WCSF SS Part B 011317

SUPPORTING STATEMENT

WEST COAST SALTWATER FISHING SURVEY

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 population of interest for this survey is all adult anglers who have fished for finfish in the saltwater off the coast of Washington, Oregon, and California in a preceding 12 month period. The sample frame consists of recreational fishing license databases maintained and held by the states of Washington, Oregon, and California. Our initial estimate of the size of this universe is 1,403 thousand anglers overall; 964 thousand in California, 233 thousand in Washington, and 206 thousand in Oregon. Our estimate of the population size will be revised through this process, as we get refined estimates of the percentages of each license type that are used to fish in saltwater in the three states. Our expected response rates are based on prior economic surveys conducted by NOAA Fisheries. Note that the numbers in the table below are not annualized. In order to calculate annualized numbers to match the format of question A12, these numbers would need to be divided by three.

State	Universe	Total Contacted	Total Completed Mail/Web Surveys Saltwater Anglers	Total Completed Mail / Web Surveys Non-saltwater Anglers	Total Completed Phone Screening Surveys	Response Rate among Eligible Anglers
Washington	233,000	2,400	505	422	369	43%
Oregon	206,000	3,300	323	876	507	43%
California	964,000	5,600	906	1,197	860	43%
Total	1,403,000	11,300	1,734	2,495	1,736	43%

We will sample from the licensing databases where the license type allows for use in saltwater. Washington licenses that meet this criterion include (1) annual saltwater, (2), annual combination fishing and shellfishing, and (3) one-, two-, and three-day combination fishing and shellfishing. Oregon licenses that meet this criterion include (1) annual angling, (2) combination angling and hunting, (3) sports pac, (4) senior angling, (5) senior combination, (6) pioneer combination, and (7) all combinations of one- two- and three-day angling. California licenses that meet this criterion include (1) an annual fishing license; (2) or 1-Day, 2-Day, or 10-Day fishing licenses. 

The sample will be split between a pretest, resulting in 200 completes across the three states (see response to B4), and the subsequent full survey administration.

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.

We will use simple random sampling from the licensing databases managed by the three states. The total sample size allocation will be split into four individual samples: Washington, Oregon, Southern California, and Northern California. California will be split into Southern and Northern sub-samples to be able to address the regional differences in the Southern California and Northern California fisheries.

Data collected through this survey will be used for the estimation of an economic model intended to support ongoing recreational fishing policy making on the West Coast. While more accurate data are clearly preferred, standards do not exist regarding the accuracy of data required for estimation of an econometric model. Factors such as the minimization of model specification error also contribute to the quality of the empirical results obtained using survey data. It is not possible to state a level of accuracy that is required for all uses and applications of data collected by this survey.

In order to reduce the time cost of reporting, as well as the financial cost to the federal government, we intend to collect similar data no more than every five years.

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.

The information collection will attempt to maximize response rates by following the suggestions of Dillman (Dillman, D.A., J.D. Smyth, and L.M. Christian. 2009. Internet, Mail, and Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Tailor Design Method. Wiley, New York.). In particular, the repeated contacts through multiple mediums (email, phone, and mail) attempt to increase the percentage of sampled anglers who are reached by one or more contacts as well as to allow flexibility with regard to how the respondents choose to respond. Both of these factors are intended to maximize response rates.

Unit nonresponse will be examined through two comparisons. First, we will compare respondent demographics with the demographics available in the license databases. Second, we will compare the answers from the brief telephone screening survey to answers from the full online and mail surveys. The results of these comparisons will inform the potential benefit of applying weights to address any observed differences.

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.

We will conduct a formal pretest of the survey using all of the protocols that will be used in the final survey. The pretest will consist of 200 completed surveys. The purpose of the pretest is to determine whether the survey instrument provides the data needed, as well as to test survey procedures and protocol. If the survey needs revision, we will submit the revised instruments as part of a non-substantive change request.

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.

Leif Anderson (co-P.I.)

Northwest Fisheries Science Center

2725 Montlake Blvd. East

Seattle, WA 98112-2097

Phone: 206-302-2403

James Hilger (co-P.I.)

Southwest Fisheries Science Center

8901 La Jolla Shores Drive

La Jolla, CA 92037-1508 

Phone: 858-546-7140