1018-0088 Ssa

Supporting Statement A for

Paperwork Reduction Act Submission

OMB Control Number 1018-0088

National Survey of Fishing,

Hunting and Wildlife-Associated Recreation (FHWAR)

Terms of Clearance: This Survey is approved based on the revised questionnaire and other data collection materials sent to OMB on July 18, 2005. FWS should report to OMB (via e-mail) the actual response rate achieved for all phases of data collection.

Response: On June 15, 2007, we reported the actual response rates for data collection associated with the 2006 FHWAR Survey (attached in ROCIS as a supplementary document).

1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary.

The Fish and Wildlife Service (Service, we) has overall Federal responsibility for managing the Nation's fish and wildlife resources and for providing technical and financial assistance to the States for carrying out their fish and wildlife programs.

To assist in carrying out our responsibilities, we have sponsored national surveys of fishing and hunting at 5-year intervals since 1955. Authorities for carrying out the Survey are:

• Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act (P-R Act) (16 U.S.C. 669 et seq.), as amended;

• Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act (D-J Act) (16 U.S.C. 777 et seq.), as amended;

• Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 (16 U.S.C. 742d-f).

The Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program Improvement Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-408) authorizes multistate conservation grant programs, which fund projects such as the National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation (FHWAR) that benefit a majority of the States.

Under the P-R and D-J Acts, we provide over $800 million in grants annually to States for projects that support wildlife and sport fish management and restoration and improve boating access. Fish and wildlife projects include acquisition and improvement of aquatic resources, fishing access, fish stocking, and the acquisition and improvement of wildlife management areas, facilities, and access. We also provide grant funds for aquatic education, hunter education, and development and operation of archery and shooting range facilities.

The 2011 FHWAR will result in a comprehensive database of fish and wildlife-related recreation activities and expenditures. It provides comparable national and State statistics not available from other sources.

The survey information helps us effectively administer fish and wildlife restoration grant programs, and helps the States develop project proposals and conservation programs. Data are used to evaluate the status and trends of recreational uses as well as the values and benefits of fish and wildlife resources. The data provide essential information on present recreation demands and serve as a basis for projecting future demands.

It is important that the Service and coastal States are able to determine the number of saltwater and freshwater resident anglers within each State. We use this information to equitably allocate funds between freshwater and saltwater projects as required by the D-J Act. The information is not readily available elsewhere because few States have saltwater licenses or conduct their own surveys. If the FHWAR data were not available, it would impair the States’ ability to meet their obligations.

The FHWAR information is needed to prepare resource management and development plans and environmental documents required for compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The data also are used to calculate economic values of fish and wildlife recreation resources. Those values serve as a basis for assessing damages to fish and wildlife resources from adverse instances such as oil spills and hazardous waste dumps.

2. Indicate how, by whom, how frequently, and for what purpose the information is to be used. If the information collected will be disseminated to the public or used to support information that will be disseminated to the public, explain how the collection complies with all applicable Information Quality Guidelines.

The scope and purpose of the 2011 FHWAR are similar to those of previous surveys. The Census Bureau is not introducing new procedures or methods with this collection. All questions in the 2011 FHWAR have been fielded in a previous version of the survey, with the exception of one. Four other questions were changed slightly or the answer categories were modified slightly.

The FHWAR will generate information identified as priority data needed by the Service, other Federal agencies, States, nongovernmental organizations, and other major survey users. General categories of information collected include the number of participants in different types of fish and wildlife consumptive and nonconsumptive activities, the extent of their participation (days and trips), and related trip and equipment expenditures. The 2011 FHWAR questions and methodology are similar to those used in the 1991, 1996, 2001, and 2006 surveys, so their estimates are comparable.

Although the Service is the primary Federal user of FHWAR information, many other Federal agencies rely on it. Fish and wildlife agencies use the information to make management and policy decisions. Land managing and water development agencies use the data on participation rates, species sought, and types of resources used to formulate policies, programs, and plans related to recreational fish and wildlife uses. Federal regulatory, permitting and environmental agencies rely on the economic data for estimating damages to fish and wildlife resources, and for determining the benefits and costs of projects affecting natural resources. Data are used in evaluating alternative plans and their environmental impacts.

