80 FR 13497 - Migratory Bird Hunting and Permits; Regulations for Managing Harvest of Light Goose Populations

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 50 (March 16, 2015)

Page Range		13497-13500
FR Document		2015-05977

We reduce the information collection requirements for participants in the light goose conservation order, which authorizes methods of take to increase harvest of certain populations of light geese in the Atlantic, Central, Mississippi, and Pacific Flyways, and to reduce the burden on State and tribal wildlife agencies that are required to submit annual light goose harvest reports to us. This action will eliminate reporting requirements that we believe to be unnecessary and will relieve requirements on individuals, States, and tribes.

Federal Register, Volume 80 Issue 50 (Monday, March 16, 2015)

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 50 (Monday, March 16, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13497-13500]
From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2015-05977]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 21

[Docket No. FWS-R9-MB-2012-0098; FF09M21200-134-FXMB1231099BPP0]
RIN 1018-AZ19

Migratory Bird Hunting and Permits; Regulations for Managing
Harvest of Light Goose Populations

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We reduce the information collection requirements for
participants in the light goose conservation order, which authorizes
methods of take to increase harvest of certain populations of light
geese in the Atlantic, Central, Mississippi, and Pacific Flyways, and
to reduce the burden on State and tribal wildlife agencies that are
required to submit annual light goose harvest reports to us. This
action will eliminate reporting requirements that we believe to be
unnecessary and will relieve requirements on individuals, States, and
tribes.

DATES: This regulation change will be effective on April 15, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Document Availability: You may obtain a copy of the final
environmental impact statement (EIS) on this management issue from our
Web site at: http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/currentbirdissues/management/snowgse/tblcont.html, or by requesting one from the Division
of Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 5275
Leesburg Pike, Mail Stop MB, Falls Church, VA 22041-3830.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Kelley at 612-713-5409.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) has the primary Federal responsibility for
managing migratory birds. We implement the provisions of the MBTA
through regulations in parts 10, 13, 20, 21, and 22 of title 50 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).
In 1999, we established a conservation order at 50 CFR 21.60 to
increase harvest of light geese and authorize new methods of take (64
FR 7517, February 16, 1999). We took this action because several
populations of light geese were exceeding the carrying capacity of
their breeding or migration

[[Page 13498]]

habitats in the Central and Mississippi Flyways. A conservation order
is a special management action that is needed to control certain
wildlife populations when traditional management programs are
unsuccessful in preventing overabundance of the population. We prepared
an environmental impact statement (EIS) and record of decision to
revise the regulations for the conservation order to include the
Atlantic and Pacific Flyways (73 FR 65926, November 5, 2008).
The regulations include information collection and reporting
requirements. Individuals participating in the order must provide
information to State or Tribal wildlife agencies, and these agencies
are required to submit annual light goose harvest reports to the
Service. We have used this information to assess the effectiveness of
light goose population control methods and strategies and to determine
whether or not additional population control methods were needed.
However, we now believe that sufficient information has been collected
for these purposes since 2000, so on February 18, 2014, we published a
proposed rule to change the information collection requirements of the
conservation order (79 FR 9152-9156). We proposed to simplify but not
eliminate all of these requirements, thus reducing the burden on
individuals participating in the conservation order and on State and
Tribal wildlife agencies.

