1018-0023 Supporting Statement A

Supporting Statement A for

Paperwork Reduction Act Submission

OMB Control Number 1018-0023

Migratory Bird Harvest Surveys

Terms of Clearance: None.

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

Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program: Under 50 CFR 20.20, migratory bird hunters must register for the Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program (HIP) in each State in which they hunt each year. State natural resource agencies must send names and addresses of all migratory bird hunters to the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service (we, Service). We send surveys to selected hunters to estimate the magnitude and composition of migratory bird species harvest.

Migratory Bird Hunter Survey and Parts Collection Survey: Under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-711), the Department of the Interior is designated as a key agency responsible for the wise management of migratory bird populations frequenting the United States and for the setting of hunting regulations that allow appropriate harvests of magnitudes that will allow for the populations' well-being. These responsibilities dictate the gathering of accurate data on various characteristics of migratory bird harvests of a temporal and geographic nature. The Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 (16 U.S.C. 742a-742j) authorizes collection of such information as is necessary to determine the status of wildlife resources, which is necessary to develop appropriate hunting regulations. Information required for effectively governing harvests of migratory birds includes not only knowledge of the harvest's magnitude, but also information of the species, age, and sex composition within that harvest, including the geographic and chronologic distribution of these components as they relate to various hunting regulations.

Sandhill Crane Harvest Survey: The cooperative management guidelines for mid-continent sandhill cranes (included are three currently recognized subspecies: lesser, Grus canadensis canadensis; Canadian, G. c. rowani; and greater, G. c. tabida) are aimed at providing optimum diverse recreational opportunity consistent with the welfare of the species and within the provisions of international treaties and socio-economic constraints. Beginning in 1960 and continuing to date, hunting seasons have been allowed for sandhill cranes in Alaska and all or part of eight Midwestern States (Colorado, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming) during specified time periods. In addition, a sandhill crane hunting season has been allowed in Kansas since 1993. Prior to the initiation of the sandhill crane harvest questionnaire in 1975, little information was available on the number of individuals who annually hunt sandhill cranes or the number of cranes harvested. This lack of information was a major void in management of the species. Annual crane hunter activity and harvest information were readily available for Canada through uniform nationwide surveys conducted by the Canadian Federal Government. Lack of comparable information from the United States precluded ascertaining the total annual hunter harvest from this migratory bird resource shared by the two countries.

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.

Data are collected via various survey forms that are specific to the type of information being collected (e.g., mail survey form for Migratory Bird Hunter Survey, envelope for Parts Collection Survey). Data are collected by State natural resource agencies (Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Migratory Bird Hunter Survey, Parts Collection Survey, and Sandhill Crane Harvest Survey). All data are collected each year, because there is a reasonable expectation of significant changes in key statistics between collections. This is because: (1) hunters change addresses over time; and (2) hunter success is dependent upon bird populations and migration chronology, which can vary from year to year depending on weather and habitat conditions. Information collected is used by both Federal and State authorities to monitor the effects of various hunting regulations on the harvest of individual migratory bird species. The information has been particularly useful in evaluating the effects of changes in daily bag limits, hunting season length, and hunting season dates on harvest. Information obtained also gives the Service a great deal of insight into the status of the many species involved. If this information were not collected, our ability to promulgate regulations allowing controlled hunting of migratory birds would be greatly weakened. Agencies participating in determining appropriate hunting regulations, and making use of survey results, include the Department of the Interior, the Canadian Wildlife Service, State conservation agencies, and various private conservation organizations. Additionally, researchers often use these data to investigate biological phenomena such as range expansion, migration chronology, and species presence/absence.

Annual reports are made available on the Division of Migratory Bird Management’s (DMBM) website http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/NewReportsPublications/HIP/hip.htm. Promulgation of annual hunting regulations by the Service relies on a well-defined process of monitoring data collection and scientific assessment. At key points during that process, Flyway technical committees, Flyway Councils (State agencies), consultants, and the public (and in some instances international regulatory agencies) review and provide valuable input on data collection and technical assessments. All assessments pertaining to the setting of annual harvest regulations are deemed “highly influential”; however, they are exempt from strict application of IQA peer-review guidelines due to the compressed time schedule associated with the regulatory process. Therefore, peer-review plans for technical assessments which influence annual hunting regulations decisions are not posted on the DMBM webpage. The DMBM has a long-history of subjecting applicable portions of such technical assessments to formal peer-review through submission to scientific journals, or other means, in addition to the review received as part of the annual regulatory process. Information from each survey contributes towards a national program to monitor the harvest of all migratory game bird species in the United States.

The Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program was developed by the State natural resource agencies and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to allow each State to provide annual lists of all migratory bird hunters licensed by the State. Included with the name and address are ancillary information that allows us to stratify the sample, investigate sources of bias, calculate bias correction factors, and identify duplicate records. Each State collects the information in a way that is most appropriate for that State, but all States ask some variation of the following questions that are appropriate in that State:

1. Will you hunt migratory birds this year?

2. How many ducks did you bag last year?

3. How many geese did you bag last year?

4. How many doves did you bag last year?

5. How many woodcock did you bag last year?

6. Did you hunt coots or snipe last year?

7. Did you hunt rails or gallinules last year?

8. Will you hunt sandhill cranes this year?

9. Will you hunt band-tailed pigeons this year?

10. Will you hunt brant this year?

11. Did you hunt sea ducks last year?

Because the distributions of these birds vary across the country and hunters vary in terms of what species they choose to hunt, the answers to these questions allow us to increase the efficiency of sampling by allowing us to concentrate sampling effort on the most appropriate hunters in each State.

The Migratory Bird Hunter Survey is based on the sample frame provided by the Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program. Randomly selected migratory bird hunters are sent one of the following forms and asked to report their harvest of those species: a waterfowl questionnaire (form 3-2056J), a dove and band-tailed pigeon questionnaire (form 3-2056K), a woodcock questionnaire (form 3-2056L), or a snipe, rail, gallinule, and coot questionnaire (form 3-2056M). The resulting estimates of harvest per hunter are combined with the complete list of migratory bird hunters, which serves as the expansion factor to provide estimates of the total harvest of those species or species groups.

On survey forms 3-2056J - M, we ask hunters to identify the following information:

• Whether or not they hunted (waterfowl [form 3-2056J]; doves and/or band-tailed pigeons [form 3-2056K]; woodcock [form 3-2056L]; or snipe, rails, gallinules and/or coots [form 3-2056M]) this season. We need this information to estimate the number of active hunters of that species or species group. If they did hunt those species, we ask for:

  • Month and day of hunt, because this provides information on the temporal distribution of the harvest that enables us to evaluate the effects of hunting season dates on harvest;

  • County and State of hunt, because this enables us to estimate the geographic distribution of the harvest;

  • Number of birds bagged, because this provides us with information on daily hunting success that enables us to evaluate the impacts of daily bag limits on harvest; and

  • Season totals (days hunted, birds bagged, and birds knocked down but not retrieved), because this allows people who do not record their daily hunts to still provide us with data that enable us to estimate total days of hunting, total harvest, and mortality due to crippling loss.

The Parts Collection Surveys are used to estimate the species, sex, and age composition of the harvest, and the geographic and temporal distribution of the harvest. Randomly selected successful hunters who responded to the Migratory Bird Hunter Survey the previous year are asked to complete and return a postcard (form 3-165A [waterfowl], form 3-165C [woodcock, band-tailed pigeon, rail, gallinule], or 3-165D [mourning dove]) if they are willing to participate in the Parts Collection Surveys. Those who answer “Yes” are also asked to report approximately how many birds they harvest in an average season. We need this information to determine how many forms 3-165, 3-165B, or 3-165E to send each participant at the beginning of the hunting season.

Respondents to forms 3-165A, 3-165C, and 3-165D are provided postage-paid envelopes before the hunting season and asked to send in a wing or the tail feathers from each duck or goose (form 3-165) they harvest, a wing from each woodcock, band-tailed pigeon, rail, or gallinule (form 3-165B) they harvest, or a wing from each dove (form 3-165D) they harvest. Dove managers are interested in estimates of local recruitment, so dove wings are requested from only the first 2 hunts during the first week of the dove season, to limit the sample to local birds. The wings and tail feathers are used to identify the species, age, and sex of the harvested sample.

