SUPPORTING STATEMENT A FOR 
PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION
OMB CONTROL NUMBER 1018-0023

MIGRATORY BIRD SURVEYS

3-165, 3-165A-E, AND 3-2056J-N

Note:  In this information collection request (ICR), we are proposing that the following surveys be approved under 1018-0023.  These surveys are interrelated and/or are dependent upon each other:

•	Migratory Bird Hunter Survey approved under OMB Control No. 1018-0015.
•	Parts Collection Survey currently approved under OMB Control No. 1018-0015.
•	Sandhill Crane Harvest Survey approved under OMB Control No. 1018-0023.

This ICR also includes an experimental Dove Parts Collection Survey.  This is a new survey that we propose including in the Parts Collection Survey.

Terms of Clearance:  

•	1018-0015 was approved on February 8, 2005, with no terms of clearance.
•	1018-0023 was approved on November 19, 2004, with the following terms of clearance:  “The agency should report response rates and the results of its comparison of the three response waves in its next request for OMB approval.”  Response:  We met the terms of clearance by reporting response rates by response wave which are contained within for the sandhill crane survey.   See Supporting Statement B.

1.	Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary.  

Migratory Bird Hunter Survey and Parts Collection Survey:  Under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-711), the Department of the Interior is designated as a key agency responsible for: (a) the wise management of migratory bird populations frequenting the United States and (b) the setting of hunting regulations that allow appropriate harvests that are within the guidelines that will allow for the populations' well-being.  These responsibilities dictate the gathering of accurate data on various characteristics of migratory bird harvests of a temporal and geographic nature.  The Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 (16 U.S.C. 742a-742j) more specifically authorizes collection of such information as is necessary to determine appropriate hunting regulations.  Information required for effectively governing harvests of migratory birds includes not only knowledge of the harvest's magnitude, but also information on the species, age, and sex composition within that harvest, including the geographic and chronologic distribution of these components as they relate to various hunting regulations.  This ICR combines two surveys (the Migratory Bird Hunter Survey and the Parts Collection Survey) and their associated forms because the surveys are interrelated and/or are dependent upon each other.

Sandhill Crane Harvest Survey: The cooperative management guidelines for mid-continent sandhill cranes (included are three currently recognized subspecies:  lesser, Grus canadensis Canadensis; Canadian, G. c. rowani; and greater, G. c. tabida) are aimed at providing optimum diverse recreational opportunity consistent with the welfare of the species and within the provisions of international treaties and socio-economic constraints.  Beginning in 1960 and continuing to date, hunting seasons have been allowed for sandhill cranes in all or part of eight Midwestern States (Colorado, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming) during specified time periods.  In addition, a sandhill crane hunting season has been allowed in Kansas since 1993.  Prior to the initiation of the sandhill crane harvest questionnaire in 1975, little information was available on the number of individuals who annually hunt sandhill cranes or the number of cranes harvested.  This lack of information represented one of the major voids in management of the species.  Annual crane hunter activity and harvest information were readily available for Canada through uniform nationwide surveys conducted by the Canadian Federal Government.  Lack of comparable information from the United States precluded ascertaining the total annual hunter harvest for this migratory bird resource shared by the two countries. 

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.  

Federal and State agencies use the Information collected to monitor the effects of various hunting regulations on the harvest of individual migratory bird species.  The information has been particularly useful in evaluating the effects of changes in daily bag limits, hunting season length, and hunting season dates on harvest.  Information obtained also gives the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service, we) a great deal of insight into the status of the many species involved.  If this information were not collected, our ability to promulgate regulations allowing controlled hunting of migratory birds would be greatly weakened.  Private conservation and hunting organizations concerned with the welfare of our migratory bird resource also use this information.

Annual reports are available on the Division of Migratory Bird Management’s (DMBM) website (http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/reports/reports.html).  To issue annual hunting regulations, we rely on a well-defined process of monitoring data collection and scientific assessment. At key points during that process, Flyway technical committees, Flyway Councils (State agencies), consultants, and the public (and in some instances international regulatory agencies) review and provide valuable input on data collection and technical assessments.  All assessments pertaining to the setting of annual harvest regulations are deemed “highly influential”; however they are exempted from strict application of peer-review guidelines due to the compressed time schedule associated with the regulatory process. Therefore, peer-review plans for technical assessments that influence annual hunting regulations decisions are not posted on the DMBM webpage.  The DMBM has a long-history of subjecting applicable portions of such technical assessments to formal peer-review through submission to scientific journals, or other means, in addition to the review and scrutiny received as part of the annual regulatory process. 