Comments on the Proposed Rule

We received 10 comments on the proposed rule. Some commenters
supported the proposed changes to the information collection
requirements; others stated that the Service should not reduce or
eliminate these requirements. Some commenters stated that sufficient
information has been collected since 2000 to allow evaluation of the
effectiveness of take methods for harvesting light geese and that the
reduction in reporting requirements will reduce paperwork and
respondent burdens. Some commenters provided comments outside the scope
of the proposed rule, which sought input only on the information
collection, and not on the control of light geese. Below we provide
excerpts from some of these comments and our responses.
Comment: ``I object to the government's attempts to waste our tax
dollars on the pointless, unnecessary, unjustified and brutal killing
of light goose populations. There is no study or scientific/biologic
data that supports this plan. All goose populations can be managed and
limited using humane and non-lethal methods. That is the only kind of
management plan I support.
Furthermore, your goal to eliminate information collection &
reporting requirements that you believe to be unnecessary is nothing
more than an attempt to absolve yourselves of responsibility and remove
all records of accountability so that you can continue to get away with
unchecked killing and misuse of taxpayer funds whenever and wherever
you want.''
Response: We documented the need for the control of light geese in
our 2007 EIS. The effort was endorsed by national wildlife conservation
organizations as a way to try to protect habitat for many migratory
bird species in the Arctic.
We are not spending taxpayer dollars on this control, except to
collect information about the harvest. Nor are we choosing the
``convenience'' of controlling light goose populations. As noted in our
2007 EIS, the burgeoning light goose population has seriously harmed
nesting habitats in the Arctic for other migratory bird species.
We are not eliminating information collection. As we explained in
the proposed rule, we are reducing the burden on States and tribes by
not requiring collection and reporting of information not needed to
assess the harvest of light geese.
Comment. ``Limiting information requirements and eliminating
information collection on the issue of killing our wildlife is deeply
undemocratic (for people) and cruel (for populations targeted.)''
Response. We are not eliminating information collection; we are
revising the collection so that we collect only needed information. It
is the Service's job to address population issues such as the huge
growth in the light goose population that continues to cause
destruction of habitat in the Arctic for many other migratory bird
species. We also try to minimize the information collection burden for
other partners (such as States and Tribes) in wildlife management and
for the public.
Comment. ``I am for the update in regulations for managing the
harvest of light goose. The information that was needed before to see
find [sic] out if the proposed methods of population control of light
geese is no longer needed. It has been proven that their [sic] has been
a 26.7% increase in the harvest of light geese after the regular season
using electronic calls and a 13.1% increase using unplugged shotguns in
the Mississippi and Central flyways between 2000 and 2011. For example,
``the number of light geese taken with the aid of an electronic call.''
This requirement for data entry is no longer necessary because it has
been proven that using electronic calls is a useful method of
conservation over a term of eleven years. Majority of the data that was
required to be recorded by the states that participated in the
conservation order is no longer needed because enough data has been
recorded to prove that using unplugged shotguns and electronic calls is
a useful method on conservation.''
Comment. ``I am against the proposed rule of Migratory Bird Hunting
and Permits: Regulations for Managing Harvest of Light Goose
Populations. The managing of the light goose population is necessary
because we need to know how many there are and how many are killed each
year. Letting hunters killing more of the light goose isn't a bad idea
since there are not in danger of going extinct. The numbers show that
they are fine . . . They still need to keep track of the numbers that
are harvested that year to get an idea of how much are being harvested.
Since the ``Various populations of light geese have undergone rapid
growth during the past 30 years, and have become seriously injurious to
their habitat, habitat important to other migratory birds, and
agricultural interests,'' it is better to get the numbers lower than
they are.''
Comment. ``The purpose of this rule is to eliminate information
that is no longer needed to be collected due to the amount that has
been received. The information they have now gives a [sic] accurate
data layout for future knowledge and so the unnecessary data gather
[sic] should be dropped to save time and money for state and tribal
agencies. I think this would be a [sic] efficient cutback since the
information is no longer needed to be collected. The data that would be
eliminated would not hinder the overall analysis of light goose [sic]
taken. Numbers of light goose populations will still be collected and
recorded with accurate read outs on their population. The information
that hunters would have to submit would be lessened and make it easier
on them. This rule would overall make a great cutback on taxes and time
spent filling out paperwork that is no longer needed.''
Comment. ``The Central Flyway Council . . . supports the proposal
to reduce the information collection requirements for participants in
the light goose conservation order, which authorizes methods of take to
increase harvest of certain populations of light geese in the Atlantic,
Central, and Mississippi Flyways, and to reduce the burden on State and
tribal wildlife agencies that are required to submit annual light goose
harvest reports to the

[[Page 13499]]

Service. There is sufficient information collected since 2000 to allow
evaluation [of] the effectiveness of these methods of take for
harvesting light geese. The reduction in reporting requirement[s] will
reduce paperwork and respondent burdens.''
Response to these comments. No response necessary.

Required Determinations

Regulatory Planning and Review--Executive Order 12866 and 13563

Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant rules. OIRA has
determined that this rule is not significant.
Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles of Executive Order
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. Executive Order 13563 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. Executive Order 13563
emphasizes further that regulations must be based on the best available
science and that the rulemaking process must allow for public
participation and an open exchange of ideas. We developed this rule in
a manner consistent with these requirements.