Respondents are also asked to report on the envelope:

• Hunter name, to allow identification of the hunter if the barcode sticker is damaged or destroyed;

• Location (State, county and nearest town) the bird was harvested, because this enables us to estimate the geographic distribution of the harvest of each species (nearest town enables us to identify county if county was unknown);

• Month and day the bird was harvested, because this provides information on the temporal distribution of the harvest of each species that enables us to evaluate the effects of hunting season dates on species-specific harvest;

• Time of day the bird was harvested (form 3-165 only), because some States restrict shooting hours and this information enables us to evaluate the effects of those restrictions on harvest; and

• The band number of any leg-banded bird, because this enables us to estimate band reporting rates (form 3-165 only, because only waterfowl are banded in significant numbers).

The Sandhill Crane Harvest Survey is used to annually estimate the magnitude, geographical distribution, and temporal distribution of the sandhill crane harvest in Alaska, Colorado, Kansas, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming. It has also been possible for us to estimate the portion of the sandhill crane’s total population that is taken during harvest. This information has been particularly useful in determining the effects on harvests of daily bag limits and changes in hunting dates and the areas (counties) of States open to hunting. Based on information from the U.S. and Canadian surveys, hunting regulations can be adjusted as needed to optimize harvest at levels that provide a maximum of hunting recreation while keeping populations at desired levels.

On survey form 3-2056N, we ask hunters to identify the following information:

• Whether or not they hunted sandhill cranes this season. We need this information to estimate the number of active crane hunters.

• If they did hunt cranes, we ask for:

  • Month and day of hunt, because this provides information on the temporal distribution of the harvest that enables us to evaluate the effects of hunting season dates on harvest;

  • County and State of hunt, because this enables us to estimate the geographic distribution of the harvest;

  • Number of birds bagged, because this provides us with information on daily hunting success that enables us to evaluate the impacts of daily bag limits on harvest; and

  • Season totals (days hunted, birds bagged, and birds knocked down but not retrieved), because this allows people who do not record their daily hunts to still provide us with data that enable us to estimate total days of hunting, total harvest, and mortality due to crippling loss.

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.].

Of the total number of burden hours, most (126,910 hours) are responses to the Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program. These data are collected by the State wildlife agencies, who in turn forward the responses (hunters’ names and addresses) to the Service for use in national harvest surveys. On average, we receive the name and addresses of about 3,800,000 migratory bird hunters. Approximately 3,600,000 were collected electronically by the States in 2008, either online (through electronic licensing systems) or by telephone. The remaining records were collected using paper forms. The proportion of electronic responses increases each year as more States implement electronic data collection methods. About 224,800 responses are from randomly selected migratory bird hunters who are asked to voluntarily participate in a season-long survey (84,200 responses) or to send in migratory bird wing/feather parts in envelopes provided by the Service (140,600 responses). We have to print paper survey forms for our initial contact with hunters, to ensure a representative sample because not all hunters have electronic mail addresses. We are working with our Information Technologies Branch to develop an online survey response platform to allow hunters to respond to our season-long survey over the internet or request more survey forms. Further development of these methods is dependent upon new sources of funding.

The envelopes (forms 3-165, 3-165B, 3-165E) for the migratory bird wing/feather parts are large and would not print out on most standard printers. Furthermore, we could not guarantee envelopes printed on personal printers would comply with U.S. Postal Service regulations, thus we do not anticipate putting those envelopes online. The burden currently placed on cooperators and the cost to the Federal government is thought to be at a minimum level consistent with the information required.

We do not print out paper copies of our reports for distribution. Annual reports are made available on the Division of Migratory Bird Management’s (DMBM) website http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/NewReportsPublications/HIP/hip.htm.

