Information Collection Submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for Renewal Under the Paperwork Reduction Act

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

Information Collection Submitted to the Office of Management and

Budget for Renewal Under the Paperwork Reduction Act

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We have submitted the information collection requirements to

evaluate visitor responses to the recreation fee demonstration program

in our National Wildlife Refuges to OMB for approval under the

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES: Submit comments on or before June 1, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Send comments and suggestions on specific requirements

directly to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information

and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Department of the Interior Desk

Officer, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503; and a copy to our

Information Collection Clearance Officer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service [MS 222 ARLSQ], 1849 C Street, NW, Washington, DC 20240.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doug Staller, Chief, Branch of Visitor

Services, Division of Refuges, (703) 358-2029; or Dr. Jonathan G.

Taylor, Research Social Scientist, U.S.

[[Page 23346]]

Geological Survey, Fort Collins, CO (970) 226-9438.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We submitted the following proposed

information collection clearance requirement to OMB for review and

approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104-13. OMB

has up to 60 days to approve or disapprove information collection. To

ensure maximum consideration, OMB should receive public comments by

June 1, 1999. We may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not

required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a

currently valid OMB control number. We previously published a 60-day

notice inviting public comment on this information collection in the

Federal Register on February 16, 1999 (64 FR 7661).

We invite comments on: (1) Whether the collection of information is

necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency,

including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the

accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden, including the validity of

the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,

utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways

to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who

are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated,

electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or

other forms of information technology.

Congress authorized a recreation fee demonstration program in Pub.

L. 104-134. We were one of the four agencies mandated to implement the

program and evaluate its impact on the visiting public. We designed

this study to scientifically evaluate visitor reactions and impact of

the fees on visitation to the national wildlife refuges (NWR); U.S.

Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division, Social Economic and

Institutional Analysis Section will conduct the survey under a

cooperative agreement with us.

Although we planned to end this survey on December 15, 1998 with a

joint report issued on March 31, 1999, a November, 1998 GAO report

(GAO-RCED-99-7) recommended that only one year of data collection for

the recreation fee demonstration program was insufficient. GAO

concluded that this collection should continue for further evaluation.

Section 328 of H.R. 4193 (subsequently in FY 1999 Interior

appropriations) authorized extension of the program through FY 2001.

To represent the various types of fee changes as well as fee

demonstration refuges, we selected six distinct fee programs and nine

refuges for inclusion in the study. These include (1) New entrance fees

[Sacramento NWR, CA and Aransas NWR, TX]; (2) increased entrance fees

[Dungeness NWR, WA]; (3) new annual passes [Chincoteague NWR, VA and

Crab Orchard NWR, IL]; (4) new hunt fees [St. Catherine's Creek NWR, MS

and Balcones Canyonlands NWR, TX]; (5) non-hunt use permits [Buenos

Aires NWR, AZ] and (6) non-fee adjustments [Piedmont NWR, GA]. We will

survey random samples of individuals using these refuges. We plan to

use as part of the evaluation process a survey questionnaire to assess

the different fee programs. We will distribute an on-site questionnaire

during the peak season to a random sample of the visiting public and

obtain a minimum of 400 completed surveys for each fee type. We will

obtain additional information from Sacramento NWR to allow for

examination of credit card entrances as well as new entrance fees in

general. We will ask no questions of the participants, simply note

payment by credit card. Overall, this will result in a total sample of

2,400 respondents. The margin of error for each fee type is

5% at the 95% confidence level. The information gained from

this survey will provide a viability of the fee program among the

visiting public. The lead project officer is Dr. Jonathan G. Taylor,

Research Social Scientist, phone 970/226/9438, 4512 McMurry Avenue,

Fort Collins, CO 80525-3400.

Title: Evaluation of visitor responses to recreation fee

demonstration program.

Bureau for number: None.

Frequency of collection: On Occasion.

Description of the respondents: Individuals and Households.

Number of respondents: 2,400.

Estimated completion time: 10 minutes.

Burden estimate: 400 hours.

Dated: April 6, 1999.

Allyson Rowell,

Assistant Director for Refuges and Wildlife.

[FR Doc. 99-10804 Filed 4-29-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-55-P