State fish and wildlife agencies also are primary users of FHWAR data. State uses of the data are not significantly different from those of the Federal Government.

Other non-Federal users of the FHWAR data include conservation organizations, researchers, and trade and manufacturing associations. These users also participated in identifying priorities for data collection and streamlining. Their needs for the data largely reflect those of the Federal and State agencies. The value of the FHWAR database for natural resource economics was confirmed by Drs. Richard C. Bishop and David E. Ervin. They asked 3,000 professionals working in the natural resource and environmental field to identify their most "used" and "very important" data sources. The FHWAR was identified as one of the most important data sources for their work.

Questions on …	Provide information about …	Which is used to …
Demographic characteristics (e.g., age, sex, race, income)	Factors influencing participation and demand	Evaluate programs and estimate future participation.
History of participation, where individuals live and grew up, and how long persons have lived in their resident State	Influences and changes in fish and wildlife recreation activities as well as the degree of urban and rural influences on participation	Plan and develop programs for angler and hunter recruitment and retention.
Trip and equipment expenditure	Economic impacts of wildlife-related recreation activities on national and State economies.	Estimate the economic significance of alternative fish and wildlife resource acquisition, development, and management programs.
Economic valuation	Nonmarket values of wildlife-related recreation activities	Model damage assessment programs under the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 and to quantify values for wildlife-related recreation activities.
Fish and wildlife-associated activities on private and public lands, and land leasing and ownership data	Extent that privately owned and leased lands meet demands for fish and wildlife resources and the amount of expenditures for those activities	Estimate needs for public resources and to formulate acquisition and development plans.
Types of activities (e.g., flyfishing, ice fishing, primitive firearm or bow hunting)	Identify trends in fishing and hunting, impacts on resources, and recreation demand	Plan and manage resources and develop educational programs.
License and tag information	Expenditures for fishing and hunting	Plan ways to serve those who use the resources.
Participation in wildlife-watching activities	Recreation use patterns	Develop and evaluate game and nongame policies, programs, and resources.

The data collection will follow Information Quality Guidelines to ensure reliability of the data collected and reported. The Census Bureau will use similar methods designed and used for the previous FHWAR Surveys to ensure comparability of data. It will collect and process the 2011 Survey data using similar quality assurance procedures. The Census Bureau will conduct the Survey using computer-assisted interview (CAI) technology. The survey instrument will contain range edits on many variables and consistency checks on critical items to maximize quality of the data without unduly affecting the flow of the interview. The instrument also will have a record of data collected in previous interviews to help prevent activities or items being reported a second time. The instrument will allow for backward data correction and will contain logic to ensure that the proper interview path is maintained.

3. Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information involves the use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology; e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses, and the basis for the decision for adopting this means of collection. Also describe any consideration of using information technology to reduce burden [and specifically how this collection meets GPEA requirements.].

The Census Bureau collects and records all verbal responses through telephone or in-person interviews using computer-assisted technology. Paper or online questionnaires are not used because of the size of the questionnaire and the complexity of the skip patterns.

4. Describe efforts to identify duplication.

There is no other comparable source of national and State-by-State reliable data on recreational fish and wildlife uses that we can adapt to carry out our program and management responsibilities. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) provides limited coverage of saltwater fishing, but does not cover freshwater fishing, hunting, or nonconsumptive activities. NMFS coverage of the coastal States varies from year to year. In recent years, the NMFS survey has not included all of the States on the West and Gulf coasts. It is important that the Service and the coastal States are able to differentiate the number of resident saltwater and freshwater resident anglers within each State. Since the NMFS survey does not provide comparable data to accomplish this, there is no unnecessary duplication of efforts between the two surveys.

5. If the collection of information impacts small businesses or other small entities, describe the methods used to minimize burden.

This information collection does not involve small businesses or other small entities.

6. Describe the consequence to Federal program or policy activities if the collection is not conducted or is conducted less frequently, as well as any technical or legal obstacles to reducing burden.

