PCGR ss Part B and references 050310rev

SUPPORTING STATEMENT
PACIFIC COAST GROUNDFISH FISHERY RATIONALIZATION SOCIAL STUDY
OMB CONTROL NO. 0648-xxxx

B.

COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL METHODS

1. Describe (including a numerical estimate) the potential respondent universe and any
sampling or other respondent selection method to be used. Data on the number of entities
(e.g. establishments, State and local governmental units, households, or persons) in the
universe and the corresponding sample are to be provided in tabular form. The tabulation
must also include expected response rates for the collection as a whole. If the collection has
been conducted before, provide the actual response rate achieved.
The respondent universe for this study includes those individuals, partners, businesses, etc., that
have any connection to the Pacific Coast Groundfish and Whiting Fisheries. These are the
fisheries that are being rationalized or managed under a limited entry program. Types of
respondents expected include fishermen, vessel owners, vessel operators, groundfish limited
entry permit owners, groundfish limited entry permit owners/holders, quota allocation recipients,
crew aboard groundfish/whiting vessels, mothership operations, catcher-processor operations,
shoreside processors, any other at-sea processors, first receivers/buyers, and other individuals
who are stakeholders in the fishery such as partners or spouses. In addition, the survey/interview
pool will include any businesses that are directly tied to the groundfish/whiting communities
through the supply of commercial items to include, but are not limited to net suppliers, fuel
suppliers, equipment suppliers, etc.
The survey will be a census of the groundfish trawl/fixed gear fishery as described; that is, all
individuals who meet the descriptions above. The only known numbers are the vessel owners
and permit owners, because the current Limited Entry Permit program requires this information.
All other counts of the number of respondents are estimates. Calculations have been developed
to estimate the number of respondents. Values for these calculations come from a combination
of published data and information from personal communications. Published data including the
number and size of fishing vessels is available from the Northwest Regional Office Limited
Entry Permit database. Additionally, published materials provide information on the shoreside
processors. Information such as the estimates of how many crew are on vessels came from
personal communications during the pilot/study review process with NMFS employees and
industry members. The combination of this data is utilized to estimate the number of crew on
participating vessels that will be part of the survey respondent group. This is believed to be the
most accurate process to estimate the field of respondents.
Another sector of the study population, shoreside processors, is not as clear as the vessel owners
and permit holders, but does have a little more information based in the literature; those for both
the trawl groundfish species and whiting species have been described in the Pacific Fishery
Management Council documents (PFMC and NMFS 2009). The data provided identified a list
of possible processors on the west coast. For this research, the processors will be confirmed and
it is assumed that each processor has at least one owner, if not multiple owners. An approach to
contact the owner(s) of each processor and conduct a census of the processor owner population
will be taken.
1

Description

No.
Companies

Vessel Owners
Permit Owners Only
Crew Estimate
No. of
x Est. Crew
= No. Est.
Vessel Length
Vessels
Per Vessel
Crew
33’ -80’
124
3
372
80’-150’
41
4
164
Over 150’
12
100
1200
Shoreside Processors Owners (CA, OR, & WA)†
Shoreside Processors Employees (CA,OR &WA) ††
Industry Supply Company Owners and Employees
Misc. Fishermen/Processors – Interviews ONLY
Fishery Related Organizations – Meetings
Misc Others
Total (actual number contacted, not annualized)

No.
People
177
13

71
71
15
15

372
164
1200
107
710
15
78
15
20

No. of
Estimated
Respondents
200*
20*

Estimated
Response
Rate 60%
128
13

372
164
1200
107
710
15
78
15
20
2808

238
105
768
68
284+
10
50
10
13
1687

*Some vessels and permits are co-owned, but both owner names are not listed in the permit data, so additional respondents were
added to account for vessels with more than one boat owner.
†
Personal communications alluded to some processors being owned by more than one individual. An exact number of these
circumstances were not able to be obtained. As a result, to account for more than one owner, a multiplier of 1.5 was applied to
the number of companies to derive an estimate number of owners to include in the calculation.
††
Personal communications alluded to various numbers of employees for processors. An exact number of these circumstances
were not able to be obtained. As a result, to account for an average number of employees, a multiplier of 10 was applied to the
number of companies to derive an estimate number of employees to include in the calculation.
+
An average response rate was calculated as 60%. For a majority of the estimated respondents (1300) a 64% response rate is
estimated. For the remainder of the estimated respondents (284) a 40% response rate is estimated. Personal communications
suggest access to shoreside processor employees will be extremely difficult. As a result, a lower response rate is projected from
this pool of respondents