The Migratory Bird Hunter Survey is based on the Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program, under which each State annually provides a list of all migratory bird hunters licensed by the State.  Randomly selected migratory bird hunters are sent one of the following forms and asked to report their harvest of those species:  a waterfowl questionnaire (form 3-2056J), a dove and band-tailed pigeon questionnaire (form 3-2056K), a woodcock questionnaire (form 3-2056L), or a snipe, rail, gallinule, and coot questionnaire (form 3-2056M).  The resulting estimates of harvest per hunter are combined with the complete list of migratory bird hunters, which serve as expansion factors to provide estimates of the total harvest of those species. 

On survey forms form 3-2056J -M, we ask hunters to identify the following information:
•	Whether or not they hunted (waterfowl; doves and/or band-tailed pigeons; woodcock; or snipe, rails, gallinules and/or coots) this season.  We need this information to estimate the number of active (waterfowl, doves and/or band-tailed pigeons, woodcock, or snipe, rails, gallinules and/or coots) hunters.
•	If they did hunt those species, we ask for:  	
o	Month and day of hunt, because this provides information on the temporal distribution of the harvest that enables us to evaluate the effects of hunting season dates on harvest;
o	County and State of hunt, because this enables us to estimate the geographic distribution of the harvest;
o	Number of birds bagged, because this provides us with information on daily hunting success that enables us to evaluate the impacts of daily bag limits on harvest; and
o	Season totals (days hunted, birds bagged, and birds knocked down but not retrieved), because this allows people who do not record their daily hunts to still provide us with data that enable us to estimate total days of hunting, total harvest, and mortality due to crippling loss.

The Parts Collection Survey provides information on the species, sex, and age composition of the harvest, and the geographic and temporal distribution of the harvest.  Randomly selected successful hunters who responded to the Migratory Bird Hunter Survey the previous year are asked to complete and return a postcard (form 3-165A or form 3-165C) if they are willing to participate in the Parts Collection Survey.  Those who answer “Yes” are then asked to report about how many birds they harvest in an average season.  We need this information to determine how many of form 3-165 or form 3-165B to send each participant at the beginning of the hunting season.   

Respondents to forms 3-165A and 3-165C are provided postage-paid envelopes before the hunting season and asked to send in a wing or the tail feathers from each duck, goose, or coot (form 3-165) they harvest, or a wing from each woodcock, band-tailed pigeon, snipe, rail, or gallinule (form 3-165B) they harvest.  We use the wings and tail feathers to identify the species, age, and sex of the harvested sample.  

Respondents are also asked to report on the envelope:

•	Location (State, county and nearest town) the bird was harvested, because this enables us to estimate the geographic distribution of the harvest of each species (nearest town enables us to identify county if county was unknown);
•	Month and day the bird was harvested, because this provides information on the temporal distribution of the harvest of each species that enables us to evaluate the effects of hunting season dates on species-specific harvest;
•	Time of day the bird was harvested (form 3-165 only), because some States restrict shooting hours and this information enables us to evaluate the effects of those restrictions on harvest; and
•	The band number of any leg-banded bird, because this enables us to estimate band reporting rates (form 3-165 only, because only waterfowl are banded in significant numbers).

Experimental Dove Parts Collection Survey - Over the last 2 years, most of the 39 States that have dove seasons have been collecting dove wings from volunteers at hunter check stations on State-owned Wildlife Management Areas.  These wings are subsequently examined to obtain the age composition of the dove harvest.  While these State wing collections are a means of obtaining an annual sample of dove wings, the hunters that provide these dove wings are not randomly selected and these hunters may not be representative of the dove hunter universe.  Thus, there are concerns that the resulting age composition estimates of the harvest may not be a true reflection of the age composition of the U.S. dove harvest.  

We intend to initiate a mail dove parts collection survey, compare the results of our mail survey to the results obtained from the State surveys, and provide estimates of dove productivity at the management unit levels.  We plan to conduct this new survey concurrently with the State surveys for a period of 3 years.  We will compare the results and the cost of our experimental mail survey with the results and costs of mourning dove collection methods employed by most States.  If mourning dove productivity estimates are similar for the two methods, we would propose to adopt the more cost effective method on a national scale.