If the FHWAR were not conducted in 2011, the Service and States would experience difficulty in effectively carrying out their responsibilities to meet statutory, administrative, and other obligations. There would not be uniform national and State level data to use in identifying priorities for fish and wildlife grant programs, to evaluate the effectiveness of those programs, and to identify and plan for special needs and new initiatives. The FHWAR's uniformly collected and comparable data are not available elsewhere at the national and State levels. Without it, the Service and the States will have to acquire the data at greater expense and delay or use outdated and inconsistent data where available.

The 5-year frequency of data collection is appropriate for current and projected management purposes. FHWAR users have indicated they need the data updated at least every 5 years. If the Service collected the data at greater intervals than every 5 years, the value of the information collected would be reduced.

7. Explain any special circumstances that would cause an information collection to be conducted in a manner:

* requiring respondents to report information to the agency more often than quarterly;

* requiring respondents to prepare a written response to a collection of information in fewer than 30 days after receipt of it;

* requiring respondents to submit more than an original and two copies of any document;

* requiring respondents to retain records, other than health, medical, government contract, grant-in-aid, or tax records, for more than three years;

* in connection with a statistical survey, that is not designed to produce valid and reliable results that can be generalized to the universe of study;

* requiring the use of a statistical data classification that has not been reviewed and approved by OMB;

* that includes a pledge of confidentiality that is not supported by authority established in statute or regulation, that is not supported by disclosure and data security policies that are consistent with the pledge, or which unnecessarily impedes sharing of data with other agencies for compatible confidential use; or

* requiring respondents to submit proprietary trade secrets, or other confidential information unless the agency can demonstrate that it has instituted procedures to protect the information's confidentiality to the extent permitted by law.

There are no circumstances that require us to collect the information in a manner inconsistent with OMB guidelines.

8. Provide the date and page number of publication in the Federal Register of the agency's notice, required by 5 CFR 1320.8(d), soliciting comments on the information collection prior to submission to OMB. Summarize public comments received in response to that notice (or in response to a PRA statement) and describe actions taken by the agency in response to these comments.

Describe efforts to consult with persons outside the agency to obtain their views on the availability of data, frequency of collection, the clarity of instructions and recordkeeping, disclosure, or reporting format (if any), and on the data elements to be recorded, disclosed, or reported. [Please list the names, titles, addresses, and phone numbers of persons contacted.]

On February 8, 2010, we published in the Federal Register (75 FR 6216) a notice of our intent to request that OMB reinstate and approve this information collection. In that notice, we solicited comments for 60 days, ending on April 9, 2010. We did not receive any comments.

In addition to soliciting comments through the Federal Register, we consulted with States and other survey users to determine the specific content of the 2011 FHWAR. From April to September 2009, we received comments and recommendations through meetings and correspondence with Federal agencies, State fish and wildlife agencies, national conservation organizations, researchers, and nongovernmental organizations. Comments and recommendations were compiled, analyzed, and used in planning the 2011 survey. The 2011 FHWAR questions are the result of this consultative process.

We had extensive consultations with the Census Bureau (Census) and with the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (AFWA), including its national survey working group, regarding the survey scope, methodology, and cost. They were asked their opinions about the importance and use of the data and the estimated burden of the information collection. They believe the information is of great importance and the estimated burden for this information collection is reasonable considering the major reduction in sample size of the proposed 2011 Survey in comparison with the previous survey and the almost same number and type of questions. The following were the main contacts from Census and AFWA:

Ronald Regan Executive Director Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies 202-624-7890

Deborah Kinnaman, Chief, Special Surveys Branch, Demographic Surveys Division, U.S. Census Bureau 301-763-3817

We also contacted economists, researchers, and consultants who have extensive knowledge and use the survey data in their wildlife-related research and services. These individuals included:

Andrew J. Loftus Loftus Consulting 410-295-5997	Robert Byrne Bob Byrne Consulting 540-937-2139
Robert Southwick Southwick Associates 904-277-9765	Steve Sheriff, Biometrician Resource Science Center Missouri Department of Conservation 573-882-9909

Comments and suggestions from individuals and organizations varied and reflected the interests of those particular users of the Survey. As much as possible, comments were incorporated in the final data collection plan and questionnaires.

9. Explain any decision to provide any payment or gift to respondents, other than remuneration of contractors or grantees.