Two sub-populations of the study where no list of individuals exists are that of vessel crew and
processor employees. Access to these individuals will be sought through various means.
Initially, vessel owners, permit owners, and processor owners will be asked for lists of
employees and/or for permission to contact their employees. We will work closely with the
NMFS Observer and Survey programs as key informants to reach crew aboard vessels. There are
various community organizations related to this fishery; for example, the Newport Fishermen’s
Wives, Inc. We will work closely with these organizations to reach members who are fishermen
and processor employees. Key informants and members of the groups listed above will handle
initial introductions with respondents, providing the outreach letter and informed consent form
explaining the survey. All individuals who complete the survey/interview process will be shown
the compiled lists and asked if there are other crew/staff not listed.
We will be taking the more traditional, direct method of outreach – sending initial letters – to all
permit holders, vessel owners and processor owners for whom we have addresses.
2. Describe the procedures for the collection, including: the statistical methodology for
stratification and sample selection; the estimation procedure; the degree of accuracy
needed for the purpose described in the justification; any unusual problems requiring
specialized sampling procedures; and any use of periodic (less frequent than annual) data
collection cycles to reduce burden.
As previously mentioned in Question B.1, the approach to this study is to conduct a census of the
study population. Individuals who meet the study criteria will be provided an opportunity to
2

participate in the research. The sample selection will therefore not contain a random sample or
other statistical representation of the study population and their associated statistical analysis.
Sample selection will be based solely on the criteria of the individuals’ participation and having
an active role in the Pacific Coast Groundfish Trawl Fishery, where those expected roles have
been previously addressed in Question B.1.
Data collection will occur primarily through in-person survey administration and semi-structured
to unstructured interviews. Researchers will discuss the research with study participants,
administer the surveys, be available to answer any questions, code the surveys for anonymity and
confidentiality, and collect all the surveys upon completion. In the event individuals are
unavailable to meet in person, various options will be available. Hard copy surveys can be
provided either in person or via the mail, electronic versions will be available either for
distribution via email or accessible over the internet. In the event of any mailing costs to return
the survey, postage paid envelopes will be provided as appropriate.
It is expected that a 60% response rate will be sufficient to properly represent the study
population. This response rate is based on a similar study conducted by the principal investigator
with the same collection methodologies (Russell and Schneidler 2009). Analysis of the results
will be conducted to include the response rate for each question. This is an important aspect of
the research as the option to skip questions is being provided as an additional layer of
confidentiality. The strength and accuracy each piece of data will therefore be represented
through the response rate of the question, in addition to the overall response rates.
Data collection is not planned to be conducted on an annual basis. The first projected study year
is 2010; a supplemental analysis will take place in 2012, and another full analysis, in 2015-2016.
As the focus of this research is to measure changes in the communities over time due to a
management change, it is not expected that there will be a great advantage to conducting the
research in annual increments. The design of the program by fishery managers has elements
built in that are expected to trigger events in the communities that may be measured in
increments other than annually. For example, the quota shares are not authorized to be traded
until after the second year the program is in effect. However, quota pounds are expected to be
traded immediately. The purpose of the second year supplemental survey is to measure the
initial effect of the quota pound trading. Discussions with various NMFS personnel and personal
communications with industry members suggest that after the 5th year, the system will be more
stabilized and settled. Trading activities should be well settled and this would be a good time to
measure the overall change. In addition, the MSA Sec. 303A (1)(G) requires a five-year review
of the quota management system, and the data provided from this research can inform the fiveyear review process. In addition, this approach, as opposed to an annual approach, will reduce
the burden on the research participants significantly.
3. Describe the methods used to maximize response rates and to deal with nonresponse.
The accuracy and reliability of the information collected must be shown to be adequate for
the intended uses. For collections based on sampling, a special justification must be
provided if they will not yield "reliable" data that can be generalized to the universe
studied.
Various steps have been, and will continue to be, taken to maximize response rates. As a
reminder, no statistical sampling methodology is intended for this study population, there is no
specific sampling frame applied in this case.
3

