GRNMS_SS_2-17-11 Part B

SUPPORTING STATEMENT
SOCIOECONOMICS OF USERS AND NON-USERS OF
GRAYS REEF NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY
OMB CONTROL No. 0648-xxxx
Revised 2-6-2011

U.S. Department of Commerce
National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration
National Ocean Service
Office of National Marine Sanctuaries
1305 East West Highway, SSMC4, 11th floor
Silver Spring, MD 20910
Contact: Dr. Vernon R. (Bob) Leeworthy
(301) 713-7261
Bob.Leeworthy@noaa.gov

1

Table of Contents
Page Number
Justification
Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary…………. 6
Explain how, by whom, how frequently and for what purpose the information
will be used……………………………………………………………………………… 6
How and Purpose: …………………………………………………………………… 7
Users of GRNMS via Private Household Boats…………………………………… 7
Section1: Opinions about Ocean & Coastal Resources Protection and Management. 8
Section 2: Attitudes about GRNMS Current Management Strategies and
Regulations……………………………………………………………… 10
Section 3: Sources of Information on Ocean & Coastal Resources and
GRNMS ………………………………………………………………… 10
Section 4: Status and Condition of the Resources in GRNMS .……..……………... 10
Section 5: Activities in Ocean & Coastal Areas in and around Georgia and in
GRNMS………………………………………………………………… 11
Section 6: Activity Specialization …………………………………………………. 12
Section 7: Ways Users Value Ocean & Coastal Resources/Marine Environment… 12
Section 8: Information about the User……………………………………………… 12
Non-users of GRNMS from Georgia’s General Population…………………………13
For-hire Recreational Diving Operations…………………….…………………… 13
Part 1: General Information, Economic Information, and Person-days and Trip
Costs…………………………………..…………………………………… 14
General Information:………………..………………………………………….. 14
Economic Information………………..………………………………………………. 14
Person-days and Trip Costs………………..…………………………………… 14
Part 2: Knowledge, Attitudes & Perceptions of Sanctuary Management Strategies
and Regulations……………………………………..……………………… 15
For-hire Recreational Fishing Operations…………………………………………. 15
Part 1: General Information, Economic Information, and Person-days and Trip
Costs……………………………………………………………………..… 15
General Information………………..…………………………………………… 15
Economic Information……………………..…………………………………………. 15
Person-days and Trip Costs……………………………………………………... 15
Part 2: Knowledge, Attitudes & Perceptions of Sanctuary Management Strategies
and Regulations 11…………………………………………………………. 16
By Whom………………………………………………………………………….. 16
How Frequently…………………………………………………………………… 16
How Collection Complies with NOAA Information Quality Guidelines………… 16
Utility………………………………………………………………………... 16
Integrity……………………………………………………………………… 17
Objectivity…………………………………………………………………… 17
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

2

information technology…………………………………………………………………. 17
Describe efforts to identify duplication…………………………………………………. 17
If the collection of information involves small businesses or other small entities, describe
the methods used to minimize burden……………………………………………………. 18
Describe the consequences to the Federal program or policy activities if the collection is
not conducted or conducted less frequently……………………………………………… 18
Explain any special circumstances that require the collection to be conducted in a manner
inconsistent with OMB guidelines……………………………………………………….. 19
PRA Federal Register Notification comments…………………………………………….19
Explain any decision to provide payments or gifts to respondents other than remuneration
of contractors or grantees………………………………………………………………….19
Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for
assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy…………………………………………19
Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual
behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and any other matters that are commonly
considered private……………………………………………………………………….. 20
Provide an estimate in hours of the burden of the collection of information……………..20
Provide an estimate of the total annual cost burden to the respondents or record-keepers
resulting from the collection (excluding the value of the burden hours)………………… 23
Provide estimates of annualized cost to the Federal government………………………... 23
Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments reported in Items
13 or 14 of OMB 83-I………………………………………………………………….. 23
For collections whose results will be published, outline the plans for tabulation and
publication……………………………………………………………………………… 23
If seeking approval to not display the expiration date fro OMB approval of the
information collection, explain the reasons why display would be inappropriate……..

