1004-0NEW Recreation Survey Supporting Statement A 10.12.21 OMB

30-day Federal Register and Version

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION

Supporting Statement PART A

Surveys and Focus Groups to Support Outcomes-Focused Management (RECREATION SURVEY and Focused Groups)

OMB Control Number 1004-0NEW

Terms of Clearance. Not applicable. This is a new information collection request.

Abstract: Information will be collected from visitors of public lands and community members near public lands. Information gathered from visitors and local community residents will be used to inform planning decisions in support of BLM’s Planning for Recreation and Visitor Services Handbook H-8320-1.

JUSTIFICATION

1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary. Identify any legal or administrative requirements that necessitate the collection.

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) manages over 245 million acres of public lands, mostly in the 12 western states, including Alaska. Although there is a rich history of livestock grazing, mineral development and wildlife management, recreation has become an increasingly important component in public land management. Extremely diverse types of recreational activities have grown in popularity, e.g., E-biking, drone flying, geocaching, BASE jumping, making managing recreation in a multiple use context even more challenging. Additionally, the proximity of public lands to the expanding urban centers of the west makes working closely with adjacent communities essential.

In the last several decades, there has been a growing recognition of how recreation contributes to quality of life, economy, society, and environment. These are generally referred to as beneficial outcomes. The BLM has developed an outcomes-focused management (OFM) framework that recognizes and manages for identified positive outcomes gained from engaging in recreational experiences. An individual’s ability to obtain specific recreational outcomes is highly dependent on the presence of the physical, social, and operational recreation setting characteristics that support those outcomes. In order to incorporate outcomes-focused management into recreation planning, it is critical to understand the relationship between outcomes, recreation settings, actions, and decisions. Surveys and focus groups are needed to provide valuable input from visitors and local community residents in order to develop management objectives and planning decisions for Resource Management Areas (RMA).

The Planning for Recreation and Visitor Services Handbook was developed to provide guidance in the planning and management of recreation and visitor services on public lands and adjacent waters. This handbook provides an OFM framework and planning guidance at the land use plan (LUP) and implementation level. This handbook also supports the policies in BLM Manual 8320, “Planning for Recreation and Visitor Services,” and related program guidance in BLM Handbook H-1601-1, “Land Use Planning.” Data are needed to implement OFM; the data resulting from the surveys and focus groups outlined in this Information Collection Request will assist BLM managers in fulfilling the protocols specified in these handbooks and manuals.

The legal authority relevant to recreation management as highlighted in the above manuals and handbooks includes:

Subchapters I and II of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) (43 U.S.C. 1701-1723) provide the authority for the BLM land use planning process. Section 102(a)(7) and (8) (43 U.S.C. 1701(a)(7) and (8)) state that the policy of the United States is to plan and manage public lands for multiple uses and sustained yield. Among the objectives listed are to protect the quality of scenic values and provide for outdoor recreation.

Sec. 201 (43 U.S.C. 1711) requires the Secretary of the Interior to prepare and maintain an inventory of the public lands and their resource and other values including outdoor recreation and scenic values. In order to determine these values, data from both visitors and local communities must be gathered. This data will help inform the planning process, determine the supply and demand of recreation and scenic resources, and aid in the analysis of impacts from other land uses.

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347) requires the consideration and public availability of information regarding the environmental impacts of major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. This includes the consideration of alternatives and mitigation of impacts. The data acquired from the surveys and focus groups will aid in the analysis of potential impacts to recreation resources and meet the requirements set forth in the NEPA.

In addition to complying with these federal regulations and policy, the survey and focus group methodology will help support the new national BLM recreation strategy entitled “Connecting with Communities.”  This strategy calls for outreach and consultation with communities adjacent to BLM-managed public lands in the process of outdoor recreation planning and management. This information can be used to support BLM efforts to increase equity in the use of lands they manage and to enable better access for underserved communities, thereby aiding BLM implementation of Executive Order 13985, Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government.

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 information will be collected through two mediums: pre/post LUP surveys of visitors to BLM-managed lands, and focus groups with residents of communities near the BLM-managed lands. BLM field offices will be selected to administer a visitor survey based on one of two conditions: 1) a forthcoming LUP in which Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMA) might be considered (e.g., high visitation, unique recreation opportunities, and unique natural features); or 2) to monitor achievement of LUP objectives in completed LUPs or other planning documents.

BLM field offices will be selected to administer a focus group based on one of three conditions: 1) a forthcoming LUP in which SRMAs might be considered (e.g., high visitation, unique recreation opportunities, and unique natural features); or 2) a recently completed LUP in which SRMAs were designated; or 3) in support of efforts to engage local communities and stakeholders in recreational planning and management consistent with the BLM national recreation strategy – “Connecting with Communities.”