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 would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
SBREFA amended the Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal
agencies to provide the statement of the factual basis for certifying
that a rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. This regulation change will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities, so a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required.
This rule will reduce the information collection requirements for
participants in the light goose conservation order and reduce the
burden on State and tribal wildlife agencies that are required to
submit annual light goose harvest reports to us. It will have no impact
on economic activities already associated with the light goose
conservation order itself and, therefore, will not have an economic
effect on any small entities.
This is not a major rule under the SBREFA (5 U.S.C. 804(2)). It
will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
a. This rule will not have an annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more.
b. This rule will not cause an increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, Tribal, or local
government agencies, or geographic regions.
c. This rule will not have effects on competition, employment,
investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based
enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501
et seq.), we have determined the following:
a. This rule will not affect small governments. A small government
agency plan is not required.
b. This rule will not produce a Federal mandate. It is not a
significant regulatory action.

Takings

This rule does not contain a provision for taking of private
property. In accordance with Executive Order 12630, a takings
implication assessment is not required.

Federalism

This rule does not have sufficient Federalism effects to warrant
preparation of a federalism impact summary statement under Executive
Order 13132. It will not interfere with any State's ability to manage
itself or its funds. No economic impacts will result from the
regulations change.

Civil Justice Reform

In accordance with Executive Order 12988, the Office of the
Solicitor has determined that the rule does not unduly burden the
judicial system and meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of the Order.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

This rule contains a collection of information that OMB has
approved under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.). We 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.
OMB Control Number: 1018-0103.
Expiration Date: 3/31/2018.
Title: Conservation Order for Light Geese, 50 CFR 21.60.
Service Form Number(s): None.
Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved collection.
Description of Respondents: State and tribal governments;
individuals who participate in the conservation order.
Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain a benefit.
Frequency of Collection: Annually.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual number
Activity/requirement of Total annual Completion time per Total annual
respondents responses response burden hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
States--collect information, maintain 39 39 45 hours................ 1,755
records, prepare annual report.
Participants--provide information to 21,538 21,538 8 minutes............... 2,872
States.
-------------------------------- ---------------
Total............................. 21,577 21,577 ........................ 4,627
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: $78,000, primarily for State
and tribal overhead costs (materials, printing, postage, etc.).
We expect a maximum of 39 States and tribes to participate under
the authority of the conservation order each

[[Page 13500]]

year it is available. States and tribes must keep records of activities
carried out under the authority of the conservation order. We believe
that this recordkeeping requirement is necessary to ensure that those
individuals carrying out control activities are authorized to do so.
The States and tribes must submit an annual report summarizing the
activities conducted under the conservation order. Reported information
helps us to assess the effectiveness of light geese population control
methods and strategies, and assess whether or not additional population
control methods are needed. However, we believe that the number of
elements in the information collection requirement can be reduced while
maintaining a core of elements that allow us to monitor the number of
participants in the conservation order and resulting harvest of birds.
We have revised 50 CFR 21.60(f)(8) to require that information be
collected only on the number of:
Persons participating in the conservation order;
Days people participated in the conservation order;
Light geese shot and retrieved under the conservation
order; and
Light geese shot but not retrieved.
Each State and tribe determines how they collect data from
participants. Though there is no common form or method, the States and
tribes have shared their forms and there is commonality. Some States
require participants to obtain a permit to participate in the
conservation order; others do not. Post-harvest survey questions and
questionnaire delivery methods differ among States and tribes. States
measure harvest and hunter activity through the use of mail
questionnaires, phone surveys, hunter diaries, online data entry, and
so forth. Differences also exist within similar survey types, such as
the proportion of participants surveyed and the type and number of
followup contacts.
During the proposed rule stage, we solicited comments on the new
information collection requirements. We received several comments that
addressed information collection. Most conflated the information
collection and control of overabundant light geese. We did not change
our requirements based on these comments. Several of the comments only
noted that we proposed to change the information collection. We have
addressed all comments in the preamble above.
The public may comment at any time on the accuracy of the
information collection burden in this rule and may submit any comments
to the Information Collection Clearance Officer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street NW., (Mailstop
BPHC), Washington, DC 20240.

National Environmental Policy Act

We have analyzed this rule in accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 432-437(f) and Part 516 of
the U.S. Department of the Interior Manual (516 DM). The regulations
change would simply remove unused regulations, and is administrative in
nature. The action is categorically excluded from further NEPA
consideration by 43 CFR 46.210(i).
Socioeconomic. The regulations change would have no discernible
socioeconomic impacts.
Migratory bird populations. The regulations change would not affect
native migratory bird populations.
Endangered and Threatened Species. The regulation change would not
affect endangered or threatened species or habitats important to them.

Endangered Species Act

Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), as amended (16
U.S.C. 1531-1543; 87 Stat. 884) provides that ``Each Federal agency
shall, in consultation with and with the assistance of the Secretary,
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 previously completed
section 7 consultation under the ESA for the rule that authorized the
light goose regulations (73 FR 65926, November 5, 2008). This rule will
only affect information collection and reporting requirements, so a
section 7 consultation is not needed.