Randomly selected successful hunters who responded to the Migratory Bird Hunter Survey the previous year will be asked to complete and return a postcard (form 3-165D) if they are willing to participate in the Dove Parts Collection Survey.  Those who answer “Yes” will be sent two postage paid envelopes (form 3-165E), before the hunting season and asked to send in one wing from each dove that they harvest during their first two hunts during the first week of the dove season.  We will use the wings to identify the species and age of the harvested sample.  In addition, we will ask respondents to provide the same information as form 3-165B for the same reasons.

Sandhill Crane Harvest Survey

Since initiation of the questionnaire survey, it has been possible to annually estimate the magnitude, geographical distribution, and temporal distribution of the sandhill crane harvest.  It has also been possible for us to estimate the portion of the sandhill cranes total population that is taken during harvest.  This information has been particularly useful in determining the effects on harvests of daily bag limits and changes in hunting dates and the areas (counties) of States open to hunting.  Based on information from the U.S. and Canadian surveys, hunting regulations can be adjusted as needed to optimize harvest at levels that provide a maximum of hunting recreation while keeping populations at desired levels.  Agencies participating in determining appropriate sandhill crane hunting regulations, and making use of survey results, include the Department of the Interior, the Canadian Wildlife Service, State conservation agencies, and various private conservation organizations.

On the survey form 3-2056N, we ask hunters to identify the following information:

•	Whether or not they hunted sandhill cranes this season.  We need this information to estimate the number of active crane hunters.
•	If they did hunt cranes, we ask for:  	
o	Month and day of hunt, because this provides information on the temporal distribution of the harvest that enables us to evaluate the effects of hunting season dates on harvest;
o	County and State of hunt, because this enables us to estimate the geographic distribution of the harvest;
o	Number of birds bagged, because this provides us with information on daily hunting success that enables us to evaluate the impacts of daily bag limits on harvest; and
o	Season totals (days hunted, birds bagged, and birds knocked down but not retrieved), because this allows people who do not record their daily hunts to still provide us with data that enable us to estimate total days of hunting, total harvest, and mortality due to crippling loss.

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.].

Of the total number of burden hours, most (126,667 hours) are actually responses collected by the State wildlife agencies, which forward the responses (hunters’ names and addresses) to the Service for use in national harvest surveys.  On average, we receive the name and addresses of about 3,800,000 migratory bird hunters.  Approximately, about 3,600,000 were collected electronically by the States in 2006, either online (through electronic licensing systems) or by telephone.  The proportion of electronic responses increases each year as more States implement electronic data collection methods.  

About 227,100 responses are from randomly selected migratory bird hunters who are asked to voluntarily participate in a season-long survey (92,500 responses) or to send in migratory bird body parts in envelopes provided by the Service (134,600 responses).  If we put the season-long survey forms on line, we might receive responses from people who were not randomly selected for the survey.  This would invalidate (i.e., bias) our survey results and complicate our efforts to obtain reliable harvest information to use in setting migratory bird hunting regulations.  However, as new electronic survey methodologies are developed and tested, we will strongly consider any that are appropriate for this survey and will examine the feasibility of on-line survey response for the season-long survey forms 3-2056J-N, especially if we can limit responses by hunters not randomly selected to participate in these surveys.

The envelopes (forms 3-165, 3-165B, 3-165E) for the migratory bird body parts are quite large and would not print out on a standard computer.  Furthermore, we could not guarantee envelopes printed on a standard computer would comply with U.S. Postal Service regulations, thus we do not anticipate putting those envelopes online.  The burden currently placed on cooperators and the cost to the Federal government is thought to be at a minimum level consistent with the information required.

4.	Describe efforts to identify duplication.  

Many State wildlife agencies collect some information on migratory bird harvest within their State, and we have examined a number of State hunter surveys.  State information is generally collected secondarily in harvest surveys of nonmigratory game and is not adequate for Federal regulatory responsibilities because:  

	(a) it is often insufficiently detailed or imprecise, or has inherent weaknesses in sampling design resulting in serious biases; 
	(b) comparable information is not available from all States because survey methodologies vary among States; 
	(c) many State survey results are not available in time to be useful for promulgating regulations; and 
	(d) some States do not conduct hunting surveys or maintain lists of hunter names and addresses.  

Some States eliminated migratory birds from their harvest surveys when we began conducting the Migratory Bird Hunter Survey; thus, duplication of effort between State and Federal surveys has been reduced since implementation of the Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program.

