tribe and the
Service may formally agree on allowed methods of take, notwithstanding
the regulations in Sec. 20.21, for on-reservation and ceded lands
hunting by Tribal members. The Service will make public any such formal
agreement.
(B) A Tribe that would like to make an additional hunting method
operational would need to provide data to the Service for
consideration. If the Service agrees with the Tribe's proposal, the
Service will conduct rulemaking to amend the regulations in this part
to allow Tribal members to use the additional hunting method.
(2) Tribes may establish off-reservation hunting regulations by
Tribal members on ceded lands, with hunting seasons that may differ
from the authorization conditions for season dates, season length, and
daily bag and possession limits.
(d) Provisions for ceded lands. Tribes that have special migratory
game bird hunting regulations for Tribal members on ceded lands must
send a copy of the Tribal regulations to officials in the affected
State(s) as soon as reasonably possible prior to the season opening.
Sec. 20.115 Duck and dove zone and split-season configurations.
Below are the alternative combinations of zones and season segments
that a State may use for duck and dove hunting in a 5-year period. The
SRC may approve a deviation from the 5-year period length for all four
flyways.
(a) Duck hunting zone and split-season configurations include:
(1) One zone (same as no zones) with up to three season segments;
(2) Two zones with up to two season segments in each zone;
(3) Two zones with up to three season segments in each zone;
(4) Three zones with up to two season segments in each zone; or
(5) Four zones with a continuous season (i.e., no segments) in each
zone.
(b) Dove hunting zone and split-season configurations include:
(1) One zone (same as no zones) with up to three season segments;
or
(2) Two zones with up to three season segments in each zone, except
in the Western Management Unit where the season in one or both zones
may be split into two segments.
Sec. 20.117 Duck season regulatory alternatives.
For the general duck season authorization conditions, each Flyway
has four possible regulatory alternatives (closed, restrictive,
moderate, and liberal), each with a different expected harvest level.
The open season alternatives are specified as:
(a) Atlantic Flyway:
Table 1 to Paragraph (a)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative
Authorization conditions --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Restrictive Moderate Liberal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bracket dates........................ Oct. 1-Jan. 31......... Saturday nearest Sep. Saturday nearest Sep.
24-Jan. 31. 24-Jan. 31.
Season length (days)................. 30..................... 45..................... 60.
Daily bag limit...................... 3...................... 6...................... 6.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Mississippi Flyway:
[[Page 55813]]
Table 2 to Paragraph (b)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative
Authorization conditions --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Restrictive Moderate Liberal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bracket dates........................ Saturday nearest Sep. Saturday nearest Sep. Saturday nearest Sep.
24-Jan. 31. 24-Jan. 31. 24-Jan. 31.
Season length (days)................. 30..................... 45..................... 60.
Daily bag limit...................... 3...................... 6...................... 6.
Mallard restriction.................. 2...................... 4...................... 4.
Mallard female restriction........... 1...................... 1...................... 2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c) Central Flyway:
Table 3 to Paragraph (c)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative
Authorization conditions --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Restrictive Moderate Liberal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bracket dates........................ Saturday nearest Sep. Saturday nearest Sep. Saturday nearest Sep.
24-Jan. 31. 24-Jan. 31. 24-Jan. 31.
Season length (days)................. 39..................... 60..................... 74.
Daily bag limit...................... 3...................... 6...................... 6.
Mallard restriction.................. 3...................... 5...................... 5.
Mallard female restriction........... 1...................... 1...................... 2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(d) Pacific Flyway, except Alaska:
Table 4 to Paragraph (d)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative
Authorization conditions --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Restrictive Moderate Liberal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bracket dates........................ Saturday nearest Sep. Saturday nearest Sep. Saturday nearest Sep.
24-Jan. 31. 24-Jan. 31. 24-Jan. 31.
Season length (days)................. 60..................... 86..................... 107.
Daily bag limit...................... 4...................... 7...................... 7.
Mallard restriction.................. 3...................... 5...................... 7.
Mallard female restriction........... 1...................... 2...................... 2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(e) Alaska:
Table 5 to Paragraph (e)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative
Authorization conditions --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Restrictive Moderate Liberal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bracket dates........................ Sep. 1-Jan. 26......... Sep. 1-Jan. 26......... Sep. 1-Jan. 26.
Season length (days)................. 107.................... 107.................... 107.
Daily bag limit...................... 5, except Gulf Coast 7, except Gulf Coast 7, except Gulf Coast
Zone is 6 and North Zone is 8 and North Zone is 8 and North
Zone is 8. Zone is 10. Zone is 10.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(f) Shooting and hawking hours are from one-half hour before
sunrise to sunset daily.
(g) In the Central Flyway High Plains Mallard Management Unit, the
season length may be extended 12 additional days in the restrictive
alternative and 23 additional days in the moderate and liberal
alternatives; additional days must be on or after the Saturday nearest
December 10.
(h) In the Pacific Flyway Columbia Basin Mallard Management Unit,
the season length may be extended 7 additional days in the restrictive
and moderate alternatives.