24

Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in item 19 of the
OMB 83-I………………………………………………………………………………

24

3

Table of Contents (continued)
Page Number
Collections of Information Employing Statistical Methods…………………………….. 24
Describe (including a numerical estimate) the potential respondent universe and any
sampling or other respondent selection method used………………………………….

24

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 purposes 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……………………………………………….. 27
Describe the methods used to maximize response rates and to deal with non-response.. 30
Describe any tests of procedures or methods to be undertaken…………………………. 32
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..32
References…………………………………………………………………………………… 33

4

List of Tables
Table Number

Description

Page Number

1

Information and Survey Times for Different Versions of User
And Non User Surveys……………………………………………..

8

2

Burden Hours Calculations………………………………………… 22

3

Total Project Cost to the Federal Government…………………….. 23

4

Populations, Sample Sizes, and Expected Response Rates………… 26

5

Required Sample Sizes for Desired Precision of Estimates………… 30

5

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.
Users of GRNMS from Private Household Boats
The population was estimated at approximately 500 using satellite imagery and estimates of the
number of people per boat. About 500 users have been identified by the Georgia Department of
Natural Resources which randomly boards boats on random days through the year in GRNMS.
The boaters are not selected because they are violating any rules or regulations; they are
randomly selected. Boat registration number and name and address of the boat owner are
obtained. All in the sample list will be surveyed via a mail survey. The current sample list is
almost equal in number to the estimated population.
Non Users of GRNMS
For non users, the sample frame is the civilian non-institutionalized population of the U.S. living
in households that are 16 years old or older. Since we will obtain samples of households, we will
randomly select the respondent within the household who will answer the questions using the
birthday rule i.e. the person in the household who is 18 years of age or older who last celebrated
their birthday.
Our initial thoughts were to stratify the sample on the basis of the distribution of the civilian noninstitutionalized population living in households’ age 18 years old or older by coastal and noncoastal counties. NOAA has worked with the U.S. Bureau of the Census in developing
population by county for coastal and non-coastal counties. However, in our calculations for
desired precision and sample size requirements, we determined that we need to over-sample
coastal residents (see answer to Question 2 below). In addition, mailing lists are likely to be by
zip code, so we will do Geographic Information System GIS overlays of zip codes and counties
to get distributions between coastal and non-coastal counties and coastal and non-coastal zip
codes that come as closely as possible to the distributions by coastal and non coastal counties.
If 2010 Census data is not available by county and/or zip code before sampling begins, we will
use the 2009 Census data for the samples and then post weight the data for the coastal and noncoastal strata when the 2010 data is available. Post sampling weighting will also be required to
adjust for over-sampling coastal residents. Table 4 shows the estimates of the population of
coastal and non coastal Georgia, expected response rates, and the expected total number of
expected completed questionnaires by version of the survey. Table 5 shows the distribution by
coastal and non coastal strata. For each version of the survey, we will split the 500 samples
equally between coastal and non coastal residents of Georgia, which means we will over-sample
coastal residents of Georgia for purposes of estimation precision (see answer to Question 2

6

below).
For-hire Recreational Diving Operations
We have identified a population of 10 operations. This was done through previous survey efforts
conducted by Duke University and Savannah State University. We expect to get a 100%
response rate or a census. The representative for the dive industry on the GRNMS SAC has
assured us that all of their members are highly supportive of the effort and we should expect full
cooperation (Table 4).
For the For-hire Recreational Fishing Operations
We have identified a population of between 20 and 30 operations. This population is more fluid
and the numbers fluctuate. The current recession may affect this number of operations. We
identified these operations through NOAA Fisheries, telephone yellow book, web sites and
fishing magazines. Again, we expect to get a 80% to100% response rate or close to a census
(Table 4). The representatives for the recreational fishing industry have assured us that their
members are highly supportive of the effort and we should expect full cooperation.

