DOCSLIB.ORG

Federal Register/Vol. 86, No. 33/Monday, February 22, 2021

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Federal Register/Vol. 86, No. 33/Monday, February 22, 2021 10622 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 33 / Monday, February 22, 2021 / Proposed Rule DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Flyway Council Recommendations, Process for Establishing Annual below, for more information). Migratory Game Bird Hunting Fish and Wildlife Service FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Regulations (Subpart K) Jerome Ford, U.S. Fish and Wildlife As part of the Department of the 50 CFR Part 20 Service, Department of the Interior, Interior’s retrospective regulatory [Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2020–0032; (202) 208–1050. review, in 2015 we developed a FF09M21200–212–FXMB1231099BPP0] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The schedule for migratory game bird process for promulgating annual hunting regulations that is more RIN 1018–BE34 regulations for the hunting of migratory efficient and establishes hunting season game birds involves the publication of dates earlier than was possible under Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed the previous process. Under the current 2021–22 Frameworks, and Special a series of proposed and final rulemaking documents. In this proposed process, we develop proposed hunting Procedures for Issuance of Annual season frameworks for a given year in Hunting Regulations rule, in addition to our normal procedure of setting forth proposed the fall of the prior year. We then AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, frameworks for the annual hunting finalize those frameworks a few months Interior. regulations (described below), we are later, thereby enabling the State agencies to select and publish their ACTION: Proposed rule; supplemental. also proposing minor changes to the permanent regulations that govern the season dates in early summer. We SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife migratory bird hunting program. The provided a detailed overview of the Service (Service or we) is proposing to annual regulations are set forth in current process in the August 3, 2017, establish the 2021–22 hunting subpart K of part 20 of the regulations Federal Register (82 FR 36308). This regulations for certain migratory game in title 50 of the Code of Federal proposed rule is the second in a series birds, and make a minor change to the Regulations (CFR). In this document, we of proposed and final rules that special procedures for issuance of also propose minor changes to subpart establish regulations for the 2021–22 annual hunting regulations. We N of 50 CFR part 20, as follows: migratory bird-hunting season. annually prescribe outside limits, Regulations Schedule for 2021 frameworks, within which States may Proposed Changes to Regulations at 50 select hunting seasons. Frameworks CFR Part 20 (Subpart N) On October 9, 2020, we published in specify the outside dates, season the Federal Register (85 FR 64097) a The regulations governing special proposal to amend 50 CFR part 20. The lengths, shooting hours, bag and procedures for issuance of annual possession limits, and areas where proposal provided a background and hunting regulations are at 50 CFR part overview of the migratory bird hunting migratory game bird hunting may occur. 20, subpart N. The rules of subpart N These frameworks are necessary to regulations process, and addressed the apply only to subpart K regarding the establishment of seasons, limits, and allow State selections of seasons and issuance of the annual regulations limits and to allow harvest at levels other regulations for hunting migratory establishing seasons, bag limits, and game birds under §§ 20.101 through compatible with migratory game bird other requirements for the seasonal population status and habitat 20.107, 20.109, and 20.110 of subpart K. hunting of migratory birds. This document is the second in a series conditions. Migratory game bird hunting In subpart N, the current regulations seasons provide opportunities for of proposed and final rules for migratory require that the Service publish a notice game bird hunting regulations. Major recreation and sustenance, and aid of meetings of the Service’s Regulations Federal, State, and Tribal governments steps in the 2021–22 regulatory cycle Committee and the Flyway Councils in relating to open public meetings and in the management of migratory game the process of developing frameworks birds. Federal Register notifications were for migratory bird hunting seasons. illustrated in the diagram at the end of DATES: You must submit comments on Specifically, notice of each meeting of the October 9, 2020, proposed rule. For the proposed migratory bird hunting the Regulations Committee and Flyway this regulatory cycle, we have combined frameworks and special procedures for Council to be attended by any official of elements of the document that is issuance of annual hunting regulations the Department of the Interior will be described in the diagram as by March 24, 2021. published in the Federal Register at Supplemental Proposals with the ADDRESSES: Comments: You may submit least 2 weeks before the meeting or as document that is described as Proposed comments on the proposals by one of soon as practicable after the Service Season Frameworks. the following methods: learns of the Flyway Council meeting. Further, in the October 9, 2020, • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// In addition to or in place of proposed rule we explained that all www.regulations.gov. Follow the publishing a meeting notice in the sections of subsequent documents instructions for submitting comments Federal Register, we propose to add that outlining hunting frameworks and on Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2020– we post on the Service’s Migratory Bird guidelines would