0338 Ss 071911

SUPPORTING STATEMENT
IMPLANTATION AND RECOVERY OF ARCHIVAL TAGS
OMB CONTROL NO. 0648-0338

A.

JUSTIFICATION

1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary.
The purpose of the collection of this information is to help comply with the Atlantic Tunas
Convention Act of 1975 (ATCA, 16 U.S.C. 971), the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation
and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act, 16 U.S.C. 1812), and Federal regulations at
50 CFR § 635. ATCA authorizes the promulgation of regulations to implement
recommendations adopted by the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic
Tunas (ICCAT) and collect information to support these recommendations. Atlantic Highly
Migratory Species (HMS), such as tuna, shark, swordfish, and billfish, are also managed under
the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, which gives National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) the authority to conduct and promote fisheries research, and requires that the United
States (U.S.) cooperate with those international organizations involved in the conservation of
HMS.
As a member of ICCAT, the U.S. takes part in the collection of HMS biological statistics for
research purposes. The collection of information through the U.S. HMS archival tagging
program provides essential stock assessment information for international and domestic fishery
management. The tagging program has provided and continues to provide vital information
regarding the movement and life history of bluefin tuna and billfish.
Archival tags are miniature data loggers that record the movements, geoposition, and behavior of
individually tagged highly migratory species. The tags are returned to the agency by fishermen
after a tagged fish is captured in a commercial or recreational fishery. Data from recovered tags
is used to ascertain HMS life history information such as migratory patterns and spawning site
fidelity. This information is vital for international and U.S. management of HMS fisheries. For
example, data obtained from this tagging program is valuable for research related to bluefin tuna
stock composition, movements, and identification of western bluefin tuna spawning areas.
Bluefin management has been based on a two stock hypothesis (with spawning occurring in two
discrete locations in the Mediterranean and Gulf of Mexico); however, additional information
collected through tags may help provide a better understanding of migratory patterns and
spawning site fidelity for bluefin tuna. Data from the archival tagging program will continue to
be useful for scientists and managers concerned with bluefin tuna.
This extension request covers two reporting requirements associated with the archival tag
program. Current regulations (50 CFR§635.33) allow fishermen to retain any HMS with an
archival tag implanted or attached without regard to season or size limits, under the condition
that the fisherman report the landing along with certain information about the catch, and make
the fish available to NMFS for recovery of the tag.
1

Regulations also require that researchers using archival tags for Atlantic tunas, swordfish, or
billfish submit an application for an Exempted Fishing Permit (EFP) or Scientific Research
Permit (SRP) that provides details concerning the research objectives, the type and number of
tags used, the species and approximate size of the tagged fish, and the location and method of
capture of the tagged fish. Receipt of an EFP or SRP confers Agency authorization of the
research activity and requires scientists to submit interim and annual reports that provide
additional information on tagged fish, among other requirements.
2. Explain how, by whom, how frequently, and for what purpose the information will be
used.
As described above, there are two sets of reporting requirements. The information provided by
HMS fishermen will include the archival tag, location of capture, and captured fish. This
information will be used to analyze fish movements to better understand the life history of the
tagged fish.
The information provided by researchers will include notification of project initiation, goals of
the research, and a summary of project results. This information is needed to assist the agency in
assessing the effectiveness of archival tag research and the impact of regulatory allowances for
tag recovery, and to ensure that archival tag research does not lead to undue mortality.
It is anticipated that the information collected will be disseminated to the public directly or used
to support publicly disseminated information such as stock assessments or peer-reviewed
scientific literature. As explained in the preceding paragraphs, the information gathered has
utility. NMFS will retain control over the information and safeguard it from improper access,
modification, and destruction, consistent with Agency standards for confidentiality, privacy, and
electronic information. See response to Question 10 of this Supporting Statement for more
information on confidentiality and privacy. The information collection is designed to yield data
that meet all applicable information quality guidelines. Prior to dissemination, the information
will be subjected to quality control measures and a pre-dissemination review pursuant to Section
515 of Public Law 106-55.
3. Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information involves the use of
automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological techniques or other forms of
information technology.
Archival tags have been specifically designed for use on fish, sea turtles, and marine mammals.
The archival tag stores environmental and behavioral data. Software provides graphical
representation of all the data. Tags currently on the market weigh 25g in air, have up to one
megabyte of memory, can retain data for 20 years, and have a lifetime of four to five years.
Archival tag information can be reported to the Southeast Fisheries Science Center by calling a
toll-free number (800) 437-3936, or by contacting: National Marine Fisheries Service, Highly
Migratory Species, 1315 East West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Scientists’ notification
and reporting forms, downloadable and fillable, are available at
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms/Linkpages/reporting_forms.htm
and may be submitted via email to: [email protected].
2