Energy Effects--Executive Order 13211

Executive Order 13211 requires agencies to prepare Statements of
Energy Effects when undertaking certain actions. This rule is not a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 13211, and will not
adversely affect energy supplies, distribution, or use. This action is
not a significant energy action, so no Statement of Energy Effects is
required.

Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes

In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994,
``Government-to-Government Relations With Native American Tribal
Governments'' (59 FR 22951), Executive Order 13175, and 512 DM 2, we
have determined that this rule has very little effect on federally
recognized Indian tribes because few participate in the order.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 21

Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Transportation, Wildlife.

Regulation Promulgation

For the reasons stated in the preamble, we hereby amend part 21, of
subchapter B, chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations,
as set forth below:

PART 21--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 21 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 703-712.

0
2. Amend Sec. 21.60 by revising paragraph (f)(8) to read as follows:

Sec. 21.60 Conservation order for light geese.

* * * * *
(f) * * *
(8) States and tribes must keep annual records of activities
carried out under the authority of the conservation order.
Specifically, information must be collected on:
(i) The number of persons participating in the conservation order;
(ii) The number of days people participated in the conservation
order;
(iii) The number of light geese shot and retrieved under the
conservation order; and
(iv) The number of light geese shot but not retrieved.
* * * * *

Dated: February 2, 2015.
Michael J. Bean,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2015-05977 Filed 3-13-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 50 / Monday, March 16, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 13497

• Is not a significant regulatory action and address the comment in the DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR proposed rulemaking. This action may
28355, May 22, 2001); not be challenged later in proceedings to Fish and Wildlife Service
• Is not subject to requirements of enforce its requirements (see section
Section 12(d) of the National 307(b)(2)). 50 CFR Part 21
Technology Transfer and Advancement [Docket No. FWS–R9–MB–2012–0098;
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because FF09M21200–134–FXMB1231099BPP0]
application of those requirements would Environmental protection, Air
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; RIN 1018–AZ19
pollution control, Incorporation by
and reference, Intergovernmental relations, Migratory Bird Hunting and Permits;
• Does not provide EPA with the Particulate matter, Reporting and Regulations for Managing Harvest of
discretionary authority to address recordkeeping requirements. Light Goose Populations
disproportionate human health or
environmental effects with practical, Dated: January 23, 2015.
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
appropriate, and legally permissible Jared Blumenfeld, Interior.
methods under Executive Order 12898 Regional Administrator, Region IX. ACTION: Final rule.
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code SUMMARY: We reduce the information
In addition, this rule does not have
of Federal Regulations is amended as collection requirements for participants
tribal implications as specified by
follows: in the light goose conservation order,
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is which authorizes methods of take to
PART 52—APPROVAL AND increase harvest of certain populations
not approved to apply in Indian country PROMULGATION OF
located in the State, and EPA notes that of light geese in the Atlantic, Central,
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS Mississippi, and Pacific Flyways, and to
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt reduce the burden on State and tribal
■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 wildlife agencies that are required to
tribal law.
continues to read as follows: submit annual light goose harvest
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. reports to us. This action will eliminate
Business Regulatory Enforcement reporting requirements that we believe
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides Subpart F—California to be unnecessary and will relieve
that before a rule may take effect, the requirements on individuals, States, and
agency promulgating the rule must ■ 2. Section 52.220, is amended by tribes.
submit a rule report, which includes a adding paragraphs (c)(423) (i)(B)(2) and DATES: This regulation change will be
copy of the rule, to each House of the (ii) and (c)(447)(i)(C) to read as follows: effective on April 15, 2015.
Congress and to the Comptroller General ADDRESSES: Document Availability: You
§ 52.220 Identification of plan.
of the United States. EPA will submit a may obtain a copy of the final
report containing this action and other * * * * * environmental impact statement (EIS)
required information to the U.S. Senate, (c) * * * on this management issue from our Web
the U.S. House of Representatives, and (423) * * * site at: http://www.fws.gov/
the Comptroller General of the United migratorybirds/currentbirdissues/
States prior to publication of the rule in (i) * * * management/snowgse/tblcont.html, or
the Federal Register. A major rule (B) * * * by requesting one from the Division of
cannot take effect until 60 days after it (2) Rule 421, ‘‘Mandatory Episodic Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish
is published in the Federal Register. Curtailment of Wood and Other Solid and Wildlife Service, 5275 Leesburg
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as Fuel Burning (except section 402),’’ Pike, Mail Stop MB, Falls Church, VA
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). amended on September 24, 2009. 22041–3830.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of (ii) Additional Material.
James Kelley at 612–713–5409.
this action must be filed in the United (A) Sacramento Metropolitan Air SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
States Court of Appeals for the Quality Management District.
appropriate circuit by May 15, 2015. Background
(1) Rule 421, ‘‘Mandatory Episodic
Filing a petition for reconsideration by Curtailment of Wood and Other Solid Under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
the Administrator of this final rule does Fuel Burning,’’ Financial Hardship (MBTA), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
not affect the finality of this action for Exemption Decision Tree, dated Service (Service) has the primary
the purposes of judicial review nor does December 12, 2007. Federal responsibility for managing
it extend the time within which a * * * * * migratory birds. We implement the
petition for judicial review may be filed, provisions of the MBTA through
and shall not postpone the effectiveness (447) * * * regulations in parts 10, 13, 20, 21, and
of such rule or action. Parties with (i) * * * 22 of title 50 of the Code of Federal
objections to this direct final rule are (C) South Coast Air Quality Regulations (CFR).
encouraged to file a comment in Management District. In 1999, we established a
Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES

response to the parallel notice of conservation order at 50 CFR 21.60 to
proposed rulemaking for this action (1) Rule 1155, ‘‘Particulate Matter increase harvest of light geese and
published in the Proposed Rules section (PM) Control Devices,’’ amended on authorize new methods of take (64 FR
of today’s Federal Register, rather than May 2, 2014. 7517, February 16, 1999). We took this
file an immediate petition for judicial * * * * * action because several populations of
review of this direct final rule, so that [FR Doc. 2015–05807 Filed 3–13–15; 8:45 am] light geese were exceeding the carrying
EPA can withdraw this direct final rule BILLING CODE 6560–50–P capacity of their breeding or migration

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:05 Mar 13, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16MRR1.SGM 16MRR1

13498 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 50 / Monday, March 16, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

habitats in the Central and Mississippi non-lethal methods. That is the only necessary because it has been proven
Flyways. A conservation order is a kind of management plan I support. that using electronic calls is a useful
special management action that is Furthermore, your goal to eliminate method of conservation over a term of
needed to control certain wildlife information collection & reporting eleven years. Majority of the data that
populations when traditional requirements that you believe to be was required to be recorded by the
management programs are unsuccessful unnecessary is nothing more than an states that participated in the
in preventing overabundance of the attempt to absolve yourselves of conservation order is no longer needed
population. We prepared an responsibility and remove all records of because enough data has been recorded
environmental impact statement (EIS) accountability so that you can continue to prove that using unplugged shotguns
and record of decision to revise the to get away with unchecked killing and and electronic calls is a useful method
regulations for the conservation order to misuse of taxpayer funds whenever and on conservation.’’
include the Atlantic and Pacific wherever you want.’’ Comment. ‘‘I am against the proposed
Flyways (73 FR 65926, November 5, Response: We documented the need rule of Migratory Bird Hunting and
2008). for the control of light geese in our 2007 Permits: Regulations for Managing
The regulations include information EIS. The effort was endorsed by national Harvest of Light Goose Populations. The
collection and reporting requirements. wildlife conservation organizations as a managing of the light goose population
Individuals participating in the order way to try to protect habitat for many is necessary because we need to know
must provide information to State or migratory bird species in the Arctic. how many there are and how many are
Tribal wildlife agencies, and these We are not spending taxpayer dollars killed each year. Letting hunters killing
agencies are required to submit annual on this control, except to collect more of the light goose isn’t a bad idea
light goose harvest reports to the information about the harvest. Nor are since there are not in danger of going
Service. We have used this information we choosing the ‘‘convenience’’ of extinct. The numbers show that they are
to assess the effectiveness of light goose controlling light goose populations. As fine . . . They still need to keep track
population control methods and noted in our 2007 EIS, the burgeoning of the numbers that are harvested that
strategies and to determine whether or light goose population has seriously year to get an idea of how much are
not additional population control harmed nesting habitats in the Arctic for being harvested. Since the ‘‘Various
methods were needed. However, we other migratory bird species. populations of light geese have
now believe that sufficient information We are not eliminating information undergone rapid growth during the past
has been collected for these purposes collection. As we explained in the 30 years, and have become seriously
since 2000, so on February 18, 2014, we proposed rule, we are reducing the injurious to their habitat, habitat
published a proposed rule to change the burden on States and tribes by not important to other migratory birds, and