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

This collection does not significantly impact small entities.  This information is only collected from individual migratory bird hunters and State agencies.

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.

If this information were not collected, our ability to issue regulations allowing controlled hunting of migratory game birds would be greatly weakened.  The health and well-being of migratory bird populations demand that harvests be commensurate with population size and status.  If these surveys were not conducted, the lack of accurate assessment of migratory bird harvests would logically dictate restrictive hunting regulations, with a loss in hunting recreation due to only vague knowledge of the effects of hunting on migratory game bird populations and fear of possible overharvest.  If the surveys were conducted less frequently than yearly intervals, it would be impossible to adequately monitor the status of migratory birds, whose populations can change substantially between years as a result of droughts, floods, freezes, or other conditions.  Estimates are required for annually promulgating hunting regulations.  Information that is not required annually is requested less frequently.

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.

There are no special circumstances that require the collection to be conducted in a manner inconsistent with OMB guidelines.

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.]

On March 16, 2007, we published in the Federal Register (72 FR 12628) a notice soliciting public comment on this information collection for 60 days, ending May 16, 2007.  We received one comment as a result of that notice.  The individual did not address the information collection requirements, but did protest the entire migratory bird hunting regulations process, surveys and monitoring programs, and the killing of all migratory birds.  Our long-term objectives continue to include providing opportunities to harvest portions of certain migratory game bird populations and limit harvest to levels compatible with each population’s ability to maintain healthy, viable numbers.  Our harvest surveys are an integral part of our monitoring programs, which provide the information that we need to ensure harvest levels are commensurate with current status of migratory game bird populations and long-term population goals.  We did not make any changes to our information collection requirements as a result of this comment.

We continually solicit feedback and recommendations on our surveys through regular meetings and coordination, including:

•	State and private survey specialists and biometricians review the procedures for the Migratory Bird Hunter Survey.  
•	Meetings and workshops are held several times annually between Service and State personnel responsible for management of migratory birds, at which time problems and needs related to harvest surveys are discussed and acted upon.
•	We have representatives to each of the four flyways (groups of States) to coordinate migratory bird management with State biologists.  
•	Through regular meetings between the Department of the Interior and the Technical Committee of the Central Flyway Council, an organization of wildlife conservation professionals from States making up the Flyway, data collection needs and procedures are fully discussed and agreed upon.  
•	Immediately prior to the annual setting of migratory bird hunting regulations, public hearings are held at which individuals may comment on the regulations-setting procedures, including the conduct of harvest surveys.  The Service has provided information to the public at the Outdoor Writers Association of America and Association for Conservation Information Meetings.  Voluntary written comments and suggestions received from survey participants are noted and considered.

In addition to this continuing coordination, we solicited comments from previous survey participants listed below.  Each of them stated that the instructions they received with the survey were straightforward and easy to understand, and each agreed that our estimates of 

time burden were accurate.  Two of them suggested that we provide the opportunity to respond to the season-long diary forms on-line.

Timothy J. Bombardier
160 Lemroy Ct
Richmond, VT 05477
(802) 434-5253	Joseph D. Campbell
7707 Myers Rd
Kirkville, NY 13082
(315) 656-7340	
Steve L. Davis
PO Box 181
Bella Vista, CA 96008
(503) 549-4814	Michael J. Hoff
551 NC Hwy 343 S
Camden, NC 27921
(252) 336-2793	
Jim Kreins
5681 W Ellery Ave
Fesno, CA 93722
(559) 275-7278	Jeremy Mitchell
1051W 800N
Lehigh, UT 84043
(801)766-0758	

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

We do 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.

Each hunter contacted receives an assurance that we conduct the survey in accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 USC 552a).  We do not ask hunters to write their names on the questionnaires, and we do not associate their names or identifications with their questionnaires.  A system of records, titled Migratory Bird Population and Harvest Surveys – Interior, FWS-26, was published in 46 FR 18378.

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.  

There are no questions of a sensitive nature.

12.	Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information.  

Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program.  We estimate the total annual burden hours for this program to be 126,910.   Although State licensing authorities collect the name and address information needed to provide a sample frame of all licensed migratory bird hunters, 50 CFR 20 requires that information be reported to the Service.  Therefore, the reporting burden associated with that information collection is reported here.  We estimate that 49 States collect the required information from approximately 3,800,000 individuals annually.  States use a variety of methods to collect the required information, and the amount of time required for an individual respondent to provide the information varies from less than 1 minute to up to 4 minutes, depending upon the method employed by the State.  We estimate that the overall average time per response is 2 minutes (126,667 annual burden hours).  The States compile a list of migratory bird hunters in their State and send it to the Service.  States send their first list of hunter names to the Service in August and continue to send updated entries at 2-week intervals until the end of the migratory bird hunting seasons in their State.  The number of hunters on each list varies depending on the time of year and the number of migratory bird hunters in the State.  On average, the lists contain 5,540 records and we receive an average of 14 lists per State.  We estimate a total of 243 annual burden hours for the States to compile the lists.

Migratory Bird Hunter Survey:  We estimate that the total annual burden for all four forms used for the Migratory Bird Hunter Survey is 6,100 hours.  Although many respondents report that they did not hunt for the species for which they are being surveyed, they still need about 2 minutes to read the instructions prior to responding.  Therefore, each of the following form-specific burden estimates includes 2 minutes per respondent for reviewing instructions on the form.  

•	About 37,000 hunters respond to form 3-2056J; the number of hunting trips reported ranges from 0 to as many as 100, with an average of 3 trips reported per respondent.  We estimate completion time per response to be 5 minutes (3,083 total annual burden hours).  

•	About 25,000 hunters respond to form 3-2056K, with the number of trips reported ranging from 0 to about 30.  The number of trips reported averages two, and the completion time is 4 minutes (1,667 total burden hours).  

•	About 12,000 respondents are expected annually for form 3-2056L, with the number of trips reported averaging two.  Completion time is 4 minutes (800 total burden hours).  

•	About 11,000 respondents are expected for form 3-2056M, with the number of trips reported averaging one.  Completion time is 3 minutes (550 total burden hours).  

Parts Collection Survey.  We estimate the total annual burden hours for the Parts Collection Survey to be 10,436.

•	Form 3-165A.  Approximately 6,000 hunters will respond to the postcard request to provide waterfowl parts.  Response frequency is once annually, and it will require about 30 seconds to complete the form (50 total annual burden hours).  

•	Form 3-165.  About 6,500 respondents will provide waterfowl parts in form 3-165.  Response frequency for form 3-165 varies from once to up to 200 times annually dependent on the amount and success of hunting (averaging about 18 times per individual).  The estimated time required to complete form 3-165 is 5 minutes (9,750 total annual burden hours).  

•	Form 3-165C.  About 400 hunters will respond to the postcard request to provide wings from woodcock, snipe, rails, gallinules, and band-tailed pigeons.  Response frequency is once annually, and it will require about 30 seconds to complete the form (3 total annual burden hours).  

•	Form 3-165B.  About 3,000 respondents will provide wings using form 3-165B, averaging 1.5 responses per individual annually.  The estimated time to complete form 3-165B is 5 minutes (375 total annual burden hours).  

•	Form 3-165D.  Based on information from our other wing collection surveys we expect 4,000 respondents will respond to the postcard request to provide mourning dove wings.  The response frequency is once annually, and it will require about 30 seconds to complete the form (33 burden hours).   

•	Form 3-165E.  We estimate that 1,800 hunters will provide mourning dove wings using form 3-165E, averaging 1.5 responses per individual annually.  The estimated time to complete form 3-165E is 5 minutes (225 total annual burden hours).
 
Sandhill Crane Harvest Survey:  About 7,500 hunters respond to form 3-2056N; the number of hunting trips reported ranges from 0 to as many as 20.  Completion time is 5 minutes per response, including time to record and summarize the trips and read the cover letter that includes instructions (625 total annual burden hours).

Table 12-1 – Burden Hour Estimates

ACTIVITY/FORM NUMBER	
NO. OF
RESPONDENTS	
NO. OF ANNUAL RESPONSES	
AVG. BURDEN
PER RESPONSE	
TOTAL ANNUAL BURDEN HOURS	

Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program 	

49 (States)	

686	

185 hours	

126,910*	

Migratory Bird Hunter Survey	

	

     Form 3-2056J	
37,000	
37,000	
5 minutes	
   3,083	

     Form 3-2056K	
25,000	
25,000	
4 minutes	
   1,667	

     Form 3-2056L	
12,000	
12,000	
4 minutes	
     800	

     Form 3-2056M	
11,000	
11,000	
3 minutes	
     550	

     Subtotal	
85,000	
85,000	
	
  6,100	

Parts Collection Survey	

	