(i) Additional species-specific restrictions may be established in
the authorization conditions.
(j) Duck season regulatory alternatives are fixed for a period of
not less than 5 years.
Sec. 20.119 Establishing the authorization conditions.
(a) The authorization conditions will be determined using available
biological and habitat information and decision frameworks. A list of
current decision frameworks is posted on the Service's website with the
Migratory Game Bird Hunting Memorandum. The Service will apply
available biological and habitat information to the relevant decision
framework for that species and will
[[Page 55814]]
announce the outcomes as the authorization conditions within which
States and Tribes may establish their migratory game bird hunting
regulations in accordance with the regulations in this part and other
applicable Federal regulations.
(b) Consistent with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the
authorization conditions for any migratory game bird season must:
(1) Not start prior to September 1;
(2) Not end after March 10, except the season for ducks,
mergansers, and coots may not end later than January 31 (16 U.S.C.
704(c)(1)(B)); and
(3) Not exceed 107 days.
(c) The Service and Flyway Councils may establish decision
frameworks for the determination of authorization conditions that are
more restrictive than the provisions in the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
Sec. 20.121 Notification of the authorization conditions.
(a) The Service will communicate the authorization conditions in
the Migratory Game Bird Hunting Memorandum. The memorandum and any
supporting documentation will be made publicly available in the Federal
Register through a notice of availability and posted on the Service's
website.
(b) The Service may update the Migratory Game Bird Hunting
Memorandum and notice of availability annually if changes are
prescribed by decision frameworks. Updates would occur no later than
February 28 of each calendar year. If the Service does not issue a new
memorandum and notice of availability by February 28, then the
authorization conditions in the most recent memorandum will remain in
effect.
(c) The notice of availability will open a public comment period of
not less than 30 days. The Service may revise the Migratory Game Bird
Hunting Memorandum based on public comment and, if so, the revised
memorandum will be made publicly available in the Federal Register
through a notice of availability and posted on the Service's website.
Sec. 20.123 Special and experimental seasons.
(a) Special seasons authorize additional hunting opportunity
outside the regular season but within the 107-day limit mandated by the
MBTA. Special seasons are authorized to promote harvest of
underutilized species, address overabundance of nuisance species, or
provide special hunting opportunities. Experimental seasons are
authorized to evaluate expansion of regular and special seasons to new
areas, evaluate use of zones and splits, or evaluate alternative
seasons.
(b) Special or experimental season requests may be made by the
Flyway Council(s) or requested by a State. Requests must be submitted
by September 1 prior to the requested hunting season. If the Service
approves a special or experimental season, it will be authorized in the
Migratory Game Bird Hunting Memorandum.
(c) To approve special and experimental seasons, the Service must
find:
(1) The Flyway Council(s) where the hunting will take place endorse
the special or experimental season;
(2) Species migration and distribution provide sufficient hunting
opportunity outside the regular season;
(3) There is no or negligible impact to nontarget species; and
(4) Authorizations are consistent with existing environmental
compliance determinations.
(d) Approved experimental seasons may be valid for up to 5 years,
after which a new request must be submitted. The Service may require
implementing States to collect data for at least 3 years to assess the
environmental effects of special or experimental seasons, including
effects on target and nontarget species.
Sec. 20.125 Requirements for States.
(a) States may authorize migratory game bird hunting provided the
State establishes hunting regulations in accordance with Federal
authorization conditions and regulations. State hunting regulations
must be at least as restrictive as the Federal authorization conditions
and regulations. Hunting that occurs outside the State regulations or
Federal authorization conditions and regulations constitutes a
violation of Federal law pursuant to Sec. 20.71.
(b) No later than May 31 of each calendar year, States must submit
their proposed migratory game bird hunting regulations implementing the
Federal authorization conditions to the Service's Migratory Bird
Program for review.
(c) Areas and zones for which open seasons are specified in a
State's hunting regulations must be described, delineated, and
designated as such in each State's hunting regulations, and these areas
must also be included in the Migratory Game Bird Hunting Memorandum.
(d) Unless otherwise specified, States may establish hunting
seasons by zones as defined in Sec. 20.107. Zones for certain duck
seasons (and associated youth and veterans-active military waterfowl
hunting days, gallinule seasons, and snipe seasons) and dove seasons
must comply with Federal zone and split-season configurations. Changes
among configurations may occur in the first year of the 5-year period
that it would apply and according to the following guidelines:
(1) States seeking to change their duck or dove hunting zone and
split-season configuration selection must provide their selection and
zone descriptions to the Service by August 31 of the year prior to the
5-year interval during which they would apply.
(2) States with approved special case arrangements to change their
zone and split-season configuration must conform to the current
configurations and may not revert to the special case arrangements that
they previously had in place.
(3) Only minor (less than one county in size) zone boundary changes
will be allowed for any special case arrangement, and such changes are
allowed only in the first year of the 5-year period during which it
would apply.