The first step to increase response rates has been taken in the form of working with industry
members in a pilot study and providing the opportunity for them to review and contribute to the
development of the survey tool. Industry members selected are all key participants in various
aspects of the industry, to include geographically diverse locations within the fishery, diverse
roles within the industry, as well as diverse knowledge of the fishery. Each industry member has
been invited to continue to work with the study principal investigator to discuss the best
approach to reach study participants. Several of the industry members have already committed
to serving as key informants, gate keepers, and primary contacts to many others in the industry.
These individuals will assist in the communication of the research, will have access to literature
about the study to be distributed to their constituents, and will assist researchers in the field to
coordinate with study participants. The action of working with industry members and including
them in the survey design and study and points of contact is expected to increase the response
rate dramatically.
Additional efforts to increase response rate include in-person survey administration whenever
possible. It has been the experience of other research efforts that conducting the research in
person and collecting completed surveys immediately, dramatically increases response rates
(Russell and Schneidler 2009, Rea and Parker 1997, Robson 2002). In addition, the individuals
participating in the research have the opportunity to communicate with the researcher and
provide additional information that is of concern to them to be included in the data set.
Contact has also been made with other key members of NMFS, academia, and industry to better
understand the study universe and to work together to collect a more complete data set.
Communication with NMFS Northwest Regional Office, NMFS Observer program personnel,
NMFS survey program personnel, NMFS Alaska Fisheries Science Center personnel, NMFS
SWFSC personnel, other NMFS field personnel, Oregon Sea Grant Personnel, and California
Sea Grant personnel are included in collaborative efforts of this research. These efforts have
increased the background knowledge available to the researchers, provided additional key
informants and gate keepers to the industry, and have provided a support network throughout the
west coast to conduct this research. This network of information available to the researchers will
contribute to an increased response rate. An example of how this will work is through
coordinating our approach of fishermen with observers. This coordination will serve two
functions, 1) access to vessel schedules, and 2) gate keeper assistance. The observers work with
fishermen on a daily basis; they will have knowledge of the boats schedules, which would direct
the researchers to be available to conduct the research at the most appropriate times for the
survey respondents. It would reduce the contact burden and extensive scheduling calls, and
capture the targeted respondents when they are most available. In addition, the observers know
the individuals of research interest personally. Collaborating with the observers and arranging
for introductions between researchers and study participants by the observers, will likely increase
the willingness of study participants to work with researchers.
Multiple options will be provided to study participants to participate in the research. For
individuals who are willing to work with us but don’t want to fill out the survey, researchers will
conduct an interview and complete the survey per the participants’ responses. For those who
don’t want to complete the entire survey, a section completion guide directs the participants as to
which sections are most important to complete for the role the individual plays in the industry,
limiting the sections the participant needs to complete. It is also clearly communicated that the
individuals can stop their participation at any time, stop the completion of the survey at any time,
4

