0052 SS 080411 part A rev

SUPPORTING STATEMENT
MARINE RECREATIONAL INFORMATION PROGRAM
OMB CONTROL NO. 0648-0052

A. JUSTIFICATION
1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary.
This request is for a revision of this information collection. Note: we are changing the name of
the information collection from “Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistics Survey” to “Marine
Recreational Information Program”.
Collection of these data is necessary to fulfill statutory requirements of Section 303 of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1852 et. seq. and to
comply with Executive Order 12962 on Recreational Fisheries. Section 303 (a) of the MagnusonStevens Act specifies data and analyses to be included in Fishery Management Plans (FMPs), as
well as pertinent data that shall be submitted to the Secretary of Commerce under the plan.
This revision will fulfill statutory requirements of Section 401 of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act. Section 401 (g) requires that the Secretary
of Commerce, “establish a program to improve the quality and accuracy of information
generated by the Marine Recreational Fishery Statistics Survey”. MSA further specifies that
future surveys should, “target anglers registered or licensed at the State or Federal level to collect
participation and effort data”, and that the program, “to the maximum extent feasible implement
the recommendations of the National Research Council [(NRC)]” that were provided in a 2006
review of the methods currently used by the National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration’s
(NOAA) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to survey marine recreational fishing effort
and catch.
The NRC Review suggested that recreational fishing surveys suffer from inefficiency, potential
bias due to under-coverage of angling populations, and potential bias due to nonresponse (NRC,
2006). NMFS is addressing these concerns by developing and implementing the Marine
Recreational Information Program (MRIP), an improved system of surveys that will replace
existing marine recreational fishing data collection programs. One of the primary objectives of
MRIP is to address the recommendation that future telephone surveys of fishing effort should
utilize available lists of licensed or registered saltwater anglers as sampling frames. To this end,
NOAA Fisheries is developing fishing effort surveys that sample from databases of licensed or
registered saltwater anglers. To compensate for gaps in survey coverage resulting from
exemptions to licensure requirements, MRIP has designed dual-frame telephone and mail
surveys that ingrate angler license frames with random-digit-dial (RDD) frames and addressbased sampling (ABS) sampling frames, respectively.
Dual-frame approaches provide measurable improvements in survey coverage but are not
without their own limitations. Specifically, the dual-frame telephone survey design suffers from
poor response rates, under-coverage due to the proliferation of non-landline telephone
households, and an inability to match component sample frames, which is a critical aspect of
1

dual-frame designs. The dual-frame mail survey design offers improved response rates, the
ability to weight sample data to adjust for nonresponse bias, relatively complete coverage of the
target population, and an accurate means to identify overlapping frame units, but may not
produce estimates in a timely enough fashion to satisfy customer needs (Mathiowetz et al.,
2011).
This requested revision will address these limitations by testing a dual-frame, mixed-mode
(telephone/mail) design for contacting anglers and collecting recreational fishing data. The
design will support dual-frame estimation and maximize coverage by sampling from angler
license frames and household address frames derived from the United States Postal Service
Delivery Sequence File (DSF), and will maximize response rates and the timeliness of estimation
by including both mail and telephone data collection. The survey will be designed to estimate
recreational saltwater fishing effort, as well as measure the impact of data collection mode on
survey response, coverage and measurement.
2. Explain how, by whom, how frequently, and for what purpose the information will be
used. If the information collected will be disseminated to the public or used to support
information that will be disseminated to the public, then explain how the collection
complies with all applicable Information Quality Guidelines.
Recreational fishing catch and effort data are used annually by NMFS, regional fishery
management councils, interstate marine fisheries commissions, and state natural resource
agencies in developing, implementing and monitoring fishery management programs, per
statutory requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management
Act. Catch and effort statistics are fundamental for assessing the influence of fishing on
any stock of fish. Accurate estimates of the quantities taken, fishing effort, and both the
seasonal and geographic distributions of the catch and effort are required for the
development of regional management policies and plans. Information collected through
this study will be used to identify and quantify bias in ongoing recreational fishing survey
methods, as well as test the feasibility of dual-frame, mixed-mode designs for collecting
recreational fishing effort data. The results of the study will be used to develop more
efficient and accurate surveys of recreational anglers.
The survey will utilize a dual-frame, multi-phase approach to identify anglers and collect
information about recent saltwater fishing activity. Anglers will be sampled from both an
address-based sample frame (ABS sampling) derived from the USPS Delivery Sequence File
(DSF) and state databases of licensed saltwater anglers. ABS sampling will include a household
screener questionnaire to identify saltwater anglers, a 2nd-phase angler questionnaire to collect
information about saltwater fishing activity that occurred during a two-month reference wave,
and a 3rd-phase questionnaire to collect information about encounters with sea turtles. The ABS
household screener questionnaire will be administered by mail, the 2nd-phase angler
questionnaire will be administered by either mail or Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing,
and the 3rd-phase sea turtle questionnaire will be administered by CATI.
Sampling from angler license databases will include a 1st-phase angler questionnaire, which will
be identical to the 2nd-phase ABS angler questionnaire and will be administered by both mail and
2