To gather the data, the BLM will partner with a network of researchers and consultants throughout the United States. To ensure the outlined procedures are adhered to, a lead institution will serve as the main point of contact for the BLM and will assist in coordinating the researchers and consultants. The selected field office will work with the lead institution to define pressing management issues. The lead institution will then remove questions/responses from the OMB approved master survey and focus group script that are not relevant. The lead institution will also develop a sampling plan that follows question 2, Supporting Statement B. Content and length of the survey will vary depending on whether information is being gathered prior to the development of a Resource Management Plan (RMP) or after the RMP to monitor conditions. The resulting surveys and focus group scripts will meet the time specifications highlighted in question 12, Supporting Statement A. The field office, following sampling protocol specified by the lead institution, will contract with local university researchers and utilize students, volunteer groups, campground hosts, and field staff to administer the surveys. The focus groups will be administered by a facilitator trained by the lead institution. The data will be sent back to the lead institution for analysis and reporting.

There are 113 BLM field offices across 12 western states and 2 field offices in the eastern United States. In any given year up to 5 field offices would conduct pre-RMP surveys and focus groups and 1 field office would conduct a post-RMP survey.

The surveys and focus groups will provide BLM managers with information to:

1) Identify on-site experiences and long-term outcomes (e.g., improved health, improved family bonding, and economic diversity) desired and attained by visitors, local residents, and other relevant local stakeholders.

2) Identify communities not currently served by the recreational benefits of the lands, and through consultation with those communities, identify and improve understanding of specific barriers to use of the lands. This will aid the BLM’s implementation of Executive Order 13985, Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government.

3) Determine the field office’s ability to respond to identified recreational issues and opportunities and understand the relationships among desirable and attained outcomes, activities, setting characteristics, and service delivery systems (within BLM-administered and other public lands as well as those provided by local communities) which those outcomes and activities depend on.

4) Develop LUPs that ensure visitor services and facilities are appropriate to provide desired experiences, settings, and longer-term outcomes.

5) Monitor progress towards meeting objectives put forth in the LUP.

6) Prepare and maintain a continuing inventory of outdoor recreation values, kept current so as to reflect changing conditions and identify new and emerging values.

The relationship of the survey and focus group questions to the above information objectives are as follows.

Survey

On-site survey

The pre-RMP on-site survey contains thirteen questions; the post-RMP survey will contain a subset of those questions. The onsite survey is the tool used to gather information from a randomly selected visitors on select topics to inform recreation planning for beneficial outcomes. Due the randomization, it will provide a measure of general visitor characteristics. The onsite survey is also used to identify visitors interested in participating in the follow-up internet/mail survey. The data from the onsite survey serves as a baseline to assess, and correct through weighting if needed, the representation of the follow-up surveys.

Question (s)	Purpose
1, 7	Understand group size and composition. This information will allow better understanding of how on-site experiences and longer-term outcomes relate to visitors.
2	Measure the proportion of visitors on primary vs. incidental trips to the BLM-managed area.
3, 4, 5, 6	Measures activities visitors plan to participate in, specific areas they plan to visit, as well as their main activity and primary destination. This information helps identify recreation needs.
8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13	Respondent’s zip code, race, ethnicity, , gender, and age. , gender, race, and ethnicity. This information provides demographic information, which contributes to a better understanding of recreational users and helps identify underserved communities.

Follow-up survey

The pre-RMP follow-up internet/mail survey will consist of approximately 25 questions. The master survey included in this submission contains more than 25 questions. The lead institution, working with each field office, will delete the questions that are not relevant to the specific survey site or area planning issues. The lead institution will also work with the field office to refine specific survey response options, e.g., the number of zones and names of zones (Q 4), the list of activities (Q 8), and the list of recreation features activities being evaluated (Q21). Before administration of the survey, the field office and lead institution will pilot test the survey to ensure it can be completed within 20 minutes. The post-RMP monitoring survey will focus on specific conditions specified in the RMP and will be of a length that could be completed in approximately 6 minutes. The follow-up internet/mail survey will consist of up to seven sections.

Section 1: Trip planning and accommodations

This set of questions will provide information to help understand general characteristics of the respondents’ visits.

Question(s)	Purpose
1	Measures whether the visitor is on a primary or incidental trip to the BLM-managed area.
2	Assesses the types of accommodations used, and their location.
3	Documents where visitors receive trip information and whether it was useful.

Section 2: Trip behavior and past experience

This set of questions provides detailed information regarding specific areas the respondents visited and their activities, as well as their experience and skill level in their primary activity. In general this set of questions provides information to understand how the recreational visitors might relate to the area being managed. This will help to inform what types of visitor services and facilities will meet recreation demand.

Question(s)	Purpose
4	Measures the specific areas (i.e., zones) respondents visited.
5	Identifies the zone that was the primary destination of the visit.
6, 7	Assesses visitors’ experience with the site.
8	Assesses activity participation.
9	Quantifies the activity of primary participation.
10, 11, 12	Measures respondents’ specialization in their primary activity.
13	Obtains information on facility use and visitation to specific attractions.
14	Assesses whether there is unmet demand for activities.

Section 3: Trip experiences and benefits

This section assesses visitors’ satisfaction with their primary destination and measures their desired on-site experiences and post-trip beneficial outcomes. Their level of attainment of those experiences and outcomes is also measured. This information is a key component of the BLM’s recreation management as it forms the basis for appropriate services and facilities.