     Form 3-165	
6,500	
117,000	
5 minutes	
 9,750	

     Form 3-165A	
6,000	
    6,000	
0.5 minute	
      50	

     Form 3-165B	
3,000	
   4,500	
5 minutes	
    375	

     Form 3-165C	
 400	
      400	
0.5 minute	
       3	

     Form 3-165D	
         4,000 	
   4,000	
0.5 minute	
      33	

     Form 3-165E	
        1,800	
  2,700	
       5 minutes	
    225	

     Subtotal	
13,500	
     134,600	
	
10,436	

Sandhill Crane Harvest Survey	

	

     Form 3-2056N	
7,500	
7,500	
5 minutes	
   625	

Total	
106,049	
    227,786	
	
     144,071	

*Includes burden for individuals to report information to States.  Although the States collect the required information for their hunting licenses/permits, we have included the burden for hunters to provide the information (126,667 hours) since the requirement is included in our regulations.  

We estimate the total dollar value of the burden hours associated with these surveys to be $3,678,546.37.  We used the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) website to calculate the hourly wage and multiplied by 1.3 for benefits.  We used the figures for a U.S-wide average hourly pay rate for 2006 for all U.S. workers and for State government workers.  See table below.

TABLE 12-2 – ESTIMATE OF DOLLAR VALUE OF ANNUAL BURDEN HOURS

ACTIVITY	TOTAL ANNUAL BURDEN HOURS	AFFECTED PUBLIC	HOURLY PAY RATE 
($/HR EST.)	HOURLY RATE INCLUDING BENEFITS 
(1.3 X HOURLY PAY RATE)	DOLLAR VALUE OF ANNUAL BURDEN HRS
(TOTAL HRS X HOURLY RATE INCL. BENEFITS	
Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program	126,667	Individuals/Households (report to States)	$19.29	$25.08	$3,176,808.36	
Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program	       243	State Govt	$23.99	$31.19	         7,579.17	
Migratory Bird Hunter Survey	    6,100          	Individuals/Households	$19.29	$25.08	     152,988.00	
Parts Collection Survey	  10,436	Individuals/Households	$19.29	$25.08	     325,498.84	
Sandhill Crane Harvest Survey	       625	Individuals/Households	$19.29	$25.08	       15,675.00	
Totals	144,071				$3,678,546.37	

13.	Provide an estimate of the total annual [nonhour] cost burden to respondents or recordkeepers resulting from the collection of information.  

There is no nonhour cost burden to respondents.  There is no fee for completing the survey or any other costs associated with responding to this survey.  The survey is accompanied by a postage-paid return envelope.

14.	Provide estimates of annualized costs to the Federal Government.  

The estimated annual cost of these surveys to the Federal Government is $1,805,635 as detailed below.  

ACTIVITY	CLERICAL/DATA ENTRY (GS 5/2)	CLERICAL/ADMIN
(GS 9/5)	BIOLOGIST/
IT SPEC. (GS-13/5)	MANAGER
(GS-15/5)	OTHER
COSTS**	TOTAL
COST	
	HOURS	COST	HOURS	COST	HOURS	COST	HOURS	COST			
Printing forms and envelopes (contracted)									$232,000	$232,000.00	
Coord. with States					10	$ 560.60	70	5,453.70		     6,014.30	
Mail preparation and handling	2,500	$48,925								   48,925.00	
Postage									 512,000	 512,000.00	
Data entry (some contracted)	11,000	215,270							 334,730	 550,000.00	
Computer/
Equipment*									140,000	 140,000.00	
Data analysis and report preparation			1000	 32,500	5000	280,300	50	3,895.50		 316,695.50	
TOTAL	13,500	$264,195	1000	$32,500	5010	$280,860.60	120	$9,349.30	$1,218,730	$1,805,634.8	

We used the 2007 pay table for the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area published on the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) web site (http://www.opm.gov/oca/07tables/ ) to determine the hourly wage.

FEDERAL STAFF	GRADE	HOURLY PAY RATE 
	HOURLY RATE INCLUDING BENEFITS 
(1.3 X HOURLY PAY RATE)	
Clerical/Data Entry 	GS-5, step 2	$15.05	$19.57	
Clerical/Admin	GS-9, step 5	25.00	32.50	
Biologist/IT Specialist	GS-13, step 5	43.12	56.06	
Manager	GS-15, step 5	59.93	77.91	

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

There are currently 7,500 responses and 625 burden hours in the OMB inventory for 1018-0023.  This ICR asks for approval for 227,786 responses and 144,071 burden hours.  This is an increase of 220,286 responses and 143,446 burden hours.  