7

Table 4. Populations, Sample Sizes, and Expected Response Rates
___________________________________________________________________
Survey
___________________________________________________________________
1. Users from Private Household Boats
a. Population
500
b. Samples
(1) Version 1
500
(2) Version 2
500
c. Expected Response Rates
d. Expected Completed Surveys/Version

40 -70 %1
200 - 350

2. Non Users of GRNMS
a. Population of Georgia 2008
(1) Coastal
(2) Non Coastal
b. Samples
(1) Version 1
(2) Version 2

Percent
2

c. Expected Response Rates
d. Expected Completed Surveys/Version

9,829,211
609,762
9,219,449
500
500
40 - 70 %1
200 - 350

3. Recreation For Hire Diving Operations
a. Population
b. Sample
c. Expected Response Rate
d. Expected Completed Surveys
4. Recreation For Hire Fishing Operations
a. Population
b. Sample

6.2
93.8

10
10
100%3
10

20 - 30
20 -30
4

85 - 100%
c. Expected Response Rate
d. Expected Completed Surveys
17 - 30
___________________________________________________________________
1. Based on experience with mail surveys of similar populations in consultation with the
late Robert Ditton of Texas A&M University.
2. There are 11 coastal counties in Georgia based on the State's Coastal Zone Management
Plan. See http://marineeconomics.noaa.gov/socioeconomics/welcome.html.
3. Based on experiences in the Florida Keys, Channel Islands, and Flower Gardens Bank
National Marine Sanctuaries.
4. Based on experiences in the Florida Keys and Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuaries.

8

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.
Users from Private Household Boats
a. Statistical methodology for stratification and sample selection
For those who access GRNMS via private household boat, we have identified 500 users through
the Georgia Department of Natural Resources which randomly boards boats on random days
through the year in GRNMS. The boaters are not selected because they were violating any rules
or regulations; they are randomly selected. Boat registration number and name and address of
the boat owner are obtained. We will use a mail survey following the Dillman Method of
sending a full survey, after two weeks those that have not responded will be sent a post card
reminder, and after one month non-respondents will be sent a full package. We will send out
surveys to all 500, and expect survey response rates will vary between 40 and 70 percent based
on past experience with the Dillman Method for a total completion of 200 to 350 completed
questionnaires (Table 4). Past experience with mail survey response rates is based on
consultations over a period of several years with the late Robert Ditton of Texas A & M
University. The response rates are based on the use of the full Dillman Method with
prenotification letters.
For calculating required sample size, a hypergeometric distribution was proposed, since
population size is small, as is the case for users of GRNMS (Morris, 2004). The equations for
the hypergeometric populations are shown below:
Hypergeometric

n = N z2 pq/(E2 (N-1) + z2 pq)

Where:
a. N is the population size
b. n is the required sample size
c. p and q are population proportions
d. z is the value of the confidence level needed for the confidence interval used
e. E is the confidence interval used (or margin or error)
In the case of population sampling based on population proportions, the values for p and q are
generally unknown, and thus are set equal to each other (0.5). The z value used is associated
with an alpha of 0.05 (or 95% confidence level), which is 1.96. Finally, the E value depends on
the confidence interval required (ex., where 5% = 0.05). See Table 5 for the calculations.
The population is considered as a single stratum, and stratifications are only considered at the
analysis stage (ex. age, education level, income bracket, etc.).
b. Estimation procedure