or skip any questions of concern at any time, without any personal consequence. For those
individuals who are not interested in the survey at all but are willing to participate in an
interview, researchers will limit their data collection to interviews. If a participant is willing to
give us only a few minutes of their time, we will ask the questions outlined in Sections A and B
of the survey instrument. These sections are estimated to take approximately 5 minutes to
complete. These responses will be used to analyze non-response bias.
4. Describe any tests of procedures or methods to be undertaken. Tests are encouraged as
effective means to refine collections, but if ten or more test respondents are involved OMB
must give prior approval.
A full review of the study description, the study methodology, and the survey instrument has
been undertaken. NMFS personnel and other federal personnel in various regions have reviewed
the survey tool and provided comments on both the survey tool and the study. As previously
discussed in Question 3, key industry members were provided a description of the research,
discussed the research with the principal investigator, and reviewed the survey tool in a pilot
study of fewer then 10 industry participants. Communication with reviewers is being maintained
to 1) communicate changes to the survey tool as a result of the reviews, and 2) to lay the
framework for the deployment of researchers into the field to conduct the research.
Information received from industry members and other NMFS personnel was found to be
invaluable to the development of the survey tool. Significant changes were thus made to
improve the tool. Their continued participation in this research is expected to contribute greatly
to its success.
5. Provide the name and telephone number of individuals consulted on the statistical
aspects of the design, and the name of the agency unit, contractor(s), grantee(s), or other
person(s) who will actually collect and/or analyze the information for the agency.
The internal NMFS design, development, and review team including statistical analysis included
Dr. Karma Norman, social scientist NWFSC (206) 302-2418; Anna Varney, ERT contractor at
the NWFSC (206) 302-2486, Kristin Hoelting, UW Research Assistant at the NWFSC, (206)
302-2418, Todd Lee, Economist NWFSC (206) 302-2436, Carl Lian, Economist, NWFSC (206)
302-2414.
The primary individuals expected to collect the data include Suzanne Russell, social scientist,
principal investigator, NWFSC, Anna Varney, ERT contractor NWFSC, Karma Norman, social
scientist NWFSC, Jennifer Gilden Pacific Fisheries Management Council Staff, Christina
Package, Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission, Stacey Miller, NWFSC, and others to be
identified. It is expected that at minimum two additional individuals will be collection data in
collaboration with the Oregon Sea Grant Program and the California Sea Grant Program.
Individuals who are expected to analyze the data include Suzanne Russell (206) 860-3274,
Karma Norman (206) 302-2418, and Anna Varney (206) 302-2486.

5

Cited References
Ecotrust Canada, 2001. Catch-22, Conservation, Communities, and the Privatization of B.C.
Fisheries. Available on-line. Accessed February 2, 2010.
http://www.ecotrust.ca/ocean/catch22.
Lowe, M.E., and C. Carothers, editors, 2008. Enclosing the Fisheries: People, Places, and
Power. American Fisheries Society, Symposium 68, Bethesda, Maryland.
McCay, B. 1995. “Social and Ecological Implications of ITQs: An Overview.” Ocean &
Coastal Management 28(1-3):3-22.
National Research Council. 1999. Share the Fish: Toward a National Policy on Individual
Fishing Quotas. National Academy Press. Washington D.C.
PFMC (Pacific Fishery Management Council) and NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service).
2009. Rationalization of the Pacific Coast Groundfish Limited Entry Trawl Fishery;
Draft Environmental Impact Statement Including Regulatory Review and Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. Pacific Fishery Management Council, Portland,
Or. November 2009. Accessed January 6, 2010. http://www.pcouncil.org/wpcontent/uploads/0911_TRatEIS_Cover.pdf
2010.
Palsson, G, and G. Petursdottir, editors. 1996. Social Implications of Quota Systems in
Fisheries. Nordic Council of Ministers, Copenhagen.
Rea, L.M. and R.A. Parker, 1997. Designing and Conduction Survey Research. John Wiley &
Sons, Inc. San Francisco, CA.
Robson, C., 2002. Real World Research Second Edition. Blackwell Publishing. Malden, MA
Russell, S.M. and M. Schneidler, 2009. A Profile of the People in the U.S. Whale Watching
Industry of the Greater Puget Sound, WA.” Draft Technical Memorandum. NMFS,
Seattle, WA.
Additional References
Adesoji, A, J. Menzo, and B. McCay. 1998. “Market Power, Industrial Organization and
Tradeable Quotas” Review of Industrial Organization 13: 589-601.
Dewees, C.M. 1998. “Effects of Individual Quota Systems on New Zealand and British
Columbia Fisheries.” Ecological Applications 8 (1) Supplement: Ecosystem Management
for Sustainable Marine Fisheries (Feb., 1998), S133-S138.
Government Accountability Office. 2004. Individual Fishing Quotas: Methods for Community
Protection and New Entry Require Periodic Evaluation. GAO-04-277.
Huppert, D. 2005. “An Overview of Fishing Rights” Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries
15:201-215.
6

Pew Oceans Commission. 2003. Socioeconomic Perspectives on Marine Fisheries in the United
States. Pew Oceans Commission, Arlington, VA.

7