The current approval for 1018-0023 is for the Sandhill Crane Harvest Survey only.  We are not requesting any changes in responses or burden hours for this survey (7,500 responses, 625 burden hours).

Part of the increase is a result of adding the Migratory Bird Harvest  Information Program, the Migratory Bird Hunter Surveys, and the Parts Collection Surveys, currently approved under 1018-0015, to this collection.  The current OMB inventory for 1018-0015 is 3,785,400 responses and 135,930 burden hours.  We have decreased our estimated number of responses to 49 for the Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program.  The States already collect the data from hunters in order to issue permits.  Our regulations require the States to report to us.  There are 49 States in this program.  We are reporting an adjustment of 213,586 responses and 143,188 burden hours for the surveys previously included in 1018-0015.

We are reporting a program change of 6,700 responses and 258 burden hours associated with the new Dove Parts Collection Survey.

The remaining increase in the burden hour estimate is an adjustment resulting from increases in the number of migratory bird hunters in some States, increases in sampling rates in some States for some migratory bird hunter surveys, and/or increases in response rates in some States.

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

Plans are to continue the Migratory Bird Harvest Surveys on an ongoing annual basis.  

Schedule for the Migratory Bird Hunter Survey

Aug-Feb	Migratory bird hunter names and addresses are received from the States, either in the form of electronic databases or on paper forms from which the data are compiled in a database.

Sep-Feb	Sample migratory bird hunters are sent questionnaires asking them to keep track of their hunting trips throughout the hunting season and return the form when they have completed their hunting season.

Dec-Apr	Following a staggered schedule based on the close of the hunting season in each State, sample hunters who have not returned questionnaires are sent reminder letters and replacement questionnaire forms.

Apr-May	Response data are edited, compiled in a database, and analyzed.

Jun-Jul	The report on nonwaterfowl species must be prepared and distributed by early June, in time for the public hearing on hunting regulations for those species.  The report on waterfowl must be prepared and distributed by early July, in time for the public hearing on waterfowl hunting regulations.  The waterfowl report will be distributed both internally and externally and made available on our website. http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/reports/reports.html 

Schedule for the Parts Collection Survey

June	Postcards soliciting participation in the survey are sent to the Service in Laurel, Maryland, where respondents names and addresses are compiled in a database.

Jul-Aug	Employees prepare the parts envelopes for mailing.

Aug-Oct	Because they must be in the possession of survey participants at the start of the hunting season, parts envelopes are sent to participants about 2 weeks before the hunting season begins in each State.  Hunting seasons open as early as September 1 in many States, and as late as early November.

Sep-Mar	Hunters mail parts to collection points in each Flyway throughout the hunting season, which continues to mid-March in some States.

Jan-Feb	Federal and State biologists assemble at each collection point to identify the species, age, and sex of each part.  Late arriving parts are sent to Laurel in early April and identified there.

Feb-May	Data slips are shipped to Laurel, where the data are compiled in a database and analyzed in combination with information derived from the Waterfowl Hunter Survey and the Migratory Bird Hunter Survey.

Jun-Jul	The report on nonwaterfowl species must be prepared and distributed by early June, in time for the public hearing on hunting regulations for those species.  The report on waterfowl must be prepared and distributed by early July, in time for the public hearing on waterfowl hunting regulations.  These reports will be made available on our website. http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/reports/reports.html 

Sandhill Crane Harvest Survey: Participating States issue permits to sandhill crane hunters in mid-July.  Copies of issued permits (showing names and addresses of permittees) are mailed to the Division of Migratory Bird Management, Laurel, Maryland, following the end of the crane hunting season in each State.  Upon receipt of name and address cards, computer records of each name/address are produced, and data-mailers containing the questionnaire are computer-addressed and mailed.  We mail these questionnaires to permittees approximately 5 weeks after the close of the respective hunting season.  We mail a followup questionnaire to nonrespondents approximately 1 month later.  In recent years, the latest crane season has closed in early February.  Thus, distribution of followup forms is completed in early April and the analysis of data commences about early May.  An annual report is available by August on our website at http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/reports/reports.html 

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 approval expiration date on the survey forms.

18.	Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in Item 19, "Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions," of OMB Form 83-I.

There are no exceptions to the certification statement.