9

Because the population for users of GRNMS is already known, there is no need to estimate the
population. Our sample list is very close, if not equal, to the estimated population, so we are
sampling the entire population or close to it. We are assuming relatively high response rates
because users of GRNMS are highly committed to the site and want to be represented in
management decisions.
c. Degree of accuracy
Because the large sample sizes due to high response rates and sampling rates, we expect a high
degree of accuracy of estimated population parameters. The required sample sizes to achieve the
desired precision of estimates are presented in Table 5. To obtain the desired precision of
estimates at +/- 5 percent requires a sample size of 217. This is slightly more than what would
be achieved at the lower bound estimate for a response rate of 40%. The required response rate
is slightly higher at 43.4% to achieve the desired precision.
d. Unusual problems and the need to conduct periodic data collection cycles
Because of the burden hours required to obtain all the information desired, two versions of the
survey were designed. The data collection for each version will be a done over a two-year
period (two versions will be implemented to the same sample) periodic data collection cycle
issues are applicable to this project.
Non Users of GRNMS
a. Statistical methodology for stratification and sample selection
For non-users from the general population of Georgia, we originally intended to select a random
sample of 500 households in Georgia, stratified by the relative population in coastal and non
coastal counties for each of the two versions of the questionnaire (Table 4). However, the
calculations in Table 5 show that to achieve the desired level of precision of estimates for the
two strata (coastal and non coastal), we need to over-sample those who live in coastal counties.
So we will split the sample evenly between coastal and non coastal populations for each version
of the survey (N=250 coastal and N=250 non coastal). With expected response rates we will
achieve the desired precision for each stratum.
A mail survey will be used and all 500 will be sent questionnaires for each of the two samples.
Again we will follow the Dillman Method described above an expect response rate to vary
between 40 and 70 percent yielding between 200 and 350 completed questionnaires per version.
b. Estimation procedure
The population for non users of GRNMS is already known since it the total population of
Georgia minus the amount of users (N=500). This will be the estimate of the population for
extrapolating from sample to population of non users, non users will include most of the
population of Georgia The probability of sampling a user in our two 500 samples is very low,
almost zero for practical application.

10

Degree of accuracy
Table 5 shows the calculations of the sample sizes required for achieving the desired level of
precision in estimates. We use the information on Likert scale questions by Sclove (2001) for
assumptions about the distributions across the five scale scores for the mean and Sigma. We use
the equal proportion assumption (each response is equal to .2 of the distribution) with a mean
equal to 3.0 and Sigma equal to 1.41. To obtain the desired precision of estimates at +/- 5
percent requires a sample size of 13.
We require desired precision for two strata (coastal and non coastal). Following a simple
stratified random sample with N=500 for each version of the survey would only yield a sample
size of 12 for coastal and 188 for non coastal respondents. To ensure sample sizes that will
allow for achieving desired precision, we propose to over-sample coastal residents of Georgia
and then post weight the sample to the coastal-non coastal distribution. By splitting the samples
of 500 evenly between coastal and non coastal residents of Georgia and assuming a response rate
of 40% yields a sample of 100 completed questionnaires for each strata. If response rates go to
70%, then sample sizes increase to 175 per strata. This will also allow for assessments across
other groups for certain socioeconomic factors where mean scores might differ.
c. Unusual problems and the need to conduct periodic data collection cycles
We don’t expect any unusual problems and both samples for each version of the survey will be
implemented in year one, so there are no periodic data collection cycles. One problem with
Likert scale questions is that the variance is a function of the mean. So when testing for
differences in means between groups, we will have to adjust the variances. Sclove (2001)
recommends and arc sine square root transformation.
For the “for-hire” operations, we expect to get a census or close to a census for both groups. This
is based on past experiences in the Florida Keys, Channel Islands, and our current effort in the
Flower Gardens Bank National Marine Sanctuaries.

11

Table 5. Required Sample Sizes for Desired Precision of Estimates
________________________________________________________________________________
Survey
________________________________________________________________________________
1. Users from Private Household Boats
a. Desired Precision: +/- 5%
b. Population: 500 (Note: Sample approximately equal to population)
c. Population Proportions: p=.5 q=.5
d. Value of z for 95% Confidence Interval: z=1.96
e. Margin of Error: E=0.05
f. Required Sample Size 1: n=NZ2pq/E2(N-1) + Z2pq
n=217
g. Required Response Rate to achieve desired precision: 43.4%
2. Non Users of GRNMS
Using results from Sclove (2001) for Likert Scale, assuming equal proportions to each scale response,
results in a mean=3.0 and a Sigma value of 1.41.
a. Desired Precision: +/- 5% is equal to +/- 0.15
b. Sigma: 1.41
c. Required Sample Size for desired precison: n=Sigma2/.15 = 13.25
Two Strata for Sample Selection2:
(1) Population in Coastal Counties of Georgia (6.2%)
(2) Population in Non coastal Counties of Georgia (93.8%)
A. Stratified Random Sample: Total Sample Size/Version N=500
(1) Coastal Sample Size at 40% Response Rate: n=12
(2) Non Coastal Sample Size at 70% Response Rate: n=188
B. Over-sample Coastal: Total Sample Size/Version N=500
(1) Coastal Sample Size at 40% Response Rate: n=100
(2) Non Coastal Sample Size at 40% Response Rate: n=100
(3) Coastal Sample Size at 70% Response Rate: n=175
(4) Non Coastal Sample Size at 70% Response Rate: n=175
________________________________________________________________________________
1. See Morris (2004) for sample size determination for small populations.
2. There are 11 coastal counties in Georgia according to the Coastal Zone Management Plan for Georgia.
A NOAA web site has a list of counties that are coastal in Georgia. The U.S. Census Bureau web site
was used to get populations for all of Georgia and Georgia's coastal counties for year 2009.
See http://marineeconomics.noaa.gov/socioeconomics/welcome.html for coastal counties.