information collection requirements of requiring collection and reporting of agricultural interests,’’ it is better to get
the conservation order (79 FR 9152– information not needed to assess the the numbers lower than they are.’’
9156). We proposed to simplify but not harvest of light geese. Comment. ‘‘The purpose of this rule
eliminate all of these requirements, thus Comment. ‘‘Limiting information is to eliminate information that is no
reducing the burden on individuals requirements and eliminating longer needed to be collected due to the
participating in the conservation order information collection on the issue of amount that has been received. The
and on State and Tribal wildlife killing our wildlife is deeply information they have now gives a [sic]
agencies. undemocratic (for people) and cruel (for accurate data layout for future
populations targeted.)’’ knowledge and so the unnecessary data
Comments on the Proposed Rule Response. We are not eliminating gather [sic] should be dropped to save
We received 10 comments on the information collection; we are revising time and money for state and tribal
proposed rule. Some commenters the collection so that we collect only agencies. I think this would be a [sic]
supported the proposed changes to the needed information. It is the Service’s efficient cutback since the information
information collection requirements; job to address population issues such as is no longer needed to be collected. The
others stated that the Service should not the huge growth in the light goose data that would be eliminated would
reduce or eliminate these requirements. population that continues to cause not hinder the overall analysis of light
Some commenters stated that sufficient destruction of habitat in the Arctic for goose [sic] taken. Numbers of light goose
information has been collected since many other migratory bird species. We populations will still be collected and
2000 to allow evaluation of the also try to minimize the information recorded with accurate read outs on
effectiveness of take methods for collection burden for other partners their population. The information that
harvesting light geese and that the (such as States and Tribes) in wildlife hunters would have to submit would be
reduction in reporting requirements will management and for the public. lessened and make it easier on them.
reduce paperwork and respondent Comment. ‘‘I am for the update in This rule would overall make a great
burdens. Some commenters provided regulations for managing the harvest of cutback on taxes and time spent filling
comments outside the scope of the light goose. The information that was out paperwork that is no longer
proposed rule, which sought input only needed before to see find [sic] out if the needed.’’
on the information collection, and not proposed methods of population control Comment. ‘‘The Central Flyway
on the control of light geese. Below we of light geese is no longer needed. It has Council . . . supports the proposal to
provide excerpts from some of these been proven that their [sic] has been a reduce the information collection
comments and our responses. 26.7% increase in the harvest of light requirements for participants in the
Comment: ‘‘I object to the geese after the regular season using light goose conservation order, which
Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES

government’s attempts to waste our tax electronic calls and a 13.1% increase authorizes methods of take to increase
dollars on the pointless, unnecessary, using unplugged shotguns in the harvest of certain populations of light
unjustified and brutal killing of light Mississippi and Central flyways geese in the Atlantic, Central, and
goose populations. There is no study or between 2000 and 2011. For example, Mississippi Flyways, and to reduce the
scientific/biologic data that supports ‘‘the number of light geese taken with burden on State and tribal wildlife
this plan. All goose populations can be the aid of an electronic call.’’ This agencies that are required to submit
managed and limited using humane and requirement for data entry is no longer annual light goose harvest reports to the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:05 Mar 13, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16MRR1.SGM 16MRR1

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 50 / Monday, March 16, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 13499