CATI, and a 2nd-phase sea turtle questionnaire, which will also be identical to the 3rd-phase ABS
sea turtle questionnaire and administered by CATI.
Specific data elements that will be collected in each questionnaire include:
ABS Household Screener Questionnaire (1st-Phase ABS Sample):
a) Questions about weather and visitation to coastal areas are included to engage nonanglers and reduce the potential for nonresponse bias,
b) Total number of adults in the household,
c) An identifier (first name or initials) for each adult in the household is used to address
second-phase ABS respondents,
d) Gender and age of each adult in the household is used for nonresponse weighting
adjustment and/or post-stratification,
e) Participation or likely participation in the following recreational activities during the
past year is used to identify likely saltwater anglers for second-phase ABS sampling, as
well as provide some incentive for non anglers to participate in the survey:
a. Recreational freshwater fishing,
b. Recreational saltwater fishing,
c. Recreational boating or sailing,
d. Scuba diving or snorkeling,
e. Dolphin or whale watching,
f) A preferred telephone number for a possible follow-up telephone interview.
Angler Questionnaire (2nd-Phase ABS Sample and 1st-Phase License Sample):
a) Questions about fishing activity in the past 12 months, 8 months and 4 months are used
to screen for recent fishing activity and assist with recall,
b) Total number of recreational fishing trips, number of recreational fishing trips taken on
privately owned boats, and number of shore fishing trips taken during the reference
wave will be used to estimate fishing effort,
c) Questions about the time of fishing trips and type of access to the water (public/private
sites) is used to assess the coverage of complementary onsite surveys,
d) The area where most of the fishing trips taken during the reference wave occurred is
used to post-stratify estimates into sub-state domains for management purposes as well
as estimate fishing effort by management area (inland waters, state territorial seas,
Federal Exclusive Economic Zone),
e) Possession of a valid saltwater fishing license will be used to identify overlap between
ABS and license sample frames,
f) Telephone usage is used to assess the coverage of current RDD sampling designs,
g) Questions about observed encounters with sea turtles will be used to identify the sample
for a more detailed follow-up questionnaire about sea turtle encounters.
Sea Turtle Encounter Questionnaire (3rd-Phase ABS Sample and 2nd-Phase License Sample)
a) A question to confirm at least one observed encounter with sea turtles during the previous
12 months,
b) A question about the disposition of the sea turtle will determine if the sea turtle was
hooked or entangled in fishing line,
c) The number of sea turtles that were entangled or hooked,
3

d) The type of sea turtle,
e) Where the turtle was hooked and if the hook was removed,
f) The disposition of the turtle when it was released.
As explained in the preceding paragraphs, the information gathered has utility. NOAA Fisheries
will retain control over the information and safeguard it from improper access, modification, and
destruction, consistent with NOAA standards for confidentiality, privacy, and electronic
information. See response to Question 10 of this Supporting Statement for more information on
confidentiality and privacy. The information collection is designed to yield data that meet all
applicable information quality guidelines. Although the information collected is not expected to
be disseminated directly to the public, results will be used in scientific, management, technical or
general information publications. Should NOAA Fisheries decide to disseminate the information,
it will be subject to the quality control measures and pre-dissemination review pursuant to
Section 515 of Public Law 106-554.
3. Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information involves the use
of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological techniques or other forms
of information technology.
The surveys will be conducted by telephone and mail. Automated technology will be used to
identify overlapping records between angler list frames and random household address frames.
Telephone interviews will be conducted through Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing
(CATI).
4. Describe efforts to identify duplication.
NMFS has the lead Federal responsibility for collection of data from marine recreational
fishermen and coordinates marine recreational fishing informational needs with other agencies.
For example, in 1987 NMFS coordinated an economic study of marine recreational anglers on
the Atlantic Coast with the Environmental Protection Agency. Also NMFS has worked with
State fishery agencies each year to coordinate data collection efforts and avoid duplication. In
some cases, NMFS employs State personnel under contract to conduct field interviewing. The
Survey is not conducted in Texas, since existing Texas-sponsored surveys provide the
information that would have been obtained by NMFS.
Specialized NMFS data collections, such as the Large Pelagics Survey (LPS), which obtains
information on recreational catch of large pelagic species, such as tunas, billfishes and pelagic
sharks, overlap to a minor extent with the MRFSS and its related data collections. Such overlap
with the Coastal Household Telephone Survey (CHTS) and its related catch component is
minimal because the MRFSS is designed to cover marine recreational fishing for all finfish
species. Contacts with anglers who fished for large pelagic species are relatively rare in these
samples, however, anglers who fish for large pelagic species are not excluded from the MRFSS
sampling because representative sampling of their fishing trips in relation to other marine
recreational angler fishing trips is necessary to avoid biasing catch estimates for any given
species.