Question(s)	Purpose
15, 16	Measures visitors’ overall satisfaction within their primary destination zone and factors that contributed to satisfaction.
17	Identifies the experiences visitors sought during their visit, and their attainment of those experiences.
18	Identifies longer lasting personal benefits visitors sought as an outcome of their visit, and their attainment of those benefits.
19	Identifies longer lasting household benefits visitors sought as an outcome of their visit, and their household’s attainment of those benefits.
20	Identifies community, environmental, and economic benefits visitors feel are important as a result of the recreation and tourism taking place at the site being studied, and their perception of the local communities’ attainment of those benefits.

Section 4: Preferences concerning recreation settings, facilities, and management

This set of questions provides information to establish a link between the experiences and outcomes desired and the specific recreation services and facilities that will best allow visitors to realize those experiences and outcomes.

Question(s)	Purpose
21	Assesses visitors’ preferences for management at the site.
22	Measures visitors’ perception of quality of specific services/facilities. The resulting information will provide direction as to which services/facilities need to be improved.

Section 5: Encounters and expectations

The number of other visitors encountered can have an impact on visitors’ experiences. Thus, encounters with other visitors and evaluation of those encounters are often monitored in recreation plans. This set of questions measures visitors’ number of and evaluation of encounters.

Question(s)	Purpose
23	Measures to what extent visitors felt crowded and the impacts of encounters.
24	Provides an estimate of the number of groups encountered.
25	Establishes a comparison between groups encountered and expectations.

Section 6: Overall trip characteristics and evaluation

This section measures variables associated with the overall trip visitors took to the BLM-managed lands. These variables include visitors’ spending associated with their recreation trip (to allow for economic impact analysis), factors that contribute to overall visit satisfaction, future visitation intentions, and management suggestions.

Question(s)	Purpose
26	Measures visitors’ spending in specific expenditure categories to allow use in an input-output model.
27	Measures visitor’s acceptability of recreation use fees.
28	Measures factors that contributed visitors’ satisfaction during the entire trip to the BLM-managed lands.
29	Provides a broad measure of future visitation intentions. In conjunction with questions regarding previous visitation, it will help managers understand the composition of visitation patterns.
30	Allows respondents to provide input on items, such as suggestions for improvements and/or enhancements, not included in questions 21 or 22.

Section 7: Respondent characteristics

This section will provide information to understand the demographic and geographic composition of recreation visitors and to monitor objectives related to social issues (e.g., ensuring racial and ethnic equity).

Question(s)	Purpose
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36	Measures demographic information: gender, age, education, ethnicity, race, income, and household size.
37	Measures respondents’ and group members’ zip codes.

Focus Groups

The master focus group question set includes questions that can be used for three different management situations (recreational needs assessment; recreational evaluation and monitoring; and evaluating local community attitudes toward recreation management). The questions for all three management situations will gather information on select topics important to the recreation planning and evaluating process. Not all questions are appropriate for each type of management situation. It is critical the BLM matches the purpose of the question to the management situation. In addition to the purpose listed in the accompanying guide (e.g., needs assessment vs. evaluation and monitoring), the BLM must ensure the questions are appropriate to the salient concerns of the focus group participants. A guide is provided in this submission to accompany the focus group and survey materials available to BLM field offices engaging in the data collection.

The focus group will consist of approximately 12-15 questions. The master focus group question set included in this submission contains 64 questions to select from. The Lead institution, working with each field office, will delete the questions that are not relevant to the site for which the focus group is being conducted. Before administration of the focus group session, the selected focus group questions will be pilot tested to ensure they can be completed within 90 minutes. The focus group script will consist of up to nine sections.

Section 1: Participant Affiliation with Landscape

This set of questions will provide information to help understand the general characteristics of the focus group composition and their connection to the landscape. This information will help researchers to better understand the recreational user or character of local communities.

Question	Purpose
1	Measures participants’ Zip code. This is used to gauge the geographic distribution of focus group participants and for understanding the differences in recreational preferences based on proximity to landscape.
2	Measures participants’ primary association with the landscape. This is useful for understanding differences in recreational demands based on differing relationships to the landscape.
3	Measures the participants’ length of connection to the landscape. This is useful for understanding differences in recreational preferences based on length of time participant has encountered the landscape.

Section 2: Management

This set of questions provides information about participants’ attitudes toward recreational management actions in a particular area. Though focus groups are not intended to be a representative sample of the public, due to self-selection bias and the need for small group sizes, they can highlight a range of attitudes present in the larger population. This information includes preferences for management priorities, the impact of different designations on their preferences and expectations of particular landscapes, and the role in planning and management of various public and private entities. These questions are helpful for determining the impact of management actions in particular areas. They are also helpful in determining opportunities for partnerships in planning and management with local government and community stakeholders, including tribes and underserved communities. This is a goal outlined in recent BLM recreation strategy documents such as “Connecting with Communities” and “Planning 2.0 process.”

Question	Purpose
4, 7	Identifies participants’ preferences for recreational management priorities on a particular landscape.
5, 6	Identifies the impact of particular administrative boundaries (e.g., state land, tribal land) and landscape designations (e.g., Wilderness Study Area) on recreational expectations and outcomes.
8	Assess the role and opportunities for collaboration in planning and management with various stakeholders, including nearby tribes and underserved communities, according to participants' preferences.