Service. There is sufficient information small organizations, and small b. This rule will not produce a
collected since 2000 to allow evaluation government jurisdictions. However, no Federal mandate. It is not a significant
[of] the effectiveness of these methods of regulatory flexibility analysis is required regulatory action.
take for harvesting light geese. The if the head of an agency certifies the rule
Takings
reduction in reporting requirement[s] would not have a significant economic
will reduce paperwork and respondent impact on a substantial number of small This rule does not contain a provision
burdens.’’ entities. for taking of private property. In
Response to these comments. No SBREFA amended the Regulatory accordance with Executive Order 12630,
response necessary. Flexibility Act to require Federal a takings implication assessment is not
Required Determinations agencies to provide the statement of the required.
factual basis for certifying that a rule
Regulatory Planning and Review— would not have a significant economic Federalism
Executive Order 12866 and 13563 impact on a substantial number of small This rule does not have sufficient
Executive Order 12866 provides that entities. This regulation change will not Federalism effects to warrant
the Office of Information and Regulatory have a significant economic impact on preparation of a federalism impact
Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant a substantial number of small entities, summary statement under Executive
rules. OIRA has determined that this so a regulatory flexibility analysis is not Order 13132. It will not interfere with
rule is not significant. required. any State’s ability to manage itself or its
Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the This rule will reduce the information funds. No economic impacts will result
principles of Executive Order 12866 collection requirements for participants from the regulations change.
while calling for improvements in the in the light goose conservation order
Nation’s regulatory system to promote and reduce the burden on State and Civil Justice Reform
predictability, to reduce uncertainty, tribal wildlife agencies that are required
In accordance with Executive Order
and to use the best, most innovative, to submit annual light goose harvest
12988, the Office of the Solicitor has
and least burdensome tools for reports to us. It will have no impact on
determined that the rule does not
achieving regulatory ends. Executive economic activities already associated
unduly burden the judicial system and
Order 13563 directs agencies to consider with the light goose conservation order
meets the requirements of sections 3(a)
regulatory approaches that reduce itself and, therefore, will not have an
and 3(b)(2) of the Order.
burdens and maintain flexibility and economic effect on any small entities.
freedom of choice for the public where This is not a major rule under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
these approaches are relevant, feasible, SBREFA (5 U.S.C. 804(2)). It will not
and consistent with regulatory have a significant impact on a This rule contains a collection of
objectives. Executive Order 13563 substantial number of small entities. information that OMB has approved
emphasizes further that regulations a. This rule will not have an annual under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
must be based on the best available effect on the economy of $100 million 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). We may
science and that the rulemaking process or more. not conduct or sponsor and a person is
must allow for public participation and b. This rule will not cause an increase not required to respond to a collection
an open exchange of ideas. We in costs or prices for consumers, of information unless it displays a
developed this rule in a manner individual industries, Federal, State, currently valid OMB control number.
consistent with these requirements. Tribal, or local government agencies, or OMB Control Number: 1018–0103.
geographic regions. Expiration Date: 3/31/2018.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
c. This rule will not have effects on
et seq.) Title: Conservation Order for Light
competition, employment, investment,
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act productivity, innovation, or the ability Geese, 50 CFR 21.60.
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by the of U.S.-based enterprises to compete Service Form Number(s): None.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement with foreign-based enterprises. Type of Request: Revision of a
Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996 (Pub. L. currently approved collection.
104–121)), whenever an agency is Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Description of Respondents: State and
required to publish a notice of In accordance with the Unfunded
tribal governments; individuals who
rulemaking for any proposed or final Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et
participate in the conservation order.
rule, it must prepare and make available seq.), we have determined the following:
for public comment a regulatory a. This rule will not affect small Respondent’s Obligation: Required to
flexibility analysis that describes the governments. A small government obtain or retain a benefit.
effect of the rule on small businesses, agency plan is not required. Frequency of Collection: Annually.

Annual Total annual Total annual
Activity/requirement number of Completion time per response
responses burden hours
respondents

States—collect information, maintain records, 39 39 45 hours ......................................................... 1,755
prepare annual report.
Participants—provide information to States ... 21,538 21,538 8 minutes ........................................................ 2,872
Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Total ......................................................... 21,577 21,577 ......................................................................... 4,627

Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden tribal overhead costs (materials, We expect a maximum of 39 States
Cost: $78,000, primarily for State and printing, postage, etc.). and tribes to participate under the
authority of the conservation order each

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:05 Mar 13, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16MRR1.SGM 16MRR1

13500 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 50 / Monday, March 16, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