(4) Minor (less than one county in size) zone boundary changes may
be allowed for any State to resolve law enforcement or other boundary
clarification issues resulting from implication of a new configuration.
Changes will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis and must be approved
by the respective Flyway Council and the Service Migratory Bird
Regulations Committee.
(5) Consideration of changes for management-unit boundaries is not
subject to the guidelines and provisions governing the use of zones and
split seasons for ducks and doves.
(d) States may issue hunting permits for migratory game bird
hunting at levels predicted to result in the amount of take authorized
by the authorization conditions. Federally authorized, State-issued
hunting permits are valid only for the individual whose name and
address appears on the hunting permit and must specify a take
authorization.
(e) States may select 2 days per duck-hunting zone, designated as
``Youth Waterfowl Hunting Days,'' and 2 days per duck-hunting zone,
designated as ``Veterans and Active Military Personnel Waterfowl
Hunting Days,'' in addition to their regular duck seasons.
(1) The days may be held concurrently or may be nonconsecutive.
Days may be held up to 14 days before or after any regular duck-season
bracket dates in the authorization conditions or within any split of a
regular duck season, or within any other open season on migratory game
birds. Youth Waterfowl Hunting Days must be held
[[Page 55815]]
outside any regular duck season on weekends, holidays, or other non-
school days when youth hunters would have the maximum opportunity to
participate.
(2) Youth hunters must be younger than 18 years of age. States may
specify a more restrictive age definition. An adult 18 years of age or
older must accompany the youth hunter into the field. This adult may
not duck hunt but may participate in other seasons that are open on the
special youth day. Permitted species may be taken only by participants
possessing applicable hunting permits.
(3) Veterans (as defined in 38 U.S.C. 101) and members of the U.S.
Armed Forces on active duty, including members of the National Guard
and Reserves on active duty (other than for training), may participate.
Permitted species may be taken only by participants possessing
applicable hunting permits.
Sec. 20.127 Requirements for hunters.
(a) Any individual hunting must comply with the regulations in this
part, Federal authorization conditions, and any applicable State or
Tribal hunting regulations. Violation of any applicable Federal, State,
Tribal, or local law or regulation is a violation of Federal law
pursuant to Sec. 20.71 and Sec. 20.72.
(b) Any individual hunting under a federally authorized, State-
issued hunting permit must adhere to the provisions of the hunting
permit, Federal regulations, and State regulations. The hunting permit
must be carried by the permittee when exercising the provisions of the
hunting permit and must be presented to any law enforcement officer
upon request. The hunting permit specifies the individual's name and
address. The hunting permit is not transferable or assignable to any
other person, and may not be sold, bartered, traded, or otherwise
provided to any other person. The hunting permit will be invalid if it
is altered or defaced in any way.
Sec. 20.129 Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee.
(a) Purpose. The Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee
(Service Regulations Committee or SRC) is responsible for considering
recommendations from the Service and Flyway Councils and recommending
authorization conditions and modifications to decision frameworks and
regulations for migratory game bird hunting to the Director of the
Service.
(b) Notice of meetings. Some SRC meetings may be attended by any
person outside the Department of the Interior. Notices of these
meetings will be published on the Service's Migratory Bird Program
website at least 2 weeks before the meeting. The notice will state the
time, place, and general subject(s) of the meeting, as well as the
extent of public involvement such as observation, written comment, or
participation. Minutes will be maintained for each meeting of the SRC
for which notice is published.
(c) Public observation and written comment. Each meeting of the SRC
for which notice is published will be open to the public for
observation, and the public may submit written comments to the
Service's Migratory Bird Program at least 1 week prior to the meeting.
Sec. 20.130 Flyway Councils.
Notice of each meeting of a Flyway Council to be attended by any
official of the Department of the Interior will be announced online on
the Service's Migratory Bird Program website at least 2 weeks before
the meeting or as soon as practicable after the Department of the
Interior learns of the meeting. The notice will state the time, place,
and general subject(s) of the meeting.
Subpart L--Administrative and Miscellaneous Provisions
0
8. Revise Sec. 20.133 to read as follows:
Sec. 20.133 Hunting regulations for crows.
(a) Crows may be taken, possessed, transported, exported, or
imported, only in accordance with such laws or regulations as may be
prescribed by a State or Tribe pursuant to this section.
(b) Except in the State of Hawaii, where take of crows is
prohibited, States and Tribes may by statute or regulation prescribe a
hunting season for crows. Such State and Tribal statutes or regulations
may set forth the method of taking, the bag and possession limits, the
dates and duration of the hunting season, and such other regulations as
may be deemed appropriate, subject to the following limitations for
each State or Tribe:
(1) Crows must not be hunted from aircraft;
(2) The hunting season or seasons on crows must not exceed a total
of 124 days during a calendar year;
(3) Hunting must not be permitted during the peak crow nesting
period within a State; and
(4) Crows may be taken only by firearms, bow and arrow, and
falconry.
Kevin Lilly,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2026-17733 Filed 8-27-26; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on August 31, 2026.
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.