be organized under 0032. Program website as a method to notify numbered headings, which were set • U.S. Mail: Public Comments the public of these meetings. We are forth at 85 FR 64097. This and Processing, Attn: FWS–HQ–MB–2020– proposing this change because it will subsequent documents will refer only to 0032; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, increase our ability to provide more numbered items requiring attention. We MS: JAO/3W, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls timely information as meeting will omit those items not requiring Church, VA 22041–3803. information becomes available, and attention, and remaining numbered We will not accept emailed or faxed more flexibility to inform the public of items may be discontinuous and appear comments. We will post all comments changes in meeting dates and locations incomplete. on http://www.regulations.gov. This should such changes be necessary. We provided the meeting dates and generally means that we will post any Greater flexibility has become critical locations for the Service Regulations personal information you provide us when unforeseen exigencies require Committee (SRC) and Flyway Council (see Review of Public Comments and venue changes for these meetings. meetings on Flyway calendars posted on VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:28 Feb 19, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\22FEP2.SGM 22FEP2 tkelley on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 33 / Monday, February 22, 2021 / Proposed Rule 10623 our website at https://www.fws.gov/ Our long-term objectives continue to corresponding to the numbered items in birds/management/flyways.php. We include providing opportunities to the October 9, 2020, proposed rule. announced the April SRC meeting in the harvest portions of certain migratory General April 9, 2020, Federal Register (84 FR game bird populations and to limit 14130). The October 9, 2020, proposed harvests to levels compatible with each Written Comments: Several rule provided detailed information on population’s ability to maintain healthy, commenters protested the entire the proposed 2021–22 regulatory viable numbers. Migratory game bird migratory bird hunting regulations schedule and announced the October hunting seasons provide opportunities process, the killing of all migratory SRC meeting. The SRC conducted an for recreation and sustenance, and aid birds, and questioned the status and open meeting with the Flyway Council Federal, State, and Tribal governments habitat data on which the migratory bird Consultants on April 28, 2020, to in the management of migratory game hunting regulations are based. discuss preliminary issues for the 2021– birds. Having taken into account the Service Response: As we indicated 22 regulations, and on October 20–21, zones of temperature and the above under Population Status and 2020, to review information on the distribution, abundance, economic Harvest, our long-term objectives current status of migratory game birds value, breeding habits, and times and continue to include providing and develop recommendations for the lines of flight of migratory birds, we opportunities to harvest portions of 2021–22 regulations for these species. conclude that the proposed hunting certain migratory game bird populations This supplemental proposed rule seasons provided for herein are and to limit harvests to levels provides the regulatory alternatives for compatible with the current status of compatible with each population’s the 2021–22 duck hunting season, and migratory bird populations and long- ability to maintain healthy, viable provides proposed frameworks for the term population goals. Additionally, we numbers. Sustaining migratory bird 2021–22 migratory bird hunting season. are obligated to, and do, give serious populations and ensuring a variety of It will lead to final frameworks from consideration to all information sustainable uses, including harvest, is which States may select season dates, received during the public comment consistent with the guiding
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Atlantic Flyway Shorebird Initiative
    2021 GRANT SLATE Atlantic Flyway Shorebird Initiative NFWF CONTACTS Bridget Collins Senior Manager, Private Lands and Bird Conservation, [email protected] 202-297-6759 Scott Hall Senior Scientist, Bird Conservation [email protected] 202-595-2422 PARTNERS Red knots ABOUT NFWF Chartered by Congress in 1984, OVERVIEW the National Fish and Wildlife The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF), the US Fish and Wildlife Service and Foundation (NFWF) protects and Southern Company announce a fourth year of funding for the Atlantic Flyway Shorebird restores the nation’s fish, wildlife, program. Six new or continuing shorebird conservation grants totaling nearly $625,000 plants and habitats. Working with were awarded. These six awards generated $656,665 in match from grantees, for a total federal, corporate and individual conservation impact of $1.28 million. Overall, this slate of projects will improve habitat partners, NFWF has funded more management on more than 50,000 acres, conduct outreach to more than 100,000 people, than 5,000 organizations and and will complete a groundbreaking, science-based toolkit to help managers successfully generated a total conservation reduce human disturbance of shorebirds year-round. impact of $6.1 billion. The Atlantic Flyway Shorebirds program aims to increase populations for three focal Learn more at www.nfwf.org species by improving habitat functionality and condition at critical sites, supporting the species’ full annual lifecycles. The Atlantic Flyway Shorebird business plan outlines NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS strategies to address key stressors for the American oystercatcher, red knot and whimbrel. 1133 15th Street, NW Suite 1000 approaches to address habitat loss, predation, and human disturbance.