Section 3: Location

This set of questions will provide information to help understand specific locations in the planning area of particular interest to the participants, and give specific location context to their responses throughout the focus group. These questions are necessary for managers to identify locations at which management decisions can best respond to recreational demands and preferences. Each question identifies those locations in a different way, as indicated in the table below. It is unlikely that a focus group would select more than one or two ways of determining the location context of the participants’ preferences.

Question	Purpose
9	Identifies location using a list of area landscapes and attractions. Participants select from a predefined list. This allows for analysis based on defined locations of interest.
10	Identifies location using recreation zones predetermined by management based on planning decisions. This allows for analysis of locations based on planning process needs.
11	Identifies location using maps allowing for participants to identify places that matter the most to them without the constraint of pre-determined categories. This is particularly useful in determining what areas need to be the foci of planning.

Section 4: Special Places – Settings

This set of questions provides information about the setting characteristics of the identified location that are desirable or undesirable to the participants. This information is a key component of BLM’s recreation management as it forms the basis for appropriate services and facilities. The open ended questions will allow participants to identify these characteristics in their own words, while the list questions will allow participants to select from a pre-determined set of options that allow for comparability of results and standardization of coding responses.

Question	Purpose
12, 13	Provides information on what setting characteristics participants prefer in a particular location.
14, 15	Provides information on what setting characteristics participants believe will diminish the experiences and outcomes they desire in a particular location.

Section 5: Change

This set of questions will provide information on the perceived change to recreational settings in particular locations, and information about participants’ reaction to those perceived changes. This information is important to the on-going evaluation and monitoring process of recreation management.

Question	Purpose
16	Provides information on participants’ perceptions of the level of change at a particular location over a set period of time.
17	Assesses participants’ reaction to perceived change.

Section 6: Outcomes, Interests, and Expectations

This set of questions assesses participants’ satisfaction with a particular location and measures their desired on-site experiences and beneficial outcomes of recreation by themselves or others. Their ability to attain those experiences and outcomes is also measured. This information is a key component of the BLM’s recreation management as it forms the basis for appropriate services and facilities.

Question	Purpose
18, 19	Provides information on the overall interests and expectations participants have for a particular landscape. This is useful for determining the broad perception and expectation for recreational management objectives for that landscape.
20, 21	Assesses whether the current management conditions met participant’s expectations. This information is useful in the evaluation and monitoring process.
22, 23, 24, 25	Identifies the experiences visitors sought during their visit, and their attainment of those experiences.
26	Identifies longer lasting personal benefits visitors sought as an outcome of their visit, and their attainment of those benefits.
27	Identifies longer lasting household benefits visitors sought as an outcome of their visit, and their household’s attainment of those benefits.
28	Identifies community, environmental, and economic benefits visitors feel are important as a result of the recreation and tourism taking place at the site being studied, and their perception of the local communities’ attainment of those benefits.

Section 7: Activities

This set of questions provides detailed information regarding specific activities that are important to participants. In general this set of questions provides information to understand how the recreational visitors and local communities might relate to recreational activities in the area being managed. This will help to inform what types of visitor services and facilities will meet recreation demand.

Question	Purpose
29	Assesses demand for activities and actual activity participation.

Section 8: Services

This set of questions provides detailed information about the recreational support services present in local communities and beyond that are essential to achieve beneficial outcomes and experiences that are important to participants. This information will help managers identify those services that are important to participants and where those services are located. This is important to inform dialogue with local communities and develop partnerships to successfully manage recreational objectives on public lands.

Question	Purpose
30	Documents where the participants receive information about a particular landscape in the management area.
31	Documents what support services the participants depend on regarding recreation in the management area.
32	Identifies the location of those support services. This is useful for continued engagement with local communities, particularly as it relates to the economic benefit of public lands recreation in their area.
33	Identifies any support services that might be missing in local area.

Section 9: Community Vision

This set of questions is designed to assess the impact of recreation and other public land management actions on local communities. These questions are only used in the focus groups populated by local residents in close proximity to the BLM lands in the management area, generally as part of the Planning 2.0 effort that accompanies Resource Management Plan Development. This information is vital to the planning process by offering a better understanding of the perceptions and attitudes of local “gateway” communities to BLM public lands. This will help to inform what types of recreational outcomes and activities, visitor services, and facilities will be compatible with local communities’ preferences for the landscape.

Question	Purpose
34	Provides information on the characteristics of local communities that are of value to those communities’ identity.
35	Assess the role of proximate public lands on the values identified as important to community character.
36, 37	Identifies BLM planning and management actions that could benefit or harm the communities’ values and vision for the future.

Section 10: Barriers or Constraints to Recreational Use of Land.

This set of questions provides information on broader recreation patterns of community residents and reasons community members might not visit the area in question, or might not visit as often as they’d like. These questions will help the BLM understand ways in the which the community might be better served. These questions are only used in the focus groups populated by local residents in close proximity to the BLM lands in the management area. While the questions are applicable to a wide range of demographic groups, they are particularly relevant to underserved communities. The resulting information will assist the BLM in meeting Executive Order 13985, Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government.