4

In some states, NMFS has required anglers to report their catches of Atlantic bluefin tuna for the
purpose of real-time quota monitoring. Although that data collection overlaps to a minor extent
with the MRFSS, it does not collect information on the other finfish species caught on bluefin
tuna fishing trips. That specialized data collection places a priority on obtaining up-to-date catch
information on only one species. On the other hand, the MRFSS is designed to obtain accurate
marine recreational fishery catch information for all finfish species. Therefore, the minimal
overlap is necessary.
Within this information collection: Mail surveys that sample from angler lists will be integrated
with surveys that sample from random address frames. Sample frames will be matched prior to
data collection to identify overlapping units. Data reconciliation software that has been
specifically developed to match records from multiple databases will be used to identify
overlapping units. Similar procedures will be used to identify overlap between mail and
telephone surveys.
5. If the collection of information involves small businesses or other small entities,
describe the methods used to minimize burden.
No small businesses will be impacted by this revision.
6. Describe the consequences to the Federal program or policy activities if the collection
is not conducted or is conducted less frequently.
Information collected through this study will be used to develop improved surveys of
recreational anglers as mandated by Section 401 of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation
and Management Reauthorization Act. Failure to implement the data collection will delay the
Agencies’ effort to develop and implement the Marine Recreational Information Program.

7. Explain any special circumstances that require the collection to be conducted in a
manner inconsistent with OMB guidelines.
The collection is consistent with OMB guidelines.
8. Provide information on the PRA Federal Register Notice that solicited public comments
on the information collection prior to this submission. Summarize the public comments
received in response to that notice and describe the actions taken by the agency in
response to those comments. Describe the efforts to consult with persons outside the
agency to obtain their views on the availability of data, frequency of collection, the clarity
of instructions and recordkeeping, disclosure, or reporting format (if any), and on the
data elements to be recorded, disclosed, or reported.
A Federal Register Notice, published on May 17, 2011 (76 FR 28421) solicited public
comment on this revision. No comments were received.

5

9. Explain any decisions to provide payments or gifts to respondents, other
than remuneration of contractors or grantees.
The sample of anglers/households will receive a $1.00 cash incentive. The benefits of cash
incentives on mail survey response rates are well documented (Church, 1993).
10. Describe any assurance or confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis
for assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy.
As stated on the instruments, responses are kept confidential as required by section 402(b) of the
Magnuson-Stevens and NOAA Administrative Order 216-100, Confidentiality of Fisheries
Statistics, and will not be released for public use except in aggregate statistical form without
identification as to its source. Section 402(b) stipulates that data required to be submitted under
an FMP shall be confidential and shall not be released except to Federal employees and Council
staff responsible for FMP monitoring and development or when required under court order. Data
such as personal addresses and phone numbers will remain confidential.
11. Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature, such as
sexual behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly
considered private.
No sensitive questions are asked.
12. Provide an estimate in hours of the burden of the collection of information.
The revised total respondents for OMB Control No. 0648-0052 will be 783,405, a net increase of
37,060 over the current 746,345 respondents; responses, 963,557, a net increase of 37, 976 over
the current responses of 925,581, and burden, 53,494 hours, a net increase of 3,854 hours from
49,640 (elimination of a previously approved mail survey (screening and main questionnaires)
results in a decrease of 10,500 respondents, 17,600 responses and 1,703 hours). In addition to
these decreases, new respondents, responses and hours are shown below in the burden table.
The ABS household screener questionnaire will be completed by approximately 38,400
respondents (38,400*5 minutes/60 minutes = 3,200 hours). Of these, approximately 3,408 will
complete an angler mail questionnaire (3,408*10 minutes/60 minutes = 568 hours) and
approximately 3,408 will participate in an angler CATI interview (3,408*6 minutes/60 minutes =
341 hours). In addition, approximately 4,720 anglers sampled from saltwater fishing license
databases will complete an angler mail questionnaire (4,720*10 minutes/60 minutes = 787
hours), and an additional 3,440 anglers sampled from license databases will complete an angler
CATI interview (3,440*6 minutes/60 minutes = 344 hours).
Of individuals who complete the angler questionnaire, approximately 200 will complete a sea
turtle CATI interview (200*5 minutes/60 minutes = 17 hours). Approximately 1,000
nonrespondents to the ABS household screener questionnaire will complete a follow-up
questionnaire (1,000*10 minutes/60 minutes = 167 hours). Approximately 500 nonrespondents
to the angler questionnaire will complete a follow-up mail questionnaire (500*10 minutes/60
6

