Quiero saber acerca de...

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2

48830

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 31, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
is prohibited statewide, including on all Service lands, largely in response to the adverse impacts of lead on the endangered California condor Gymnogyps californianus. We will continue to research this issue and plan to continue engaging with States and other partners to promote the use of non-lead ammunition and tackle.
Although there is not a Service-wide ban on lead ammunition for nonmigratory bird hunting activities or on lead fishing tackle, the Service has taken specific steps to limit the use of lead in hunting and fishing activities on refuges and hatcheries. Currently, under 50 CFR
32.2k, all refuges and hatcheries may require the use of nontoxic ammunition for all hunting other than deer and turkey hunting through brochures, signage, and other forms of public notification. For deer hunting, turkey hunting, and fishing, refuges and hatcheries must promulgate stationspecific regulations. Notably, we continue, in these annual rulemakings updating the regulations for hunting and fishing on NWRs and NFHs, to phase out the use of lead on Service lands and waters. Currently, including the regulatory changes in this rule, 82 of the 434 stations open to hunting restrict lead ammunition use for deer and/or turkey hunting, and 23 of the 378
stations open to fishing restrict lead tackle for fishing. In this rule, 17
stations are putting forward restrictions on the use of lead ammunition and/or lead fishing tackle. However, we acknowledge that with the increased access provided to hunters and anglers on Service lands and waters in the past few years, despite the Services efforts to mitigate the impact of lead on the environment, the increase in number of hunting and angling opportunities has outpaced the increase in number of opportunities subject to lead use restrictions.
Based on the recent historic expansions in our hunting and fishing programs, and per our policy, the Service will continue to evaluate lead use in hunting and fishing on Service lands and waters.
Comment 11: A few commenters expressed opposition to a prohibition on lead ammunition for hunting. The arguments these commenters put forward were that hunters on a given refuge would not take enough shots to create dangerous levels of lead and that reducing lead is a positive move but regulations prohibiting lead might result in anger and backlash.
Our Response: We recognize that lead in the environment carries risks for fish and wildlife, which is why lead ammunition is not allowed for
VerDate Sep<11>2014

20:40 Aug 30, 2021

Jkt 253001

waterfowl hunting on any refuge and lead ammunition is prohibited on refuges in California in order to protect the California condor. However, most hunting and sport fishing activities do not introduce enough lead into the environment to pose a significant danger to any species or to make it likely listed species will experience adverse effects. Accordingly, lead ammunition and tackle are currently allowed where our NEPA and ESA
analyses determine the activity is not likely to result in dangerous levels of lead exposure. Even for the hunting and sport fishing opportunities where we have determined lead will be allowed, we educate hunters about lead and encourage the use of nontoxic alternatives. This education and encouragement, coupled with the declining price of nontoxic alternatives and others trends, have allowed us to introduce lead prohibitions for all or some hunting and sport fishing activities, in addition to waterfowl hunting, on many of our refuges without significant opposition from our State partners, local hunters and anglers, or other stakeholders. This includes provisions prohibiting the use of lead ammunition or lead fishing tackle for 17
different stations in this rule.
Comment 12: We received several comments concerned with impacts of this rule on migratory birds. A few of these commenters were particularly concerned about those refuges whose purposes include inviolate sanctuaries for migratory birds or that have been designated as important bird areas IBAs by the Audubon Society.
Our Response: All of the migratory bird hunting opportunities on Service lands are done within the frameworks set by the Service in compliance with the MBTA. These frameworks set season lengths, bag limits, and areas for migratory game bird hunting and ensure that hunting will not have adverse impacts on the populations of the various species of migratory birds through rigorous biological monitoring, information collection, and data review.
To determine the appropriate frameworks for each species, the Service considers factors such as population size and trend, geographical distribution, annual breeding effort, the condition of breeding and wintering habitat, the number of hunters, and the anticipated harvest. After frameworks are established for season lengths, bag limits, and areas for migratory game bird hunting, States may select season dates, bag limits, and other regulatory options for the hunting seasons. States may always be more restrictive in their selections than the Federal frameworks,
PO 00000

Frm 00010

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

but never more permissive. For more information on this process, see the 20212022 cumulative impacts report at http www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWSHQNWRS2021
0027.
Our analysis in the cumulative impacts report of the expansion of hunting of migratory game birds on Service lands through this rule indicates that the proposed harvests, or intentional take, of each species will constitute a negligible component of both national and flyway harvest.
Station-specific migratory game bird hunting regulations are established within the above discussed frameworks and in compliance with NEPA to ensure that adverse impacts will not accumulate over time; thus, the harvest is expected to have a negligible impact on migratory bird resources within NWRs.
In addition to all hunting for migratory game birds being set within this national framework, and as with all species hunted in the Refuge System, each station must also ensure that the hunting or fishing opportunity is compatible, or in the case of NFHs not detrimental, with the purpose of that station and complies with applicable provisions of NEPA, ESA, and other applicable laws and policy before opening or expanding migratory bird hunting. This thorough process ensures that the Service has analyzed the potential impacts of the proposed hunting or fishing opportunity and determined that the opportunity would not have a significant impact on any migratory bird species, not just the targeted species.
Where inviolate sanctuaries occur on NWRs, all uses must be evaluated for appropriateness and, if necessary, compatibility. The language within the Administration Act only applies to those lands with the designation of inviolate sanctuary for migratory birds.
With this in mind, other uses e.g., big game hunting, hiking, auto tours, etc.
can be allowed as long as they are compatible. When determining compatibility, the Service must consider the high bar that the inviolate sanctuary designation established.
In addition, refuges with this designation will have to evaluate the influence of uses occurring or potentially occurring on other portions of the refuge and how they may affect the inviolate sanctuaries. Although this designation sets a higher level of consideration, it is clear that Congress intended for these areas to be considered for use when compatible. In the case of IBA designations from the Audubon Society, while several refuges
E:FRFM31AUR2.SGM

31AUR2