    [Show full text]
  • River Mileages and Drainage Areas for Illinois Streams—Volume 2, Illinois River Basin
    RIVER MILEAGES AND DRAINAGE AREAS FOR ILLINOIS STREAMS—VOLUME 2, ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 79-111 Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS RIVER MILEAGES AND DRAINAGE AREAS FOR ILLINOIS STREAMS—VOLUME 2, ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN By R. W. Healy U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 79-111 Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS 1979 CONTENTS Conversion Table . .iv Abstract . .1 Introduction . .1 Methods . .2 Explanation of tables . .2 References . .3 Index . .291 ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1. Map showing Illinois counties . .4 2. Map showing stream systems, hydrologic units, and major cities in Illinois. .6 TABLE Table 1. River mileages and drainage areas for Illinois streams . .8 i CONVERSION TABLE Multiply inch-pound unit By To obtain SI (metric) unit mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km) square mile (mi2) 2.590 square kilometer (km2) iv RIVER MILEAGES AND DRAINAGE FOR ILLINOIS STREAMS— Volume 2, Illinois River Basin By R. W. Healy ABSTRACT River mileages are presented for points of interest on Illinois streams draining 10 square miles or more. Points of interest include bridges, dams, gaging stations, county lines, hydrologic unit boundaries, and major tributaries. Drainage areas are presented for selected sites, including total drainage area for any streams draining at least 100 square miles. INTRODUCTION Expansion of water-resource investigations within the State of Illinois has amplified the need for a common index to locations on streams. A common index would aid in the coordination of various stream-related activities by facilitating data collection and interpretation.
    [Show full text]
  • Ultimate RV Dump Station Guide
    Ultimate RV Dump Station Guide A Complete Compendium Of RV Dump Stations Across The USA Publiished By: Covenant Publishing LLC 1201 N Orange St. Suite 7003 Wilmington, DE 19801 Copyrighted Material Copyright 2010 Covenant Publishing. All rights reserved worldwide. Ultimate RV Dump Station Guide Page 2 Contents New Mexico ............................................................... 87 New York .................................................................... 89 Introduction ................................................................. 3 North Carolina ........................................................... 91 Alabama ........................................................................ 5 North Dakota ............................................................. 93 Alaska ............................................................................ 8 Ohio ............................................................................ 95 Arizona ......................................................................... 9 Oklahoma ................................................................... 98 Arkansas ..................................................................... 13 Oregon ...................................................................... 100 California .................................................................... 15 Pennsylvania ............................................................ 104 Colorado ..................................................................... 23 Rhode Island ...........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ecoregions of New England Forested Land Cover, Nutrient-Poor Frigid and Cryic Soils (Mostly Spodosols), and Numerous High-Gradient Streams and Glacial Lakes
    58. Northeastern Highlands The Northeastern Highlands ecoregion covers most of the northern and mountainous parts of New England as well as the Adirondacks in New York. It is a relatively sparsely populated region compared to adjacent regions, and is characterized by hills and mountains, a mostly Ecoregions of New England forested land cover, nutrient-poor frigid and cryic soils (mostly Spodosols), and numerous high-gradient streams and glacial lakes. Forest vegetation is somewhat transitional between the boreal regions to the north in Canada and the broadleaf deciduous forests to the south. Typical forest types include northern hardwoods (maple-beech-birch), northern hardwoods/spruce, and northeastern spruce-fir forests. Recreation, tourism, and forestry are primary land uses. Farm-to-forest conversion began in the 19th century and continues today. In spite of this trend, Ecoregions denote areas of general similarity in ecosystems and in the type, quality, and 5 level III ecoregions and 40 level IV ecoregions in the New England states and many Commission for Environmental Cooperation Working Group, 1997, Ecological regions of North America – toward a common perspective: Montreal, Commission for Environmental Cooperation, 71 p. alluvial valleys, glacial lake basins, and areas of limestone-derived soils are still farmed for dairy products, forage crops, apples, and potatoes. In addition to the timber industry, recreational homes and associated lodging and services sustain the forested regions economically, but quantity of environmental resources; they are designed to serve as a spatial framework for continue into ecologically similar parts of adjacent states or provinces. they also create development pressure that threatens to change the pastoral character of the region.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 8 Migration Studies