4. Describe efforts to identify duplication.

Many State wildlife agencies collect some information on migratory bird harvest within their State, and a number of State hunter surveys have been examined. State information is generally collected secondarily in harvest surveys of game other than migratory birds and is not adequate for Federal regulatory responsibilities because: (1) it is often insufficiently detailed or imprecise, or has weaknesses in sampling design that can result in bias; (2) comparable information is not available from all States because survey methodologies vary among States; (3) many State survey results are not available in time to be useful for promulgating regulations; and (4) some States do not conduct hunting surveys or maintain lists of hunter names and addresses. Some States eliminated migratory birds from their harvest surveys when we began conducting the Migratory Bird Hunter Survey; thus, duplication of effort between State and Federal surveys has been reduced since implementation of the Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program. We do not select a hunter for more than one survey each year. We have implemented computer algorithms to identify duplicate Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program registrations across all data files. We eliminate these duplicate records prior to drawing our sample, thus improving the efficiency of our survey while avoiding asking a single hunter to fill out more than one survey.

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

This collection does not significantly impact small entities. This information is only collected from individual migratory bird hunters and State agencies.

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 this information were not collected, our ability to promulgate regulations allowing controlled hunting of migratory game birds would be greatly weakened. The continued health of migratory bird populations demands that harvests be commensurate with population size and status. If these surveys were not conducted, the lack of accurate assessment of migratory bird harvests would dictate restrictive hunting regulations, which could result in lost hunting recreation.

Surveys need to be conducted annually because the number of birds harvested can change substantially between years. Harvests fluctuate with the size of the hunted and hunter population, as well as climatic conditions such as drought, flood, and extreme warm or cold temperatures. Annual harvest estimates are required to allow us to adequately measure these changes in harvest.

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 special circumstances that require the collection to be conducted 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 June 18, 2010, we published in the Federal Register (75 FR 34758) a notice soliciting public comment on this information collection for 60 days, ending August 17, 2010. We received one comment. This individual protested the entire migratory bird hunting regulations process, surveys and monitoring programs, and the killing of all migratory birds. Response: Our long-term objectives continue to include providing opportunities to harvest portions of certain migratory game bird populations and limit harvest to levels compatible with each population’s ability to maintain healthy, viable numbers. Our harvest surveys are an integral part of the Service’s monitoring programs which provide the information that we need to ensure harvest levels are commensurate with current status of migratory game bird populations and long-term population goals. We did not make any changes to our information collection as a result of this comment.

From March to May 2010, we contacted nine hunters who had participated in our surveys to ask them about the utility of our survey data and the accuracy of our time burden estimates. We contacted hunters via phone and email. All of the hunters said our the information collection is necessary, although one hunter suggested that it needed to be analyzed and presented differently to make it more useful for setting hunting regulations.

Four hunters said that the time we estimate it will take a hunter to fill out one of our survey forms was accurate; four said it might take a little less time; and one said it takes more time. Based on these responses, most of our estimates of time burden remain unchanged. However, we slightly increased the time for three of the forms (from 30 seconds to 1 minute) and decreased the completion time for the sandhill crane survey (from 5 minutes to 3.5 minutes)

Three hunters had suggestions for enhancing the quality, utility, and clarity of the information: two suggested changes to the way data are reported in our annual reports, and one thought it would be more cost effective if we asked the hunters how many envelopes they needed at the beginning of the each hunting season. Four hunters had suggestions for how we can lessen the burden on hunters. These included: not leaving hunters in the Parts Collection Survey for >1 year, making sure survey forms are sent to hunters before the hunting season begins, continue to allow hunters to fill out paper surveys (not force them to go online), and inform hunters of the utility of the information so they want to participate in the surveys. We have considered these suggestions at various times, and have concluded that they are not cost-effective (asking the hunters how many envelopes they needed at the beginning of the each hunting season), would result in unacceptably low sample sizes (having hunters in Parts Collection Survey for <1 year), or an area we are constantly trying to improve (making sure survey forms are sent to hunters before the hunting season begins).