Question	Purpose
38, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44, 46	Measure focus group participant’s general recreation patterns, including location of desired activities and expectations regarding engaging in outdoor recreation. This is important in understanding what types of recreation is desired by community members.
41	Assess cultural connections to the land. This provides insight into how focus group participants might desire to use BLM land and how management actions might impact that use.
45	Identifies activities for which there might be demand, but adequate opportunities might not be available. This highlights potential ways the BLM might better serve communities.
47	Measures the sources of information focus group participants use when planning for outdoor recreation. This allows to BLM to understand how to reach potential visitors.
48, 49, 50	Identifies barriers that prevent focus group participants from engaging in outdoor recreation or using outdoor spaces, including on BLM land. This can identify specific actions the BLM might take to better serve the community.
51, 54	Measures focus group participant’s perception of equity and ways to improve any deficiencies. This allows the BLM to understand how the community might be better served.
52, 53	Provides information on how public lands positively or negatively impact the community. This allows the BLM to understand how management actions might impact the community.
55	Allows for community specific issue or concern to be addressed.

Section 11. Demographics

This section of questions assesses the demographics of participants. The questions are not intended to assess representation of any particular population, nor generalize results. Rather the questions are intended to assess which demographic groups are participating in the focus groups and which groups are not participating. This can provide feedback on focus group recruitment methods. The information has potential to understand differences in recreation preference based on membership in specific social classes or groups, including those from underserved communities. The resulting information will assist the BLM in meeting Executive Order 13985, Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government.

Question	Purpose
56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62	Measures demographic information: gender, age, education, ethnicity, race, income. Allows an assessment of demographic groups that are participating in the focus group and demographic groups that are not participating. This information can also be used to understand differences in recreational preferences based on membership in specific social classes or groups, including those from underserved communities.
63	Measures household size. This information can be combined with income to determine whether participant is below or above poverty status.
64	Measures participants zip code, if a similar question has not been included. This allows an assessment of the focus group participant’s proximity to BLM lands.

Regarding the Information Quality Guidelines, reports that detail survey and focus group methodology, for each site where a survey or focus group is conducted, will be posted to a central website and made available to anyone who requests a copy. The website will be maintained by the lead institution. This will ensure transparency and the ability to replicate as specified in the DOI Information Quality Guidelines. Reports detailing methods for focus groups will also be posted online and made available, however statistical generalization, and thus replication, is not the goal of a focus group.

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.].

At some sites the onsite information might be entered into a tablet computer. In those situations, use of the tablet will be by the person gathering the information, not the survey respondent.

An invitation to take the follow-up survey will be offered to all respondents at the end of their on-site interview. They may elect to complete the follow-up survey via an online internet-base survey or a mail-based paper survey. If they elect to take the internet version, they will be directed to an electronic survey research site and provided with access (via email invitation or access codes) to complete their survey online. The responses from both the online and paper survey questions will be combined and compiled into an electronic database. This combined data will form a comprehensive data file for subsequent analysis. Names of individuals will not be directly linked to surveys, and the list of participant names will be destroyed when data collection is complete. Thus, all survey responses will remain private. The option of online or paper survey submission will allow the respondent to select the method that minimizes the burden.

At some sites, QR codes printed on posters might be used as a method to distribute the survey. Thus, these surveys would mainly be completed online, though contact information for requesting a paper survey would also be supplied.

The focus group information will be recorded in a variety of ways. Responses to open-ended questions will be recorded on presentation flip charts or a document projected for all participants to view. Additionally, it is recommended that an audio recording be made of the entire focus group. We will check with the BLM Privacy Officer to ensure recordings are in compliance with the Privacy Act. The recording will provide a reference to analysts and users of the data outside of the focus group, as well as provide a reliability check for notes taken on flip charts or projected document. All data will be recorded anonymously and no effort will be made to match specific responses to specific individuals. If the question involves a pre-determined list of responses that participants choose from, those responses can be recorded on a separate handout given to each participant with the choices identified on the handout. The data will be transferred to an electronic database for analysis. Other means of recording such questions could include audience polling technology in which each participant enters their selections on a hand-held polling device or specifically designed app on their electronic communication device. The results would be recorded electronically in a database for further analysis. The methods selected are designed to minimize the burden on participants.

4. Describe efforts to identify duplication. Show specifically why any similar information already available cannot be used or modified for use for the purposes described in Item 2 above.

The survey population is specific to visitors to BLM-managed lands and the survey gathers information about their visit. The population for the focus groups is individuals and people representing entities affected by decisions on BLM-managed lands, with topics of the focus group related to a specific BLM management area. Thus, there is not an existing data source. The intent of this information collection is to ensure an efficient means for BLM to gather without duplication of data it requires for recreation management.

Study results will be available for use by other Federal agencies, state and local agencies, university researchers, and other organizations (private consulting firms, NGOs, etc.). To the extent resulting data can meet other needs, it will reduce duplication.

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

We will collect information only from individuals.

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.

As highlighted in question 1, Federal regulation and policy require the BLM to provide the opportunity for public input, inventory resource values, incorporate those values into management plans, and to monitor the effectiveness of those management plans. In addition, BLM has instituted specific recreation management requirements. Without this information collection, it will be difficult for BLM to meet these requirements.