    Chapter 8 Migration Studies 100 Migration Studies Overview Theme he Pacific Flyway is a route taken by migratory birds during flights between breeding grounds in the north and wintering grounds in the south. Steigerwald Lake National Wildlife Refuge plays an important role in migration by providing birds with a protected resting area during their arduous journey. Migration makes it possible for birds to benefit the most from favorable weather conditions; they breed and feed in the north during the summer and rest and feed in the warmer south during the winter. This pattern is called return migration — the most common type of migration by birds. Through a variety of activities, students will learn about the factors and hazards of bird migration on the Pacific Flyway. Background The migration of birds usually refers to their regular flights between summer and winter homes. Some birds migrate thousands of miles, while others may travel less than a hundred miles. This seasonal movement has long been a mystery to humans. Aristotle, the naturalist and philosopher of ancient Greece, noticed that cranes, pelicans, geese, swans, doves, and many other birds moved to warmer places for the winter. Like others of times past, he proposed theories that were widely accepted for hundreds of years. One of his theories was that many birds spent the winter sleeping in hollow trees, caves, or beneath the mud in marshes. 101 Through natural selection, migration evolved as an advantageous behavior. Birds migrate north to nest and breed because the competition for food and space is substantially lower there. In addition, during the summer months the food supply is considerably better in many northern climates (e.g., Arctic regions).
    [Show full text]
  • COURT of CLAIMS of THE
    REPORTS OF Cases Argued and Determined IN THE COURT of CLAIMS OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS VOLUME 46 Containing cases in which opinions were filed and orders of dismissal entered, without opinion for: Fiscal Year 1994—July 1, 1993-June 30, 1994 SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS 1995 (Printed by authority of the State of Illinois) (X503204—300—7/95) PREFACE The opinions of the Court of Claims reported herein are published by authority of the provisions of Section 18 of the Court of Claims Act, 705 ILCS 505/1 et seq., formerly Ill. Rev. Stat. 1991, ch. 37, par. 439.1 et seq. The Court of Claims has exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine the following matters: (a) all claims against the State of Illinois founded upon any law of the State, or upon any regulation thereunder by an executive or administrative officer or agency, other than claims arising under the Workers’ Compensation Act or the Workers’ Occupational Diseases Act, or claims for certain expenses in civil litigation, (b) all claims against the State founded upon any contract entered into with the State, (c) all claims against the State for time unjustly served in prisons of this State where the persons imprisoned shall receive a pardon from the Governor stating that such pardon is issued on the grounds of in- nocence of the crime for which they were imprisoned, (d) all claims against the State in cases sounding in tort, (e) all claims for recoupment made by the State against any Claimant, (f) certain claims to compel replacement of a lost or destroyed State warrant, (g) certain claims based on torts by escaped inmates of State insti- tutions, (h) certain representation and indemnification cases, (i) all claims pursuant to the Law Enforcement Officers, Civil De- fense Workers, Civil Air Patrol Members, Paramedics, Firemen & State Employees Compensation Act, (j) all claims pursuant to the Illinois National Guardsman’s Compensation Act, and (k) all claims pursuant to the Crime Victims Compensation Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Mississippi Flyway Council Policy Management of Mute Swans
    MISSISSIPPI FLYWAY COUNCIL POLICY MANAGEMENT OF MUTE SWANS Introduction This document briefly describes the history, status, selected biology, management concerns, and recommendations for the management of mute swans (Cygnus olor), a non-native, invasive species that has become established in several locations in the Mississippi Flyway (e.g., Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Ontario, and Wisconsin). Although the populations are relatively low in most Flyway states, establishing and implementing a Flyway policy is important because the birds have high reproductive potential and have negative impacts on native species and damage aquatic habitats. In recent years, the numbers have continued to increase. The policy recommendations below represent the consensus of wildlife agencies in the Mississippi Flyway with respect to management of this species. The purpose of this document is to provide direction for the cooperative management of mute swans by natural-resource agencies in the Flyway. Background Introduction and Populations - Mute swans are native to Eurasia. Although once severely reduced in numbers by market-hunting and war within their natural range, they have been domesticated for centuries and are now widely distributed throughout Europe. The Eurasian population is estimated at 1 million. Mute swans were introduced into North America during the late 1800s as decorative waterfowl and have now established feral populations in all four Flyways due to escaped and released birds. Nelson (1997) estimated a population of 18,000 mute swans in North America, with most being in the Atlantic Flyway. By 2000, Nelson estimated a total of 6,800 mute swans in the Mississippi Flyway, with feral populations occurring in 9 of 17 states or provinces.