NAMES OF CONTACTED HUNTERS

1. Garrod Andra, 314 South Milan Road, Milan, KS 67105, 620-435-6838

2. Min Huang, 59 Doubleday Road, Columbia, CT 06237, 860-228-3159

3. Graham Evans-Peters, 935 SW 13^th Street, Corvallis, OR, 97333

4. Len Riehl, 3740 Shyros Drive, Dayton, OH 45424-1813, 937-233-7534

5. Erich Burkentine, 18074 Redden Forest Drive, Georgetown, DE 19947, 302-856-2893

6. Bud Smith, 42026 NW Broadshire Lane, Banks, OR 97106, 503-324-8064

7. Jared Given, 3082 Rachael Lane, Hayes, VA 23072-3320, 804-832-7636

8. Doug Howell, 129 Country Club Drive, Edenton, NC 37923, 252-482-8765

9. Steve Cordts, 303 26^th St. NW, Bemidji, MN 56601, 218-308-2281

State and private survey specialists and biometricians have reviewed the procedures for the Migratory Bird Hunter Survey, including:

Donald A. Dillman, WA State University 509-335-1511

Stephen L. Sheriff, MO Department of Conservation 314-882-9880

Vernon L. Wright, LA State University 504-388-8303

Kenneth H. Pollock, NC State University 919-737-2535

Paul H. Geissler, US Geological Survey 970-226-9482

Additionally, meetings and workshops are held several times annually between Service and State personnel responsible for management of migratory birds, at which time problems and needs related to harvest surveys are discussed and acted upon. The Service has representatives to each of the four flyways (groups of States) to coordinate migratory bird management with State biologists. The representatives are:

Atlantic Flyway: Paul I. Padding 301-497-5851

Mississippi Flyway: James R. Kelley 612-713-5409

Central Flyway: David E. Sharp 303-275-2386

Pacific Flyway: Robert E. Trost 503-231-6162

The regulations setting process follows a well-established procedure that allows for the public to comment at many points. We issue a notice of intent in the Federal Register to hold 3 two-day meetings each year. Meetings are held in January, June, and July. These meetings are attended by State and Federal biologists and administrators, and a portion of each meeting is open to the public. Individuals may comment on the regulations-setting procedures at the public portions of these meetings, including the conduct of harvest surveys. Discussions at meetings and all supporting data (including harvest surveys data) are described in the Federal Register, and transcripts are available from the Division of Migratory Bird Management. The Service has provided information to the public at the Outdoor Writers Association of America and private conservation organizations such as Ducks Unlimited. Voluntary written comments and suggestions received from survey participants are noted and considered.

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

No payments or gifts are provided to respondents. As incentive, we provide participants in the Parts Collection Survey with a report at the end of the hunting season. This report lists the species, age, and sex of each wing that hunter submitted during the past hunting season.

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

Each hunter contacted receives an assurance that the survey is conducted in accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 USC 552a). Hunters are not asked to write their names on the questionnaires, and are assured that their names or identifications will not be associated with their questionnaires. A system of records, titled Migratory Bird Population and Harvest Surveys – Interior, FWS-26, was published in 46 FR 18378.

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.

There are no questions of a sensitive nature.

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

We estimate that we will receive 227,586 responses totaling 144,021 annual burden hours for this information collection. The total dollar value of the annual burden hours is approximately $5,493,421 (rounded). We used the Bureau of Labor Statistics news release USDL 10-1687, December 8, 2010, Employer Costs for Employee Compensation—September 2010 (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm), to estimate average hourly wages and calculate benefits.

• Individuals - We used the wage and salary costs for all workers from Table 1 ($20.69) and multiplied by 1.4 to calculate benefits, resulting in an hourly rate of $28.97.

• State Government - We used the wage and salary costs for all workers from Table 3 ($26.25) and multiplied by 1.5 to calculate benefits, resulting in an hourly rate of $39.38.

Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program: Although State licensing authorities collect the name and address information needed to provide a sample frame of all licensed migratory bird hunters, that information collection is required by Federal regulation. Therefore, the reporting burden associated with that information collection is reported here. The Service estimates that the 49 States will collect the required information from approximately 3,800,000 individuals annually. States are using a variety of methods to collect the required information, and the amount of time required for an individual respondent to provide the information varies from less than 1 minute to up to 4 minutes, depending upon the method employed by the State. We estimate that the overall average time per response is 2 minutes. The States then compile a list of migratory bird hunters in their State and send it to the Service. States send their first list of hunter names to the Service in August and continue to send updated entries at 2-week intervals until the end of the migratory bird hunting seasons in their State. The number of hunters on each list varies, depending on the time of year and the number of migratory bird hunters in the State. On average, the lists contain 5,540 records and we receive an average of 14 lists per State per year. Thus, the total annual burden estimate for the Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program is 126,910 hours.

