APPENDIX B

COMPARISON OF RESULTS OF THE NATIONAL RECREATION SURVEY AND
THE NATIONAL SURVEY OF FISHING AND HUNTING !

BY DANIEL B. LEVINE 2/

Beginning in September 1960, the Bureau of the
Census conducted four quarterly national surveys on
outdoor recreation activity for the Outdoor Recreation
Resources Review Commission. These surveys were
designed to identify all recreation occasions in dif-
ferent quarters of the year (vacation, trips, outings,
ete.) and to obtain frequency of participation on all
types of activities (including fishing and hunting)
engaged in on each occasion. The required infor-
mation for each of the surveys was obtained from
separate samples of approximately 4,000 respondents
who were personally interevewed about their own
outdoor recreation activities during the previous
3-month period, including their participation in fish-
ing and/or hunting.

At the beginning of 1961, the Bureau also conducted
a national survey of fishing and hunting, covering the
year 1960, at the request of the Fish and Wildlife
Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. This survey
which was similar to that conducted on this subject
in 1955 for the Department of the Interior by Crossley,
S-D Surveys, Inc., was designed primarily to measure
such subjects as type of fishing and hunting, man-days,
expenditures, licenses, and similar details relating to
these activities, The sample design involved selecting
households on a national basis; within these households
a single respondent provided information as to which
household member had fished and/or hunted during the
preceding 12 months. These persons were then
visited to obtain detailed data on the extent of their
participation in and their expenditures for their fish-
ing and/or hunting activity during 1960. The detailed
information was obtained from the fisherman and/or
hunter himself; the indication as to who was a fisher-
man and/or hunter was obtained from a household
respondent, 2/

A comparison of results obtained from the National
Survey of Fishing and Hunting and the first of the
national recreation surveys covering June through
August 1960—a relatively high period of fishing ac-
tivity—indicated a smaller number who did any fish-
ing reported in the National Survey of Fishing and
Hunting. Results from the second and third national
recreation surveys, covering September through
November 1960 and December 1960 through February
1961, respectively, revealed the same general pattern
for those who hunted, Examination of the differences
suggested that the difference in the National Survey of
Fishing and Hunting resulted from the inability of this
survey to pick up those whose participation was only
incidental, that is, those fishing and/or hunting only

VDemographic Surveys Division, Bureau of the Census.

Results of the survey are presented in “National Survey of
Fishing and Hunting: 1960,” U.S. Department of the Interior,
circular 120, September 1960.

95

one or two occasions, who had no licenses, and who had
spent little if anything on the activity.

In order to measure the full extent of this difference,
subsamples selected from two of the national rec-
reation surveys were reinterviewed to obtain a
measure of annual participation in fishing and hunting.
Specifically, two subsamples of approximately 1,500
cases each were selected from the September and
December 1960 national recreation surveys, Each
of the 3,000 designated respondents was reinterviewed
in May 1961 to find out whether he or she had fished
and/or hunted at any other time during the 12-
month period. Results obtained from the September
1960 subsample (covering the 12-~month period from
June 1960-May 1961) were used to obtain a measure of
annual participation in fishing which was compared
with that obtained from the National Survey of Fishing
and Hunting. Similarly, the December subsample re-
sults (covering the same 12-month period) provided a
comparable annual estimate of the number who hunted,
Limited data were also obtained from each group on
license ownership, approximate days devoted to the
activity, and relative level of expenditures.

As indicated, the data collected in the original
recreation surveys for each activity (covering the June,
July, and August 1960 period for fishing and the Sep-
tember, October, and November 1960 period for
hunting) were adjusted to an annual level through the
use of the additional information obtained through the
followup surveys. In the case of fishing, for example,
the annual estimate was obtained by adding to the
estimate of fishermen obtained in the September 1960
recreation survey (covering June, July, and August)
those who fished during one or more of the remaining
quarters,of the year, a8 follows:

Fished during June, July, and August (from the

September recreation survey).

Did not fish during June, July, and August (from the

September recreation survey).

Fished during September, October, and November

(from the followup survey).

Fished during December, January, and February

(from the followup survey).

Fished during March, April, and May (from the
followup survey.

The results of the reinterview, adjusted to the ap-
propriate controls, indicated that a total of some 50
million persons had either fished or hunted for rec-
reation purposes during the 12-month period, as
compared with the estimate of 30,500,000 developed
from the National Survey of Fishing and Hunting.
Further investigation, however, supported the original
hypothesis—namely, that the difference represented, in
large part, those whose participation in the activities
was only incidental. This was accomplished by deleting
from the total obtained through the recreation reinter-
view those with no licenses and two or fewer days


participation and less than $5 of expenditure on the
activity, and comparing the results with similarly
adjusted figures from the National Survey of Fishing
and Hunting. The results of this analysis are sum-
marized below:

On an annual basis, the participation rate for
fishing reported by the Interior survey is 19.3
percent, whereas that obtained from the National
Recreation Survey (adjusted to an annual level)
is 35.2 percent. The comparable rates for hunting
are 11.2 percent and 16.7 percent, respectively
(table 1).

Table 1. Comparison of unadjusted annual
porticipation rates

Fish and wildlife Outdoor recreation
survey survey
Fishing. 19.3 35.2
Hunting. 11.2 16:7

The differences between the rates, however, nar-
row considerably when the very incidental parti-
cipants are excluded from each survey. For ex-
ample, using a criteria for incidental participants
of no licenses, two or fewer days of participation
and less than $5 of expenditure for an activity,
the fishing rates become 18 percent for the Interior

Table 3. Effect of adjustment on aggregate days of particips

survey and between 22 and 25 percent for the
recreation survey; the hunting rates, 11 percent
and 10 to 12 percent (table 2).

The effect on aggregate days and expenditures of
excluding these incidental fishermen and hunters
is negligible. Aggregate days of fishing reported
in the Interior survey decrease by 0.4 percent,
aggregate expenditures by 0.05 percent, Sim-
ilarly, for hunting, days decrease by 0.3 percent
and expenditures by 0.05 percent (table 3).

Table 2. Adjusted annual participation rates ~”

Fish and wildlife Outdoor recreation
survey survey
Fishing 18.1 22-25
Hunting 10.8 10-12

5

~Adjusted by excluding those with no licenses ond two or
fewer days participation and less than $5 expenditure on the
activity.

Following a review and discussion of these results,
and their implications for publication purposes, it was
agreed by all participating groups that the report of
the National Survey of Fishing and Hunting would: (1)
present the results as collected in the detailed study;
(2) include in the introductory statement a reference
to the overall number of participants and the source of
this estimate; (3) contain an appendix statement ex-
plaining in somewhat greater detail the difference be-
tween the estimates.

ion ond

aggregate expenditures reported in fish and wildlife survey

Fishing Hunting
Deleted by adjustment Deleted by adjustment
Total djusted T dj Rs
ort tnedes Total Percent otal unedjusted Total Percent
Aggregate
days. . - 466,000,000 1,856,000 0.4 193,000,000 667,000 0.3
Aggregate, expend-
itures. . - $2,700,000,000 $1,570,000 05 $1,200,000,000 $614,000 05

96