    [Show full text]
  • An Investigation Into the Use of Road Drainage Structures by Wildlife in Maryland
    MD-11-SP909B4M STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION RESEARCH REPORT AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE USE OF ROAD DRAINAGE STRUCTURES BY WILDLIFE IN MARYLAND J. Edward Gates James L. Sparks, Jr. University Of Maryland Center for Environmental Science Appalachian Laboratory Project number SP808B4Q (Phase I) SP909B4M (Phase II) FINAL REPORT August 2011 Culvert Use by Wildlife MD-11-SP909B4M Page 2 of 72 The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Maryland State Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. Culvert Use by Wildlife MD-11-SP909B4M Page 3 of 72 Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. MD-11-SP909B4M 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date An Investigation into the Use of Road Drainage Structures by Wildlife in August, 2011 Maryland 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author/s 8. Performing Organization Report No. James L. Sparks, Jr. and J. Edward Gates 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) University Of Maryland Center for Environmental Science Appalachian Laboratory 11. Contract or Grant No. 301 Braddock Road Phase I: SP808B4Q Frostburg, Maryland 21532 Phase II: SP909B4M 12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Maryland State Highway Administration Office of Policy & Research Final Report 707 North Calvert Street 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Baltimore MD 21202 (7120) STMD - MDOT/SHA 15.
    [Show full text]
  • Storm Data and Unusual Weather Phenomena - April 2013
    Storm Data and Unusual Weather Phenomena - April 2013 Location Date/Time Deaths & Property & Event Type and Details Injuries Crop Dmg ILLINOIS, Northeast (IL-Z013) DU PAGE 04/08/13 08:39 CST 0.50K Strong Wind (MAX 48 kt) 04/08/13 08:39 CST 0 A strong area of low pressure drove winds to 50 mph across northern Illinois. Minor damage occurred at DuPage Airport on a hanger door. WINNEBAGO COUNTY --- 0.9 SE THE LEDGES [42.41, -88.99] 04/09/13 07:30 CST 0 Hail (0.88 in) 04/09/13 07:40 CST 0 Source: CoCoRaHS WINNEBAGO COUNTY --- 1.5 E THE LEDGES [42.42, -88.97] 04/09/13 07:30 CST 0 Hail (0.88 in) 04/09/13 07:40 CST 0 Source: COOP Observer Nickel size hail covered the ground. WINNEBAGO COUNTY --- 1.5 E THE LEDGES [42.42, -88.97] 04/09/13 08:30 CST 0 Hail (0.88 in) 04/09/13 08:40 CST 0 Source: COOP Observer A second thunderstorm moved over the same area dropping hail up to the size of nickels. The ground was still covered in hail from the previous storm about an hour earlier. A few strong thunderstorms developed over northern Illinois dropping nickel size hail. OGLE COUNTY --- 3.0 ESE ROCHELLE [41.90, -89.02], 2.4 ESE ROCHELLE [41.91, -89.02] 04/10/13 05:40 CST 0.15M Thunderstorm Wind (EG 50 kt) 04/10/13 05:40 CST 0 Source: Law Enforcement Over a dozen semi trucks either jackknifed or flipped onto their side at the Interstate 39 and 88 interchange in southeast Ogle County.
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Mid-Coast Initiative Area
    Gulf Coast Joint Venture: Texas Mid-Coast Initiative JO ST INT V OA EN C T F U L R U E G North American Waterfowl Management Plan 2002 Photo and Illustration Credits Cover and page i: Northern pintails, Ducks Unlimited, Inc. Page iii: (top) pintails, C. Jeske, U.S. Geological Survey; (bottom), gadwall, R.J. Long, Ducks Unlimited, Inc. Page iv: U.S. Geological Survey. Page 8: mallard pair, B. Wilson, Gulf Coast Joint Venture. Page 10: scaup pair, B. Hinz, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Page 11: mottled duck pair, R. Paille, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Page 12: lesser snow geese, T. Hess, Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries. Page 13: hydrologic structure, B. Wilson, Gulf Coast Joint Venture; breakwater structures, T. Hess, Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries; earthen terraces, T. Hess, Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries. Page 14: erosion control vegetation, T. Hess, Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries; oil-drilling access canal plug, B. Wilson, Gulf Coast Joint Venture; marsh burning, B. Wilson, Gulf Coast Joint Venture. Page 15: flooded agriculture field, U.S. Geological Survey; beneficial use of dredge material, T. Hess, Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries; American wigeon pair, B. Hinz, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Page 20: American wigeon pair, R. Stewart, Sr., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Page 22: northern shovelers and blue-winged teal, U.S. Geological Survey. Page 23: male ring-necked duck, W.L. Hohman, U.S. Geological Survey. Page 25: blue-winged teal males, W.L. Hohman, U.S. Geological Survey.
