Our Understanding of How Trout Anglers Differ in Their Valuations Between Wild and Hatchery Trout
New collection (Request for a new OMB Control Number)
No
Regular
09/30/2024
table that charts list comparision
Requested
Previously Approved
36 Months From Approved
1,200
0
300
0
0
0
The Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 (16 U.S.C. 742(a)-754) establishes a comprehensive national fish and wildlife policy and authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to take steps required for the development, management, advancement, conservation, and protection of fisheries resources and wildlife resources through research, acquisition of refuge lands, development of existing facilities, and other means. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), working with others, is responsible for conserving, protecting, and enhancing fish and wildlife and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people through federal programs relating to migratory birds, endangered species, interjurisdictional fish and marine mammals, and inland sport fisheries.
Pursuant to this mission, the Service acts as a trustee for injured natural resources when oil or hazardous substances are spilled or released into the environment. Through data collected scientific assessment techniques and extrapolated through economic analyses, trustees seek to identify the natural resources injured from oil or hazardous substances, determine the extent of the injuries, recover damages from those responsible, and plan and carry out restoration activities. The primary benefit of the Serviceâs Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Response (NRDAR) Program is to achieve restoration of injured resources for the benefit of the American people, and at no cost. This program seeks compensation from responsible parties to restore natural resources for all and allows all Americans to enjoy clean and safe public rivers and lands.
One aspect of the NRDAR program relates to releases of oil or hazardous substances that result in the loss of wild trout populations. Often when wild trout populations are killed or injured during a release event, one remedy includes using hatchery trout to replace wild trout populations. The potential problem with this approach is that there is substantial anecdotal evidence that trout anglers view and value catching wild trout and hatchery trout differently. If anglers value wild trout lost in a spill or release more highly than hatchery trout then they may not have been made fully whole by a restoration action that substitutes hatchery trout for wild trout. An examination of existing trout angler valuation studies found that in the majority of cases, no distinction was made between hatchery and wild trout in eliciting angler preferences. This collection proposes a random survey of licensed anglers designed to elicit data sufficient to estimate any differences in preferences and values associated with fishing for wild vs. hatchery trout. The data generated through the proposed information collection will provide theoretically sound and statistically defensible estimates of angler experience values for use in gauging required compensation levels for lost or injured trout resources. For the current collection, state licensed angler populations from three states are included, focusing on three distinct trout fishing regions of the US.
Legal and administrative justifications for this collection can be found under 43 CFR Part 11, Natural Resource Damage Assessments through the authority of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended, 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq., and the Clean Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. 1251-1376, which gives federal agencies authority to assess damages to natural resources resulting from a release of a hazardous substance or a discharge of oil covered under CERCLA or the CWA and to seek recovery for those damages.
On behalf of this Federal agency, I certify that the collection of information encompassed by this request complies with 5 CFR 1320.9 and the related provisions of 5 CFR 1320.8(b)(3).
The following is a summary of the topics, regarding the proposed collection of information, that the certification covers:
(i) Why the information is being collected;
(ii) Use of information;
(iii) Burden estimate;
(iv) Nature of response (voluntary, required for a benefit, or mandatory);
(v) Nature and extent of confidentiality; and
(vi) Need to display currently valid OMB control number;
If you are unable to certify compliance with any of these provisions, identify the item by leaving the box unchecked and explain the reason in the Supporting Statement.