The table below provides the number of responses, completion times, and total annual burden hours for each of the forms associated with the Migratory Bird Hunter Survey, Parts Collection Survey, and Sandhill Crane Harvest Survey.

COLLECTION TYPE/FORM NUMBER	NO. OF RESPONDENTS	NO. OF ANNUAL RESPONSES	AVG. BURDEN PER RESPONSE	TOTAL ANNUAL BURDEN HOURS	COST PER HOUR (INCLUDING BENEFITS)	TOTAL ANNUAL DOLLAR VALUE OF BURDEN HOURS
Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program	49	686	185 hours	126,910	$39.38	$4,997,715.80
Migratory Bird Hunter Survey
Form 3-2056J	37,100	37,100	5 minutes	3,092	$28.97	$89,575.24
Form 3-2056K	23,100	23,100	4 minutes	1,540	$28.97	$44,613.80
Form 3-2056L	11,700	11,700	4 minutes	780	$28.97	$22,596.60
Form 3-2056M	12,300	12,300	3 minutes	615	$28.97	$17,816.55
Subtotal	84,200	84,200		6,027	$28.97	$174,602.19
Parts Collection Survey
Form 3-165	6,500	117,000	5 minutes	9,750	$28.97	$282,457.50
Form 3-165A	6,000	6,000	1 minute	100	$28.97	$2,897.00
Form 3-165B	3,000	4,500	5 minutes	375	$28.97	$10,863.75
Form 3-165C	400	400	1 minute	7	$28.97	$202.79
Form 3-165D	2,600	2,600	1 minute	43	$28.97	$1,245.71
Form 3-165E	2,600	3,900	5 minutes	325	$28.97	$9,415.25
Subtotal	21,100	134,400		10,600	$28.97	$307,082.00
Sandhill Crane Harvest Survey
Form 3-2056N	8,300	8,300	3.5 minutes	484	$28.97	$14,021.48
TOTAL	113,649	227,586		144,021		$5,493,421.47

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

The survey is accompanied by a postage paid return envelope. There is no nonhour dollar cost burden to respondents. There is no fee for completing the survey or any other costs associated with responding to this survey.

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

We estimate the total annual cost to the Federal Government is $1,642,448 (rounded). We used the Office of Personnel Management’s Salary Table 2010-DCB to estimate hourly wages. To calculate benefits, we multiplied the hourly wage by 1.5 in accordance with Bureau of Labor Statistics news release USDL 10-1687, December 8, 2010, Employer Costs for Employee Compensation—September 2010 (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm).

Activity	Hours required	Cost/hour with benefits	Total cost of activity
Printing survey forms (contracted)	0	0	$232,000.00
Coordination with State agencies	120	$72.531	$8,703.60
Mail preparation and handling	2,500	$27.752	$69,375.00
Postage costs	0	0	$512,000.00
Data entry	10,250	$27.752	$284,437.50
Computer (hardware) costs and programming (includes cost of maintenance contracts for capital equipment, including a walk-in freezer, optical data scanners, character recognition software, high-volume printer, and automated mailing equipment)	3,500	$27.752	$97,125.00
Data analysis and report preparation	6,050	$72.531	$438,806.50
Total	22,380		$1,642,447.60

¹ Salary of GS-13/step 5 biologist of $48.35/hour * 1.5 benefits = $72.53/hour (rounded).

² Salary of GS-5/step 5 survey clerk of $18.50/hour * 1.5 benefits = $27.75/hour.

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

We are reporting 227,586 responses totaling 144,021 annual burden hours. This is an adjustment decrease of 200 responses and 50 burden hours from what is currently approved for this information collection. Based on our experience in administering this collection, we made minor adjustments in the number of respondents and completion times. We decreased the completion time for the sandhill crane survey to more accurately reflect the time it takes the average crane hunter to fill out the form based on the number of birds harvested. The original calculation did not include the lower hunting success of Alaskan crane hunters compared to mid-continent sandhill crane hunters.