4. Describe efforts to identify duplication.
Reports submitted to NMFS from researchers planning an archival tagging program for HMS
will provide for coordination of tagging programs in order to ensure that duplication of tagging
programs is minimized. Given the expense of this research, relatively few parties will be
involved and a high level of coordination with the researchers will be maintained, which will
provide an avenue to avoid any duplication of reporting requirements within NOAA. Other
reporting within NOAA that could be required of researchers includes grant reports (if a NOAA
grant is issued) or interim and final exempted fishing permit reports. If these other reports
contain the necessary information and are available in the timeframe required under 50
CFR'635.33, they may be submitted to satisfy the reporting requirements approved under this
collection.
5. If the collection of information involves small businesses or other small entities, describe
the methods used to minimize burden.
There will be no significant impact on small businesses or entities.
6. Describe the consequences to the Federal program or policy activities if the collection is
not conducted or is conducted less frequently.
The tagging program could not be conducted without the reporting requirements, since collecting
tag returns is an integral part of a tagging program. If the tagging program were not conducted,
domestic and international management of HMS would be compromised, and could be rendered
ineffective because of the lack of necessary life history information.
7. Explain any special circumstances that require the collection to be conducted in a
manner inconsistent with OMB guidelines.
The collection is consistent with the guidelines.
8. Provide information on the PRA Federal Register Notice that solicited public comments
on the information collection prior to this submission. Summarize the public comments
received in response to that notice and describe the actions taken by the agency in response
to those comments. Describe the 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.
A Federal Register Notice published on January 26, 2011 (76 FR 4634) solicited public comment
on this renewal. No comments were received.

3

9. Explain any decisions to provide payments or gifts to respondents, other than
remuneration of contractors or grantees.
A $500 reward is offered by NOAA for recovery of one of their archival tags. Rewards will not
be provided for non-NOAA archival tags that are retrieved. Given the high cost of each tag and
tag deployment, a reward to encourage recovery of the tags is warranted. Rewards in
conventional tagging programs are common and have been found to enhance recovery numbers.
The high value of an individual giant tuna on the export market (thousands of dollars) also calls
for a reward as an incentive for reporting and providing the fish for sampling. Finally, tags may
be recovered by fishermen outside the waters of the United States in the eastern Atlantic or the
Mediterranean Sea, and a reward increases the likelihood that they will report.
10. Describe any assurance or confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for
assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy.
As stated on the forms, information submitted will be treated as confidential under the provisions
of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Management and Conservation Act and NOAA Administrative
Order 216-100.
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.
No sensitive questions are asked.
12. Provide an estimate in hours of the burden of the collection of information.
Approximately 25 tags are recovered and reported per year. The estimated time for reporting on
the fish is 30 minutes, which includes the time for making a toll-free call, making arrangements
for the fish to be examined by a fishery biologist or to remove the tag, and processing fish
samples as instructed. The burden for tag recovery is therefore:
25 respondents x 1 response x 30 minutes = 12.5 (13) hours
The total number of persons implanting archival tags is estimated at 10 researchers, each
providing a written notification (EFP application) and a three written reports (two interim reports
and one annual report).
10 respondents x 1 notification x 40 minutes/notification = 6.7 (7) hours
10 respondents x 2 interim reports x 1 hour/report = 20 hours
10 respondents x 1 annual report x 40 minutes/report = 6.7 (7) hours
Collection totals are 35 respondents, 65 responses, and 47 hours.

4

13. Provide an estimate of the total annual cost burden to the respondents or recordkeepers resulting from the collection (excluding the value of the burden hours in Question
12 above.
There are no costs for those recovering tags because the phone call is toll-free, NMFS pays for
postage for returning the tag, and a reward is given. Researchers implanting archival tags are not
required to pay for paper and postage costs associated with submitting notifications and reports
because these can be submitted electronically.
14. Provide estimates of annualized cost to the Federal government.
The cost of the NOAA Archival Tagging Program is approximately $1 million in research grants
over a 3-year period. About 75 tags (25 per year) will be returned over the 3 years, with a
reward of $500 a tag, for a cost of $37,500. The total Federal cost for 3 years is therefore
approximately $1,037,500, or $345,833 a year. The Federal government is not responsible for
costs associated with research involving deployment of archival tags being conducted by
universities or other entities.
15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments.
Adjustments:
The changes in total annual burden hours are adjustments reflecting a re-estimation of the
numbers of respondents and responses.
Due to the scientists all now emailing their reports, there are no more postage costs.
16. For collections whose results will be published, outline the plans for tabulation and
publication.
The data obtained may be used in reports and articles, which may be published.
17. If seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB approval of the
information collection, explain the reasons why display would be inappropriate.
Not Applicable.
18. Explain each exception to the certification statement.
No exceptions are requested.

B. COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL METHODS
This collection will not employ statistical methods.
5