Surveys and focus group material have been designed to gather the necessary information with the minimal possible burden to public.

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.

Information will be collected in a manner consistent with OMB guidelines. However, survey administrators will request the on-site survey be completed when the visitors are contacted. As specified in the Dillman Tailored Design Method¹, to increase the response rate respondents who agree to complete the follow-up survey will be sent reminder emails/postcards after one week and a second survey after two weeks. While this will prompt them to reply in fewer than 30 days, it will increase response rate and minimize recall error.

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.]

Consultation with representatives of those from whom information is to be obtained or those who must compile records should occur at least once every three years — even if the collection of information activity is the same as in prior periods. There may be circumstances that may preclude consultation in a specific situation. These circumstances should be explained.

On July 14, 2015 (80 FR 41056), the BLM published a notice in the Federal Register announcing their intent to seek OMB approval for this survey (80 FR 41056). Through that notice, we solicited comments for 60 days, ending on September 14, 2015. In addition, we contacted and consulted with nine relevant clubs/groups across three western states, representing motorized and non-motorized recreational activities, and conservation organizations.

One comment was received in response to the Federal Register notice. The comment inquired as to composition of the stakeholders that would be involved in the focus groups. The commenter was concerned the included stakeholders might be slanted towards consumptive users. The commenter also desired a list of partners.

The BLM’s response is as follows. Effort will be made to recruit a balanced group of stakeholders to the focus groups. In no way is it intended to limit participation to only one group. The term “partners” was used as a generic term to describe organizations that would be made aware of the focus groups. The term was not intended to imply there was a formal agreement, rather that the organization has some involvement with BLM-managed land, i.e., a community’s visitor center that provides maps of BLM-managed mountain bike trails, a local chamber of commerce whose businesses rely on BLM visitors, etc. These “partners” will vary by location and no specific list of partners exists.

The survey and focus group materials have been developed by the following individuals external to the BLM. Those three individuals have extensive experience in conducting either recreational visitor surveys or focus groups related to public lands management.

Dr. Randy Virden, Professor Emeritus (founding School Director and Professor of Outdoor Recreation), School of Community Resources and Development, Arizona State University

• Experience: PhD in Recreation Resource Management (Forestry Resources) from Utah State University; expertise focuses on the application of social science knowledge to public lands, parks and protected area management, leisure and tourism behavior, visitor management, community-based planning and nature-based tourism; designed and conducted 15 visitor and stakeholder focus group studies for BLM in six states over the past 25 years. Former outdoor recreation instructor for the recreation short course at the BLM National Training center.

• Role in project: Review previous studies/surveys related to recreation management and specifically management of BLM lands, design survey instruments.

Dr. T. Timothy Casey, Professor of Political Science, Colorado Mesa University, Director, Natural Resources Center at CMU

• Experience: PhD in Political Science with an emphasis on Environmental Political Theory; teaches political theory and public policy classes including environmental politics and policy; designed and conducted 13 focus group studies at federal, state and county level on outdoor recreation utilizing 124 focus group meetings; designed and conducted training for BLM-COSO on outdoor recreation focus group studies and data management.

• Role in project: Review previous studies/focus groups related to recreation management and specifically management of BLM lands, design focus group instruments.

Dr. Peter J Fix, Professor of Outdoor Recreation, Chair, Department of Natural Resource Management, University of Alaska Fairbanks

• Experience: PhD in Recreation Resources from Colorado State University; conducted 13 visitors surveys at 10 different sites in Alaska, and several general population studies; teaches outdoor recreation classes, including principles of outdoor recreation and survey research methods; 16 peer-reviewed journal articles related to recreation and/or natural resource management.

• Role in project: Review previous studies/surveys related to recreation management and specifically management of BLM lands, design survey instruments.

Peer Reviewer Comments and Actions Taken to Address Comments.

Dr. Joseph Little, Associate Professor and Director of the Master of Science in Resource and Applied Economics Program at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (current affiliation W.A. Franke College of Business, Northern Arizona University) has reviewed the survey and methods. His comments and actions taken to address are listed below.

Thought the questions were well-thought out. Should adequately measure experiences and benefits.

• No Change.

Questions asked in survey and focus group will meet objectives expressed in focus group.

• No Change.

Econ impact will adequately measure econ impact. With regard to specifying 50 miles (to compare to NVUM) vs. leaving open-ended, there might be some areas (e.g., NE AZ, 4-corners; southern NM & AZ; SW ID, SE OR, Northern NV) in which 50 miles might not be a large enough region.

• The economic impact question in the master survey was left as “within xx miles,” rather than requiring the question to only measure expenditures within 50 miles. This will allow the field office to specify the appropriate distance for their specific site. A note was added in the “Notes to Field Office” section to specify that 50 miles is the default value that should be used unless special circumstances (e.g., no services near site) require an increase in the radius.

Concerned the mail-back/internet survey could take longer than 20 minutes (6 minute for the post RMP survey) if not adequately cut in length from the master survey.

• The need to pilot test was emphasized in the instructions to BLM by adding the following sentence: “The survey must be piloted tested, with someone not familiar with the survey, prior to administration to ensure the survey can be completed in those time parameters.”