We do not provide any payment or gifts to respondents.

10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for the assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy.

The Census Bureau will collect data in compliance with the Privacy Act of 1974 and OMB Circular A-130. A letter mailed to respondents prior to interviewing includes the information required by the Privacy Act of 1974, explains the voluntary nature of the survey, and states the estimated time required for participating in the survey. In cases where the letter was not received, a statement containing this information will be read to the respondent before the interview begins. All information given by respondents to Census Bureau employees is held in strict confidence under Title 13, United States Code, Section 9. Each Census Bureau employee has taken an oath to that effect and is subject to a jail penalty or substantial fine if he or she discloses any information. Information is maintained in a secure system of records: Census-3, Individual and Household Statistical Surveys and Special Studies Records, published in the Federal Register on November 1, 2002 (67 FR 66608).

11. Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered private.

We do not ask questions of a sensitive nature.

12. Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information.

The projected number of respondents and the estimated burden for the 2011 FHWAR are indicated in the following table:

	ESTIMATED NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLD RESPONSES	AVERAGE TIME PER HOUSEHOLD (MINUTES)	ESTIMATED NUMBER OF PARTICIPANT RESPONSES	AVERAGE RESPONDENT TIME (MINUTES)	TOTAL BURDEN (HOURS)*	$ VALUE OF RESPONDENT BURDEN HOURS
Screen	47,208	7	--------	---------	5,508	$163,642.68
Screen Reinterview**	789	5	--------	---------	66	$1,960.86
Hunting and Fishing
1st Interview	--------	---------	7,709	14	1,799	$53,448.29
2nd Interview	--------	---------	15,418	10	2,570	$76,354.70
3rd Interview	--------	---------	23,127	15	5,782	$171,783.22
Reinterview	--------	---------	200	5	17	$505.07
Wildlife Watching:
1st Interview	--------	---------	3,854	11	707	$21,004.97
2nd Interview	--------	---------	7,709	11	1,413	$41,980.23
3rd Interview	--------	---------	11,563	11	2,120	$62,985.20
Reinterview	--------	---------	100	5	8	$237.68
TOTAL	47,997		69,680		19,990	$593,902.90
*rounded

The estimated number of respondents reached from a sample of households will be 47,208. About 50 percent, or 23,604, of those respondents will receive a detail interview. An additional 50 percent of those households where one person is sampled (11,802) will have a second person screened in for interviews. We estimate the total number of respondents to be 59,010 (47,208 + 11,802).

Approximately 15 percent of the computer-assisted personal interview (CAPI) sample in both Wave 1 and Wave 3 will be pre-selected for reinterview. If an original interview is conducted, another Census Bureau representative will contact the respondent to conduct a reinterview using an evaluation questionnaire. The reinterview responses are analyzed as a quality control measure.

We estimate the total dollar value of the burden hours will be $593,902.90. We referred to the BLS news release USDL-10-02774, June 2010, Employer Costs for Employee Compensation, at www.bls.gov to obtain the individual/household average hourly wage. According to this news release, the private industry hourly wage is $29.71, which includes $9.04 in benefits. We used this information to calculate the value of respondent burden hours.

13. Provide an estimate of the total annual [nonhour] cost burden to respondents or recordkeepers resulting from the collection of information.

There are no nonhour burden costs.

14. Provide estimates of annualized costs to the Federal Government.

The total estimated cost to the Federal Government for the 2011 FHWAR Survey is approximately $13.2, of which includes $10.7 million is the Census Bureau’s costs and $2.5 million is the Fish and Wildlife Service’s costs. The annualized cost is approximately $2,637,913.

