Interviewers must have an educational background or field experience in identifying fish species. While interviewers are selected for their skills in fish identification, these are not the only skills required to be a successful interviewer. A good interviewer is one who can approach strangers with little reluctance, who can diplomatically handle touchy situations, who can follow procedures and complete forms with almost compulsive exactitude, and who can identify fish accurately at the species level. The intercept interview involves both a personal interview and a creel census (identification and measurement of the catch); a unique set of skills is required for each.
The specific tasks of a field interviewer are many. He/she will be expected to complete site assignments, to have all necessary equipment available and in proper working order (i.e., calibration of scales) while interviewing, to conduct interviews in a professional manner, to complete all forms accurately and to submit all forms in a timely fashion. Interviewers shall wear appropriate attire and present themselves in a professional manner while in the field.
Field interviewers are expected to have substantial fish identification skills prior to MRFSS training. They must be able to identify, by direct observation, the twenty most frequently occurring species in his/her geographic sampling area. Fish identifications must be at the species level. Therefore, initial testing is necessary to verify interviewers' ability to identify marine fish species in the area where they will sample. Testing from projections of high resolution 35 millimeter slides, such as those from the American Fisheries Society slide collection, along with descriptions of more subtle taxonomic characteristics would be a valid approach.
Interviewers must also be tested for their ability to correctly fill out forms and look up codes in manuals (ie., 10 digit NODC species codes). This could be accomplished by completing Coding Forms while following hypothetical video or audio taped interviews.
Initial testing must also verify the interviewer's aptitude for successfully interviewing people in the subregion they will sample. Role playing would be a desirable method of determining this aptitude.
Field supervisors must conduct follow-up testing of each interviewer after the training session. Such testing must be conducted by field visits while an interviewer is conducting intercepts. Items to be tested at this later date would include, but not necessarily be limited to: knowledge of the MRFSS, species identification, proper coding of responses, and interviewing technique.
Individuals who successfully pass the initial fish identification test must be trained in proper procedures for conducting the Intercept Interview. Training programs must be designed to ensure quality and consistency of site selection and visitation procedures, interviewing methods, and coding and editing procedures. Subjects addressed in the Intercept Survey training sessions must include, but are not necessarily limited to:
1. An introduction to the objectives, goals and operation of the MRFSS and uses of the data that educates interviewers on appropriate responses to general questions from anglers in the field.
2. Procedures for selecting alternate interview sites and for updating site register data, supplemented by a discussion of sources of local information on fishing activity to aid in these tasks.
3. Proper procedures for screening for eligible anglers, conducting the interview and coding the intercept data form, including an item-by-item explanation of the data collection instrument and a review of all materials used in the conduct of the interview.
4. Identification of the twenty most frequently occurring species in the interviewer's geographic sampling area without the aid of reference materials. Identifications must be accurate at the species level.
5. The effective use of taxonomic keys and other reference materials, including Peterson's Field Guide of Atlantic Coast Fishes of North America,Peterson's Field Guide of Pacific Coast Fishes of North America or Field Guide of Gulf Coast Fishes of North America Hoese and Moore to identify other less common fish species in the interviewer's sampling area.
6. A review of local names for fishes, identification aids for local fish commonly misidentified, and the use of the NODC finfish species list.
7. Principles and techniques of random sampling, so that decisions on subsampling fish for measurement and subsampling anglers at high use sites can be properly determined under a variety of field conditions.
8. Correct techniques for length and weight measurements for different groups of fishes, including scale calibration.
Interested State and regional NMFS personnel should be invited to each training session. Their local knowledge of fishing activity and fishing locations would be beneficial in the training process.
Upon successful completion of initial MRFSS training, additional testing and training of prospective interviewers must be conducted in the field by a field supervisor for the area in which the sampler will work. Each new interviewer must be observed in the field during one of his/her first three assignments and at least once during each successive six month period following their initial field observation. Additional field observations and training of new interviewers are required until field supervisors can ensure that intercept interviews are being conducted completely, consistently, accurately and in accordance with the standard procedures in this manual. Supervisors should focus on the interviewers' abilities to deal effectively with people, properly conduct interviews, accurately code interview forms, and correctly identify species.
Field supervisors must have extensive field experience or training in marine fish identification. They must also have effective skills in managing and motivating personnel, and particularly in the application of techniques to prevent interviewer "burnout."
A minimum of the first 100 Coding Forms from each new interviewer must be reviewed for accuracy, completeness, legibility and consistency of coding by the field supervisor in each area. Although he/she may not directly observe later Coding Forms, the field supervisor must still be involved in the resolution of all potential species identification problems and biological reasonableness issues for data submitted by samplers in his/her area. Field supervisors will be expected to review all fish records for interviewers in their area. In particular, the field supervisor must be able to verify the identification and measurements of all species reported by comparison with natural history information from the literature.