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

Plans are to continue the Migratory Bird Harvest Surveys annually as long as migratory bird hunting seasons are open in the United States.

Schedule for Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program: The schedule for the Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program varies among States and is dependent upon the license structure used in that State. States have differing hunting license structures, including licenses that are valid from January 1-December 31, September 1-August 31, April 1 – March 31, and 365 days from date of purchase. These data are generally sent from August-February, but some States send data year-round. Migratory bird hunter names and addresses are received from the States, either in the form of electronic databases or on paper forms from which the data are compiled in a database.

Schedule for the Migratory Bird Hunter Survey

Sep-Feb Sampled migratory bird hunters are sent questionnaires asking them to keep track of their hunting trips throughout the hunting season and return the form when they have completed their hunting season.

Dec-Apr Following a staggered schedule based on the closing date of the hunting season in each State, sampled hunters who have not returned questionnaires are sent reminder letters and replacement questionnaire forms. Responses are accepted until the end of April.

Apr-May Response data are edited, compiled in a database, and analyzed.

Jun-Jul The report on nonwaterfowl species must be prepared and distributed by early June, in time for the public meeting on hunting regulations for those species and publication in the Federal Register and various status reports. The report on waterfowl must be prepared and distributed by early July, in time for the public meeting on waterfowl hunting regulations and publication in the Federal Register. The complete harvest report is distributed both internally and externally and made available on our website: http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/NewReportsPublications/HIP/hip.htm

Schedule for the Parts Collection Survey

Jun Postcards soliciting participation in the survey are mailed to the public from the Service in Laurel, Maryland. Respondents return the postcard to the Service in Laurel, Maryland. Names and addresses of respondents are compiled in a database.

Jul-Aug Employees prepare the parts envelopes for mailing.

Aug-Oct Because they must be in the possession of survey participants at the start of the hunting season, parts envelopes are sent to participants about 2 weeks before the hunting season begins in each State. Hunting seasons open as early as September 1 in many States, and as late as early November.

Sep-Mar Hunters mail parts to collection points in each Flyway throughout the hunting season, which continues to mid-March in some States.

Nov-May Federal and State biologists assemble at one of six collection points to identify the species, age, and sex of each part between late November and mid-March. Late arriving parts are sent to Laurel in early April and identified there. Parts are accepted until May.

Feb-May Completed data slips (form #s) are shipped to Laurel, where the data are compiled in a database. Data are analyzed in combination with information derived from the Migratory Bird Hunter Survey to generate species-specific estimates of harvest.

Jun-Jul The report on nonwaterfowl species must be prepared and distributed by early June, in time for the public meeting on hunting regulations for those species and publication in the Federal Register and various status reports. The report on waterfowl must be prepared and distributed by early July, in time for the public meeting on waterfowl hunting regulations and publication in the Federal Register. The complete harvest report is distributed both internally and externally and made available on our website. http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/NewReportsPublications/HIP/hip.htm

Schedule for Sandhill Crane Harvest Survey: In all States except Alaska, participating States issue permits to sandhill crane hunters in mid-July. Electronic or paper copies of issued permits (showing names and addresses of permittees) are sent to the Division of Migratory Bird Management, Laurel, Maryland, following the end of the crane hunting season in each State. Upon receipt of name and address cards, computer records of each name/address are produced, hunters are selected, and surveys are mailed. These questionnaires are mailed to permittees approximately 2 weeks after the close of the respective hunting seasons. A follow-up questionnaire is mailed to nonrespondents approximately 1 month later. In recent years, the latest crane season has closed in early February. Thus distribution of follow-up forms is completed in early April and the analysis of data commences about early May. The sample frame for the estimating sandhill crane harvest from Alaska is provided from the Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program. Survey procedures are the same as for the other States, except that the survey can be sent out before the close of the sandhill crane hunting season because of earlier receipt of sample frame information. An annual report is available by August on our website: http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/NewReportsPublications/HIP/hip.htm

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 the survey forms.

18. Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in Item 19, "Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions," of OMB Form 83-I.

There are no exceptions to the certification statement.

13