For salary costs, we used the Office of Personnel Management Salary Table 2010-DCB to determine the hourly wages and multiplied the hourly wage by 1.5 to account for benefits in accordance with Bureau of Labor Standards news release USDL 10-0774, June 9, 2010

The total Census Bureau cost is approximately $10,700,000. The Census Bureau’s cost estimate for data collection is $7,079,316 which is based on sample size; length of questionnaire; administration; overhead; sample person locating, telephone interviewing; personal interviewing, and reinterview. The Census Bureau’s personnel costs are estimated at $2,208,460. Professional staff is responsible for project management; sample design; instrument development and testing; printing and mailing of materials; training interviewing staff; data quality control; weighting and estimating sampling error; file preparation and delivery; and preparation of documentation and final reports. The following table provides Census Bureau estimated costs:

CENSUS BUREAU EXPENSES	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	TOTAL COST
Professional Personnel	294,520	337,656	800,000	700,000	76,284	2,208,460
Travel and Other Expense
Travel for regular meetings		13,000	15,000			28,000
Monitor interviews			8,000	2,000		10,000
Materials and Supplies
Advance letter / reference aids			25,000	5,000		30,000
Training materials			5,000	2,500		7,500
Postage			45,000	7,000	2,000	54,000
Shipping
Instrument Development		180,000	194,930	60,000		434,930
Systems Development		392,138	137,811	267,845		797,794
Data Collection
Personal Visit			2,915,398	1,224,586		4,139,984
Telephone			1,680,559	933,508		2,614,067
Locating			325,265			325,265
Report Production				40,000	10,000	50,000
TOTAL COST	294,520	922,794	6,151,963	3,242,439	88,284	10,700,000

The FWS total estimated cost is $2,489,565. The FWS staff salaries and benefits are estimated at $ 2,196,147 (based on salaries and benefits of two FTEs in 2009 and three FTEs in 2010 to 2013). The staff includes three economists: A GS-14 who is the national survey branch chief and team leader, a GS-13 senior economist, and a GS-9/11/12 economist. Actual obligations are reported for 2009. The estimated operational costs are $293,418. Operational costs include regional meetings with State technical committee members, computer equipment and software, printing two preliminary reports, administrative and clerical support, and overhead. The following table provides FWS estimated costs:

FWS EXPENSES	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	TOTAL COST
Professional Personnel	287,966	454,688	470,891	489,445	493,157	2,196,147
4 regional committee meetings	31,940					31,940
Travel	283	2,989	3,100	3,218	3,340	12,930
Supplies	720	742	764	787	810	3,823
Equipment & Software:
Computers, printers, etc.				2,400		2,400
SAS Licenses	2,000	2,000	2,000	2,000	2,000	10,000
Reports: National Preliminary State Preliminary				6,000		6,000
Administrative Costs	32,291	46,042	47,676	50,385	49,931	226,325
TOTAL COST	355,200	506,461	524,431	554,235	549,238	2,489,565

15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments.

This is a reinstatement of a previously approved collection. Therefore, we are reporting 117,677 responses and 19,990 burden hours as a program change. This is a decrease of 12,264 hours from the previous approval for the 2006 FHWAR Survey.

16. For collections of information whose results will be published, outline plans for tabulation and publication.

The Fish and Wildlife Service and the Census Bureau will collaborate in preparing reports with the 2011 Survey results. These reports will have formats and tables similar to those of the 2006 Survey. The Census Bureau will produce each report in printable PDF format. The reports will be accessible from the Census Bureau and the Service websites. Website addresses will be in news releases announcing release of the reports

The time schedule for the information collection and publication of reports is:

Data Collection	April 2011 to March 2012
Computer Processing	June 2011 to July 2012
Preliminary Tabulations released to FWS	April 1, 2012
Release of Public Use CD-ROM by FWS	October 31, 2012
Release of Reports	July 2012 to April 2013

The 2011 FHWAR will produce an updated national report and 50 State reports on fishing, hunting, and wildlife-associated recreation statistics. We will release preliminary estimates from July to August of 2012, and final tabulations from October 2012 to April 2013. The final tabulations will be similar to those produced in 2006 with some modifications due to streamlining and meeting current data needs of the users. We have attached draft report tables in ROCIS as a supplementary document. These tables show where modifications from the 2006 tables will be made for the 2011 final reports. The national and State reports will be available in PDF formats only. The PDFs will be accessible from both the Census Bureau’s and Fish and Wildlife Service’s websites.

17. If seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB approval of the information collection, explain the reasons that display would be inappropriate.

We will display the OMB control number and expiration date on appropriate materials.

18. Certification.

There are no exceptions to the certification statement.

10