National Wildlife Refuge System: 2026-2027 Station-Specific Hunting and Sport Fishing Regulations

A large group of private individuals from Maine, supported by Maine Audubon, strongly oppose the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's proposal to rescind the lead ammunition phase-out provision. They argue that lead ammunition poses a significant risk to wildlife health, specifically bald and golden eagles, and that the existing regulation is more beneficial and scientifically sound.

Animal Wellness Action, the Center for a Humane Economy, Footloose Montana, PEER, and The Coalition to Protect America’s National Parks oppose the proposed rule because it reverses previous measures to phase out toxic lead ammunition and expands hunting opportunities. They argue that the proposal ignores established science regarding lead poisoning in wildlife and humans, violates the conservation mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System, and is an arbitrary and capricious use of agency authority.

Earthjustice submitted a scientific study regarding the mortality of common loons in New England from 1987 to 2000. The study identifies anthropogenic factors, such as lead toxicosis from fishing weights and boat-related trauma, as significant causes of loon mortality.

Earthjustice submitted a scientific study demonstrating that lead bullet fragments from rifle-killed deer are bioavailable and pose a significant health risk to human consumers of venison. The organization argues that these findings support the need for safer hunting practices to prevent lead exposure in hunters, their families, and low-income beneficiaries of venison donations.

The Center for Biological Diversity is submitting a petition and supporting scientific evidence to phase out the use of lead ammunition and fishing tackle on National Wildlife Refuges. They argue that lead is highly toxic to wildlife and humans, and that cost-effective, non-toxic alternatives are readily available.

The Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies supports the proposed expansion of hunting and sport fishing opportunities across the National Wildlife Refuge System and National Fish Hatchery System. They advocate for closer coordination with state agencies to ensure consistency with state management frameworks and support the rescinding of federal non-lead ammunition requirements that conflict with state laws.

The Friends of Patuxent Research Refuge opposes the proposed rule because it seeks to rescind a previous federal prohibition on lead ammunition and fishing tackle at nine National Wildlife Refuges, including their own. They argue that the proposal lacks scientific justification, threatens human and wildlife health, and contradicts the core mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System.

Safari Club International (SCI) expresses strong support for the proposed rule to expand and open new hunting and fishing opportunities across the National Wildlife Refuge System. They argue that the proposal aligns with federal mandates to prioritize wildlife-dependent recreational uses and advocate for the rescission of lead-related ammunition and tackle restrictions.

The Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources (DWR) supports the proposed hunting and fishing plans, specifically praising the expansion of public hunting access and the alignment with state regulations. They offer specific technical recommendations to improve language consistency, clarify species-specific regulations, and further expand hunting opportunities on several refuges.