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.
For all our surveys, we will use pre-notification letters to increase response rates.
We have worked closely with the GRNMS Advisory Council in establishing relationships with
the for-hire operations that use the GRNMS and have surveyed most of them in the past. User

12

groups have requested the socioeconomic monitoring efforts in response to recent management
strategies (spear fishing prohibition and establishment of a research only area) to monitor the
extent of socioeconomic impacts and long-term changes in attitudes and perceptions of GRNMS
management strategies and regulations. Therefore, we expect generally vey high response rates
and don’t expect non-response bias.
For users accessing the GRNMS via private household boats and non-users from the general
Georgia population, we expect higher non-response. For users it will be difficult to detect nonresponse bias because we currently don’t know the characteristics of the population of users.
This will be the first attempt to survey this population, which is relatively small. For non-users,
we can compare Census data for Georgia on socioeconomic/demographic characteristics to
detect factors related to non-response and whether any of these factors are related to
measurements of estimation in the effort. We can also compare some of our general opinion
questions against those from Georgia in the “Ocean Project” survey to see if opinions on ocean
and coastal resource protection in our sample of Georgia residents are statistically different from
that obtained by the “Ocean Project” surveys. However, because the “Ocean Project” uses a 0 to
100 scale with a one number response, according to the research by Christian and Dillman
(2004) and in Stern et al (2007) the Likert scale versus the one number response will could have
significantly different distributions, thus eliminating the usefulness of this test. If we find nonresponse, we will develop sample weights to adjust for non-response bias.
For non-users, our approach has four steps. In step 1, we compare our sample to known
distributions. For non-users, we would compare our sample with the U.S. Census across
multiple demographic factors (e.g. sex, age, race/ethnicity, educational attainment, and
household income). We conduct formal statistical tests using the SAS Software, PROC FREQ
that supports testing the distributions between sample and Census distributions to identify
significant under or over representation.
In step 2, we relate the demographic factors to key parameters in the survey. We conduct both
non parametric univariate tests using the Kolgromov-Smirnoff test for the empirical distribution
function (edf) and multivariate tests using OLS, probit and logit functions relating response rates
to demographic and other key parameters for estimation.
In step 3, if we found statistically significant relationships between demographic factors and key
parameters of estimation for which demographic factors were under or over represented, then we
construct sample weights. Multivariate weights are constructed when possible, but at minimum
multiplicative weights are constructed for all the factors. Multivariate weights are limited due to
sample sizes.
In step 4, we compare weighted and unweighted estimates to get a sense of the possible extent of
non-response bias.
For non-users, we can compare estimates of marine/saltwater recreational fishing form NOAA
Fisheries Marine Recreational Fishing Survey (done annually) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service’s Survey of Hunting, Fishing and Wildlife Associated Activities (done every five years).
Both surveys attempt to achieve statistically reliable estimates of participation and use for each