    [Show full text]
  • Harvest Distribution and Derivation of Atlantic Flyway Canada Geese
    Articles Harvest Distribution and Derivation of Atlantic Flyway Canada Geese Jon D. Klimstra,* Paul I. Padding U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, 11510 American Holly Drive, Laurel, Maryland 20708 Abstract Harvest management of Canada geese Branta canadensis is complicated by the fact that temperate- and subarctic- breeding geese occur in many of the same areas during fall and winter hunting seasons. These populations cannot readily be distinguished, thereby complicating efforts to estimate population-specific harvest and evaluate harvest strategies. In the Atlantic Flyway, annual banding and population monitoring programs are in place for subarctic- breeding (North Atlantic Population, Southern James Bay Population, and Atlantic Population) and temperate- breeding (Atlantic Flyway Resident Population [AFRP]) Canada geese. We used a combination of direct band recoveries and estimated population sizes to determine the distribution and derivation of the harvest of those four populations during the 2004–2005 through 2008–2009 hunting seasons. Most AFRP geese were harvested during the special September season (42%) and regular season (54%) and were primarily taken in the state or province in which they were banded. Nearly all of the special season harvest was AFRP birds: 98% during September seasons and 89% during late seasons. The regular season harvest in Atlantic Flyway states was also primarily AFRP geese (62%), followed in importance by the Atlantic Population (33%). In contrast, harvest in eastern Canada consisted mainly of subarctic geese (42% Atlantic Population, 17% North Atlantic Population, and 6% Southern James Bay Population), with temperate- breeding geese making up the rest. Spring and summer harvest was difficult to characterize because band reporting rates for subsistence hunters are poorly understood; consequently, we were unable to determine the magnitude of subsistence harvest definitively.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Flyway Databook 2020 MIGRATORY GAME BIRD HUNTING PERMITS by PROVINCE/TERRITORY of PURCHASE in CANADA
    CENTRAL FLYWAY HARVEST AND POPULATION SURVEY DATA BOOK 2020 compiled by: James A. Dubovsky CENTRAL FLYWAY REPRESENTATIVE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE DIVISION OF MIGRATORY BIRD MANAGEMENT 134 Union Blvd., Suite 540 Lakewood, CO 80228 (303) 275-2386 Suggested Citation: Dubovsky, J. A., compiler. 2020. Central Flyway harvest and population survey data book 2020. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Lakewood CO. CENTRAL FLYWAY 1948-2020 73 YEARS OF MIGRATORY BIRD CONSERVATION Important Note to Users: From 1961-2001, estimates of waterfowl harvest, waterfowl hunter participation, and waterfowl hunter success in the United States were derived from a combination of several sources: 1) sales of migratory bird conservation stamps (Duck Stamps), 2) a Mail Questionnaire Survey of individuals who purchased ducks stamps for hunting purposes, and 3) the Waterfowl Parts Collection Survey (PCS). This survey, which was based on duck stamp sales was discontinued after the 2001 hunting season. Beginning in 1999, new survey methods were implemented that obtained estimates of waterfowl harvest, hunter participation, and hunter success from: 1) States' lists of migratory bird hunters identified through the Harvest Information Program (HIP), 2) a questionnaire (HIP Survey) sent to a sample of those hunters, and 3) the Waterfowl PCS. The basic difference is that during 1961 - 2001 waterfowl hunter activity and harvest estimates were derived from a Mail Questionnaire Survey (MQS) of duck stamp purchasers, whereas from 1999 to the present those estimates were derived from HIP surveys of people identified as migratory bird hunters by the States. Both survey systems relied on the Waterfowl PCS for species composition data.
    [Show full text]