year it is available. States and tribes Officer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, determined that this rule has very little
must keep records of activities carried Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street effect on federally recognized Indian
out under the authority of the NW., (Mailstop BPHC), Washington, DC tribes because few participate in the
conservation order. We believe that this 20240. order.
recordkeeping requirement is necessary
National Environmental Policy Act List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 21
to ensure that those individuals carrying
out control activities are authorized to We have analyzed this rule in Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting
do so. The States and tribes must submit accordance with the National and recordkeeping requirements,
an annual report summarizing the Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 Transportation, Wildlife.
activities conducted under the U.S.C. 432–437(f) and Part 516 of the
Regulation Promulgation
conservation order. Reported U.S. Department of the Interior Manual
information helps us to assess the (516 DM). The regulations change For the reasons stated in the
effectiveness of light geese population would simply remove unused preamble, we hereby amend part 21, of
control methods and strategies, and regulations, and is administrative in subchapter B, chapter I, title 50 of the
assess whether or not additional nature. The action is categorically Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth
population control methods are needed. excluded from further NEPA below:
However, we believe that the number of consideration by 43 CFR 46.210(i).
Socioeconomic. The regulations PART 21—[AMENDED]
elements in the information collection
requirement can be reduced while change would have no discernible
■ 1. The authority citation for part 21
maintaining a core of elements that socioeconomic impacts.
Migratory bird populations. The continues to read as follows:
allow us to monitor the number of
regulations change would not affect Authority: 16 U.S.C. 703–712.
participants in the conservation order
and resulting harvest of birds. We have native migratory bird populations. ■ 2. Amend § 21.60 by revising
Endangered and Threatened Species. paragraph (f)(8) to read as follows:
revised 50 CFR 21.60(f)(8) to require
The regulation change would not affect
that information be collected only on
endangered or threatened species or § 21.60 Conservation order for light geese.
the number of:
• Persons participating in the habitats important to them. * * * * *
conservation order; Endangered Species Act (f) * * *
• Days people participated in the (8) States and tribes must keep annual
conservation order; Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered records of activities carried out under
• Light geese shot and retrieved Species Act (ESA), as amended (16 the authority of the conservation order.
under the conservation order; and U.S.C. 1531–1543; 87 Stat. 884) Specifically, information must be
• Light geese shot but not retrieved. provides that ‘‘Each Federal agency collected on:
Each State and tribe determines how shall, in consultation with and with the (i) The number of persons
they collect data from participants. assistance of the Secretary, insure that participating in the conservation order;
Though there is no common form or any action authorized, funded, or (ii) The number of days people
method, the States and tribes have carried out . . . is not likely to participated in the conservation order;
shared their forms and there is jeopardize the continued existence of (iii) The number of light geese shot
commonality. Some States require any endangered species or threatened and retrieved under the conservation
participants to obtain a permit to species or result in the destruction or order; and
participate in the conservation order; adverse modification of [critical] (iv) The number of light geese shot
others do not. Post-harvest survey habitat. . . .’’ We previously completed but not retrieved.
questions and questionnaire delivery section 7 consultation under the ESA for * * * * *
methods differ among States and tribes. the rule that authorized the light goose Dated: February 2, 2015.
States measure harvest and hunter regulations (73 FR 65926, November 5,
Michael J. Bean,
activity through the use of mail 2008). This rule will only affect
questionnaires, phone surveys, hunter Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish
information collection and reporting
and Wildlife and Parks.
diaries, online data entry, and so forth. requirements, so a section 7
Differences also exist within similar [FR Doc. 2015–05977 Filed 3–13–15; 8:45 am]
consultation is not needed.
survey types, such as the proportion of BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

participants surveyed and the type and Energy Effects—Executive Order 13211
number of followup contacts. Executive Order 13211 requires
During the proposed rule stage, we agencies to prepare Statements of
solicited comments on the new Energy Effects when undertaking certain DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
information collection requirements. We actions. This rule is not a significant National Oceanic and Atmospheric
received several comments that regulatory action under Executive Order Administration
addressed information collection. Most 13211, and will not adversely affect
conflated the information collection and energy supplies, distribution, or use. 50 CFR Part 679
control of overabundant light geese. We This action is not a significant energy
did not change our requirements based action, so no Statement of Energy Effects [Docket No. 140918791–4999–02]
on these comments. Several of the is required.
comments only noted that we proposed
Government-to-Government RIN 0648–XD823
to change the information collection.
Relationship With Tribes
Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES

We have addressed all comments in the Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
preamble above. In accordance with the President’s
Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Cod by Trawl
The public may comment at any time memorandum of April 29, 1994,
Catcher Vessels in the Western
on the accuracy of the information ‘‘Government-to-Government Relations
Regulatory Area of the Gulf of Alaska
collection burden in this rule and may With Native American Tribal
submit any comments to the Governments’’ (59 FR 22951), Executive AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries
Information Collection Clearance Order 13175, and 512 DM 2, we have Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:32 Mar 13, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16MRR1.SGM 16MRR1

Document Created: 2018-02-21 09:37:27
Document Modified: 2018-02-21 09:37:27

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Rules and Regulations
Action		Final rule.
Dates		This regulation change will be effective on April 15, 2015.
Contact		James Kelley at 612-713-5409.
FR Citation		80 FR 13497
RIN Number		1018-AZ19
CFR Associated		Exports; Hunting; Imports; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements; Transportation and Wildlife

80 FR 13497 - Migratory Bird Hunting and Permits; Regulations for Managing Harvest of Light Goose Populations

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIORFish and Wildlife Service

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 50 (March 16, 2015)

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service