minutes = 83 hours) and an additional 500 nonrespondents will complete a follow-up CATI
interview (500*6 minutes/60 minutes = 500 hours).
Total burden attributable to this revision will be approximately 5,557 hours, determined as
follows:
Activity

# Respondents

# Responses

Minutes / activity

Total Hours

ABS Household Screener
Questionnaire - Mail

38,400

38,400

5

3,200

ABS Angler Questionnaire – Mail2

3,408

3,408

10

568

ABS Angler Questionnaire – CATI2

3,408

3,408

6

341

License Sample Angler
Questionnaire - Mail

4,720

4,720

10

787

License Sample Angler
Questionnaire - CATI

3,440

3,440

6

344

200

200

5

17

1,000

1,000

10

167

Nonresponse Angler Questionnaire
– Mail2

500

500

10

83

Nonresponse Angler Questionnaire
– CATI2
Total

500
47,560

500
55,576

6

50
5,557

Sea Turtle Questionnaire - CATI2
Nonresponse ABS Household
Screener Questionnaire – Mail

2. Respondents are a subset of the ABS Household Screener Questionnaire and do not represent new respondents. Total respondents shown are
UNDUPLICATED respondent for this survey.

13. Provide an estimate of the total annual cost burden to the respondents or recordkeepers resulting from the collection (excluding the value of the burden hours in Question
12 above).
These data collections will incur no cost burden on respondents beyond the costs of
response time.
14. Provide estimates of annualized cost to the Federal government.
Annual cost to the Federal government is approximately $2,000,000 divided as follows:
$1,800,000 in data collection costs and $200,000 in professional staff, overhead and
computing costs.

7

15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments.
The net increase of 3,854 hours is the result of the following program changes:
1) Elimination of a previously approved mail survey resulted in a reduction of 10,500
respondents, 17,600 responses and 1,703 hours.
2) Implementation of a household screening mail survey (ABS Household Screener
Questionnaire) to identify recreational saltwater anglers resulted in an increase of 3,200
hours.
3) Implementation of 2nd phase ABS mail surveys of recreational saltwater anglers (ABS
Angler Questionnaire – Mail) resulted in an increase of 568 hours,
4) Implementation of 2nd phase ABS telephone surveys of recreational saltwater anglers
(ABS Angler Questionnaire – CATI) resulted in an increase of 341 hours,
5) Implementation of mail surveys of licensed saltwater anglers (License Sample Angler
Questionnaire – Mail) resulted in an increase of 787 hours,
6) Implementation of telephone surveys of licensed saltwater anglers (License Sample
Angler Questionnaire – CATI) resulted in an increase of 344 hours,
7) Implementation of telephone surveys about sea turtle interactions resulted in an increase
of 17 hours,
8) Telephone and mail follow-up interviews with nonrespondents resulted in an increase of
300 hours (167 + 83 + 50).
There are no changes to any of the other information collections under this OMB Control
Number.
16. For collections whose results will be published, outline the plans for tabulation and
publication.
All data collected and analyzed will be included in table format available on the web page of
the Fisheries Statistics Division, Office of Science and Technology, National Marine Fisheries
Service. The web address is http://www.st.nmfs.gov/st1/recreational. Findings from the study
will be presented at appropriate profession meetings (e.g. American Fisheries Society, Joint
Statistical Meetings and will be submitted for publication in appropriate statistical or fisheries
peer-reviewed journals.
17. If seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB approval of the
information collection, explain the reasons why display would be inappropriate.
Not Applicable.
18. Explain each exception to the certification statement.
Not Applicable.

8