13

State. We can compare weighted and unweighted estimates with these two sources to assess the
possible extent of non-response bias and how our weighting adjusts for the bias if it occurs.
In the Florida Keys, recreation-tourism is a dominant part of the economy. In this situation,
estimating expenditures allows for consistency checks on selected expenditure items (e.g.
lodging and food & drink at restaurants and bars). Our sample weighting was successful in that
our weighted estimates were consistent with reported actual expenditures by the Florida
Department of Revenue, while the unweighted estimates were not. In this case, we had
significant non-response bias, but it was successfully corrected with sample weighting.
We don’t have a similar situation for Grays Reef National Marine Sanctuary since its total use
would not account for a large proportion of any local economy. So we could not conduct a step
5 consistency check. What we do know is that our non-response bias plan has worked elsewhere
where we could test it and believe it is a valid and useful approach.
For users, we have nothing to compare to in step 1, so our non-response bias analysis will be
more limited. No one has ever identified the population of users that use Grays Reef National
Marine Sanctuary. Unlike the Florida Keys where we have extensive on-site surveys followed
my mailback surveys for additional information, we have no way of knowing the demographic
distributions of users before we sample them or the extent of their marine recreation activities
compared to the general Georgia population from surveys by NOAA Fisheries in their Marine
Recreational Fishing Statistics Survey (done annually) or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s
Survey of Hunting, fishing and Wildlife Associated Activities (done every five years).

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.
All of the questionnaires and methods proposed here have been employed in past information
collections and so are well tested. They all have been slightly modified for application to the
GRNMS. We have also worked through the GRNMS SAC to make sure that the members of
each user group will know why it is important to provide the information and how it will be
used, in order to receive a high level of cooperation in providing the information requested.
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.
Dr. Vernon R. (Bob) Leeworthy
Chief Economist
NOAA/NOS/Office of National Marine Sanctuaries
1305 East West Highway, SSMC4, 11th floor
Silver Spring, MD 20910
Telephone: (301) 713-7261
Fax: (301) 713-0404

14

E-mail: Bob.Leeworthy@noaa.gov
Dr. James Waters
Chief Economist
NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service
Southeast Fisheries Science Center
101 Pivers Island Rd
Beaufort, NC 28516
Telephone: 252-728-8710
E-mail: Jim.Waters@noaa.gov
Dr. Juan Agar
Senior Staff Economist
NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service
Southeast Fisheries Science Center
75 Virginia Beach Dr.
Miami, FL 33149
Telephone: 305-361-4218
E-mail: Juan.Agar@noaa.gov
Dr. David Carter
Senior Staff Economist
NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service
Southeast Fisheries Science Center
75 Virginia Beach Dr.
Miami, FL 33149
Telephone: 305-361-4467
E-mail: David.W.Carter@noaa.gov
Christopher Liese
Staff Economist
NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service
Southeast Fisheries Science Center
75 Virginia Beach Dr.
Miami, FL 33149
Telephone: 305-361-4467
E-mail: Christopher.Liese@noaa.gov

References
Bird, Christian, Brian Hooker, Greg Moretti, Larissa Nojeck, and Dana Wusinich. 2001. An
Analysis of Recreational Fishers’ Activities and Attitudes at Gray’s Reef National
Marine Sanctuary. Unpublished manuscript, Duke University, Durham NC.
Christian, Leah Melani and Don a. Dillman. 2004. Influence of Graphical and Symbolic
Language Manipulations on responses to Sef-Administered Questions. Public Opinion
Quarterly, Vol. 68, No. 1, Pp. 57-80.