• The structure of working with a lead institution who clearly understands these requirements will allow the BLM to ensure each field office adheres to the specified time limits.

Mixed mode (internet mail), should work well. Many visitors should have internet access, but with the mail option we will get a representative sample. Combining results will not be an issue.

• No Change.

Question #7 on the mail-back/internet survey asks the respondent how often they visited in the past 5 years;, is 5 years too long (i.e., will the respondent be able to accurately recall)?

• Yes, this could definitely be an issue for high-use areas. Question 7 was changed to allow the time period to be customized to match site characteristics, and the following instructions added in the “Notes to BLM section.” “Questions 6 and 7 establish use history in the area. Use the combination of questions that best match the characteristics of your visiting population. For example, if use is infrequent in each year (e.g., used for hunting seasonally over many years) use question 6 and 7, but specify a time period of 5 years for question 7. If there is high repeat use within a year from a local community use questions 6 and 7 but specify 1 year for question 7.”

Focus group – if want to identify high use local be sure to include question 13.

• No change. The structure of the lead institution will ensure this comment is realized.

Should the “Gender” question be “sex” (i.e., “what is your sex?”)

• The question was changed to “What is your gender?” A gender question has also been added to the most recent master survey.

Furthermore, since the above notice was published in 2015, we published a second, more current 60-day Federal Register notice on June 28, 2021, soliciting additional comments on this collection of information (86 FR 34037). The comment period closed on August 27, 2021. No comments were received in response to this notice.

Additionally, as required by 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv), BLM published a notice in the Federal Register announcing the submission of this request to OMB and allowing the public 30 days to send comments on the proposed extension of this OMB number to OMB.

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

We will not provide payments 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.

Names and email or mailing addresses will only be collected for those participating in the follow-up survey. The following statement will be read to on-site survey respondents when they are asked for their contact information.

Your name and email (or name and address) will only be used to contact you for this study and will not be shared; your name will not be associated with your responses.

The following statement will be included on the actual internet/mail follow-up survey.

Your survey has an identification number so that we can keep track of distribution. All the information we collect will be used for our statistical purposes and at no time will your name be identified with any results. You are free to withdraw from the study at any time. Returning the survey will be considered as your consent to participate in the study. All results will be analyzed in such a way that your answers cannot be identified with you.

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. This justification should include the reasons why the agency considers the questions necessary, the specific uses to be made of the information, the explanation to be given to persons from whom the information is requested, and any steps to be taken to obtain their consent.

Neither the survey nor focus group will include questions of a sensitive nature.

12. Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information. The statement should:

* Indicate the number of respondents, frequency of response, annual hour burden, and an explanation of how the burden was estimated. Unless directed to do so, agencies should not conduct special surveys to obtain information on which to base hour burden estimates. Consultation with a sample (fewer than 10) of potential respondents is desirable. If the hour burden on respondents is expected to vary widely because of differences in activity, size, or complexity, show the range of estimated hour burden, and explain the reasons for the variance. Generally, estimates should not include burden hours for customary and usual business practices.

* If this request for approval covers more than one form, provide separate hour burden estimates for each form and aggregate the hour burdens.

* Provide estimates of annualized cost to respondents for the hour burdens for collections of information, identifying and using appropriate wage rate categories. The cost of contracting out or paying outside parties for information collection activities should not be included here.

We estimate 7,380 total responses, 2,108 hours, and 68,547 in wage costs.

Table 12-1, below, shows our estimate of the hourly cost burdens for respondents. This cost was determined using national Bureau of Labor Statistics data at: http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm. The benefits multiplier of 1.4 is supported by information at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf.

-Table 12-1: Hourly Cost Calculation

Position and Occupation Code	Mean Hourly Wage	Benefits Multiplier	Hourly Rate with Benefits
All Occupations -- 00-0000	$27.07	1.4	$37.90

Table 12-2, below, shows our estimates of the annual hour and hour-related cost burdens. The estimated hourly wage was calculated as shown in Table 12-1. The frequency of response for each of the information collections is “once.”

Table 12-2: Estimates of Annual Hour and Cost Burdens

Collection of Inforamtion1	Number of Respondents	Number of Responses	Time Per Response (Hours)	Annual Burden Hours	Total Wage Cost (Annual Hours x $37.90)
Pre-RMP on-site survey	3,635	3,635	.08	291	$11,029
Pre-RMP follow-up survey (mail / Internet)	1,890*	1,890	.33	624	$23,650
Post-RMP onsite survey	727	727	.02	15	$569
Post-RMP follow-up survey (mail / Internet)	378*	378	.10	38	$1,440
Focus group	750	750	1.5	1,125	$42,638
Totals:	5,112*	7,380	----	2,093	$79,326

• Respondents to the follow-up surveys are a subset of those who responded to the onsite surveys; therefore, the non-duplicated count of Respondents is 5,112.

13. Provide an estimate of the total annual non-hour cost burden to respondents or recordkeepers resulting from the collection of information. (Do not include the cost of any hour burden already reflected in item 12.)

* The cost estimate should be split into two components: (a) a total capital and start-up cost component (annualized over its expected useful life) and (b) a total operation and maintenance and purchase of services component. The estimates should take into account costs associated with generating, maintaining, and disclosing or providing the information (including filing fees paid for form processing). Include descriptions of methods used to estimate major cost factors including system and technology acquisition, expected useful life of capital equipment, the discount rate(s), and the time period over which costs will be incurred. Capital and start-up costs include, among other items, preparations for collecting information such as purchasing computers and software; monitoring, sampling, drilling and testing equipment; and record storage facilities.

* If cost estimates are expected to vary widely, agencies should present ranges of cost burdens and explain the reasons for the variance. The cost of purchasing or contracting out information collection services should be a part of this cost burden estimate. In developing cost burden estimates, agencies may consult with a sample of respondents (fewer than 10), utilize the 60-day pre-OMB submission public comment process and use existing economic or regulatory impact analysis associated with the rulemaking containing the information collection, as appropriate.

* Generally, estimates should not include purchases of equipment or services, or portions thereof, made: (1) prior to October 1, 1995, (2) to achieve regulatory compliance with requirements not associated with the information collection, (3) for reasons other than to provide information or keep records for the government, or (4) as part of customary and usual business or private practices.

There is no non-hour cost burden incurred by respondents as a result of this survey.

14. Provide estimates of annualized costs to the Federal Government. Also, provide a description of the method used to estimate cost, which should include quantification of hours, operational expenses (such as equipment, overhead, printing, and support staff), and any other expense that would not have been incurred without this collection of information.

The estimated total annualized federal costs are $211,106. That amount includes BLM staff time spent coordinating with the lead investigator and/or local university and contractor.

Estimated federal wage costs total $28,454, and are shown in Table 14-1, below. The estimates in Table 14-1 are based on data at: https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/salary-tables/pdf/2021/GS_h.pdf. The benefits multiplier of 1.6 is implied by information at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm.

The lead institution will design all surveys, process the data and produce reports for all surveys, in some cases gather the data onsite, and conduct focus groups. The contractor costs are shown in Table 14-2. The following costs are based on 6 sites per year (5 pre-RMP surveys and pre-RMP focus groups and 1 post-RMP survey).

Table 14-1: Federal Wage Costs

Federal Position and Pay Grade	Hourly Pay Rate	Benefits Multiplier	Hourly Rate with Benefits	Number of Hours (for 6 Sites)	Wage Costs
Technical, GS 7/1	$18.05	1.6	$28.88	630	$18,194
Technical, GS 11/1	$26.72	1.6	$42.75	240	$10,260
Total:	----	----	----	----	$28,454

Table 14-2 Costs Associated with Contractor

Labor Costs
Description	Cost
Salary for project PI (inc. benefits)	$46,379
Graduate Student support at PI’s institution	$14,465
Salary for project co-PI (inc. benefits)	$28,810
Student assistant at co-PI’s institution	$1,862
Consultant fees	$2,000
Subaward recipient PI at other universities (oversee data collection at specific sites, conduct focus groups, inc. benefits).	$11,200
Students at subaward recipient institutions (collect data)	$18,500
Subtotal:	$123,216
Project Commodities, Supplies, and Service Costs
Online survey software for internet follow-up surveys	$3,000
Web software, digital focus groups qualitative data analysis, etc.	$510
Surveys printed for field offices assumes 20% mail (on-site surveys, color zone map, 8-page follow-up, postcard, outgoing & return env. ~$300/site) x 6	$1,800
Postage (mail surveys, mailing material to field offices)	$4,640
Travel to collect data (inc. vehicle rental, mileage, per diem)	$22,560
Overhead	$26,926
Subtotal:	$59,436
Total Costs
Total lead institution annual costs:	$182,652

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

This is a new collection of information that is necessary to enable the BLM to plan appropriately for recreation, which has become an increasingly important component in public land management. Extremely diverse types of recreational activities have grown in popularity, making managing recreation in a multiple use context even more challenging. Additionally, the proximity of public lands to the expanding urban centers of the west makes working closely with adjacent communities essential. Since this is a new collection of information request, all the public burden associated with this survey is accounted for as a program change due to agency desecration.

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

Tabulation of results will be conducted by trained research assistants at the lead institution, with oversight provided by the overall lead researcher. The analysis will follow published guidelines for level of data and appropriate statistical analysis² (e.g., as outlined in Glass and Hopkins (1996) and Vaske (2008)). The methods and results will be detailed in site-specific project reports. The project reports will be posted to an Outcomes-Focused Management website maintained by the lead institution and project reports will be available to any member of the public. These steps will maintain transparency in methods utilized and results.

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 instruments and will also provide them to focus group participants. Additionally, the OMB number and expiration date will be available at www.reginfo.gov.

18. Certification.

There are no exceptions to the certification requirements of 5 CFR 1320.9.

###

1 Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Melani Christian, L. (2014). Internet, Phone, Mail, and Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method, 4^th ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

2 Glass, G. V. & Hopkins, K. D. (1996). Statistical methods in education and psychology. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.; Vaske, J. J. (2008). Survey research and analysis: Applications in parks, recreation and human dimensions. State College, PA: Venture Publishing.

1