15

Dillman, Don A., Arina Gertseva and Taj Mahon-Haft. 2005. Achieving Usability in
Establishment Surveys through the Application of Visual Design Principles. Journal of
Official Statistics, Vol. 21, No. 2005, pp.183-214.
Gulf States Fisheries Economics Workshop. 2009. New Orleans, Louisiana, March 19-20, 2009.
Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission, Ocean Springs, Mississippi. Alex L. Miller
Workshop Coordinator.
Leeworthy, Vernon R. 1996. Technical Appendix: Sampling Methodologies and Estimation
Methods Applied to the Florida Keys/Key West Visitor Surveys. National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration: Silver Spring, MD. Available at
http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/science/socioeconomic/floridakeys/pdfs/vistechappen9596.pdf
Leeworthy, Vernon R. 2010. Technical Appendix: Sampling Methodologies and Estimation
Methods Applied to the Florida Keys/Key West Visitor Surveys 2007-08. National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: Silver Spring, MD. Available at
http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/science/socioeconomic/floridakeys/pdfs/vistechapp0708.pdf
Liese, Christopher, Carter, David, and Curtis, Rita. 2009. Surveying the For-Hire Sector:
Economic Heterogeneity in the Southeastern U.S. Charter Boat Industry. Staff Paper,
NOAA Fisheries Service, Southeast Fishery Science Center, Miami, Florida, pp 20.
Morris, E. 2004. Sampling from small populations. World Wide Web Document. URL:
http://uregina.ca/~morrisev/Sociology/Sociology.htm.
Morrison, Rebecca L., Don A. Dillman and Leah Christian. 2010. Questionnaire Design
Guidelines for Establishment Surveys. Journal of Official Statistics, Vol. 26, No.1, 2010,
pp.43-85.
Ocean Project, Methodology for National Survey, Scalar variables.
http://www.theoceanproject.org/resources/doc/America_the_Ocean_and_Climate_Change_Meth
odology.pdf
Redline Cleo D., Don A. Dillman, Lisa Carley-Baxter and Robert H. Creecy. 2004. Factors that
Influence Reading and Comprehension of Branching Instructions in Self-Administered
Questionnaires. Manuscript, Social and Economic Sciences Research Center (SESRC),
Washington State University, Pullman WA.
http://sesrc.wsu.edu/dillman/papers/2004/factorsthatinfluencereading.pdf
Sclove, Stanley L. Notes on Likert Scales. http://www.uic.edu/classes/idsc/ids270sls/likert.htm
Shivlani, M., Leeworthy V.R., Murray, T.J., Suman, D.O., and F. Tonioli. 2008. Knowledge,
Attitudes and Perceptions of Management Strategies and Regulations of the Florida Keys
National Marine Sanctuary by Commercial Fishers, Dive Operators, and Environmental
Group Members: A Baseline Characterization and 10-year Comparison. Marine

16

Sanctuaries Conservation Series ONMS-08-06. U.S. Department of Commerce, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, Silver
Spring, MD. 170 pp.
http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/science/socioeconomic/floridakeys/pdfs/kap2.pdf
Stern, Michael J. , Don A. Dillman and Jolene D. Smyth. 2007. Visual Design, Order Effects,
and Respondent Characteristics in a Self-Administered Survey. Survey Research Methods, Vol.
1, No. 3, pp. 121-138.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Population Division. 2011. “Annual
Estimates of the Resident Population for Counties of Georgia: April 1, 2000 to July 1,
2009 (CO-EST2009-01-13).

17

ATTACHMENT A: Questionnaires

This attachment includes all the questionnaires and supporting materials (e.g. information
cards and maps to assist respondents).
•

Users of GRNMS who access via Private Household Boats
- Information Sheet describing information collection
- Questionnaire
- Cover letter (to be developed once contractor/institution is selected to
conduct the survey).

•

Non-users of GRNMS from Households in General Georgia Population
- Information Sheet describing information collection
- Questionnaire
- Cover letter (to be developed once contractor/institution is selected to
conduct the survey).

•

For-hire Recreational Dive Operations
- Information Sheet describing information collection
- Part 1 (Socioeconomic/demographic, costs-and-earnings, spatial distribution
of use)
- Part 2 (Knowledge, Attitudes and Perceptions of Management Strategies and
Regulations)
- Maps of Georgia and GRNMS (To be developed before implementation)

•

For-hire Recreational Fishing Operations (Charter-Party/Head Boats)
- Information Sheet describing information collection
- Part 1 (Socioeconomic/demographic, costs-and-earnings, spatial distribution
of use)
- Part 2 (Knowledge, Attitudes and Perceptions of Management Strategies and
Regulations)
- Maps of Georgia and GRNMS (To be developed before implementation)

18