Field supervisors are expected to communicate frequently with interviewers in their area. Questions from interviewers on site assignments and sampling protocol should be encouraged. Regular feedback on Coding Forms is essential and remedial action must be taken when appropriate. Newsletters or meetings with groups of on-board interviewers (focus groups) to review data collection procedures, site-specific sampling problems, species identification and new recreational fishery developments would be highly desirable. Follow-up species identification training conducted during field observation or focus group sessions may be necessary for species of particular concern.
Referral lists for additional information, including telephone numbers for local, State and Federal resource management agencies in each area, must be provided to all interviewers. There may be occasions when State agency or NMFS personnel observe interviewers or field supervisors in the field. Their role would be to offer constructive comments to project supervisors, not to directly supervise field personnel. Field supervisors are expected to contact the appropriate agency for information on current management regulations and issues of concern to anglers, and to coordinate sampling with State and regional Federal personnel when overlapping surveys exist.
Field supervisors will also be expected to conduct intercept interviews to backfill in those areas where there are interviewer staff shortages or interviewing quotas are lagging. They must also take the lead role in verifying that the Site Register (see Section 2.2.2.1) for their area is as accurate as possible.
The MRFSS is structured around two-month periods called "waves." January and February are wave 1, March and April are wave 2, etc. Although estimates are made on a wave basis, assignments must be allocated between months proportional to effort and spread evenly within months so that there is a representative distribution of intercepts relative to effort, and intercepts are not clustered at the beginning of a wave or month.
The MRFSS is structured around types or "modes" of fishing. While there are many types of fishing, three major mode groups are considered: shore fishing (SH); partyboat and charter boat fishing (PC); and private and rental boat fishing (PR). More exact definitions for these are:
Shore (SH)
1. Pier, DockA structure built out over water and supported by pillars;
2. JettyA kind of wall, usually made of rocks, built out into the water to restrain currents or protect a harbor;
3. Breakwater--An offshore structure used to protect a harbor or beach from the forces of waves;
4. Breachway--A connecting channel;
5. Bulkhead, Sea Wall--A retaining wall along a waterfront;
6. BridgeA structure carrying a pathway or roadway over a body of water;
7. Causeway--An elevated or raised way across wet ground or water;
8. BeachA level stretch of pebbles or sand beside a body of water, often washed by high water;
9. BankA stretch of rising land at the edge of a body of water not washed by high water, which could be rocks or an overhanging cliff; and
10. Other - Any other non-boat fishing.
Partyboats and Charter Boats (PC)
1. PartyboatA boat on which fishing space and privileges are provided for a fee. The vessel is operated by a licensed captain (guide or skipper) and crew. In some areas of the country partyboats are called headboats or open boats. These boats are usually not launched until a specified number of anglers have paid and boarded. Anglers on these full or half day trips usually do not know the other anglers on the boat.
NOTE: In North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, East Florida, West Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana, this survey does not cover partyboat fishing.
2. Charter BoatA boat operating under charter for a specific price, time, etc. It is operated by a licensed captain and crew, and the participants are part of a pre-formed group. Thus, charters are usually closed parties, as opposed to the open status of party boats. These are sometimes called guide boats, especially small boats fishing inside waters with two to three clients.
NOTE: Both party and charter boats may make all-day or half-day trips.
Private and Rental Boats (PR)
1. Private BoatA boat belonging to an individual.
2. Rental BoatA boat that is rented. No crew is providedthe renter operates the boat him-/herself.
Since the focus of this survey is on saltwater recreational finfishing, all sites should be discrete geographical areas from which saltwater recreational finfishing takes place. With the possible exception of some beach/bank sites, a fishing site should include not more than approximately 100 yards of coastline area. That is, one interviewer should be able to cover an entire site on foot in a reasonable amount of time. Some beach/bank sites can be larger than 100 yards, but boundaries should be clearly delineated in the description. A site does not have to be as large as 100 yards if smaller boundaries are appropriate.
A fishing site can have more than one mode of fishing. A docking area with both charter boats and private boats would be one site with both party/charter and private/rental fishing. If people occasionally fish from the dock itself, that site would also show shore fishing.
The actual sites to be sampled in the intercept survey are randomly selected according to fishing activity from a master list of all marine fishing locations in each State, called the Site Register. Appendix A includes the 1995 wave 1 Site Register for East Florida as an example. Beginning with 1990 sampling, the Site Register contains separate pressure estimates for each month within a wave.
Originally developed from secondary sources, the Site Register is continuously updated using feedback from intercept interviewers, field supervisors, and State fisheries personnel. The computerized Site Register contains fishing pressure information, that is, information concerning the relative use of the site in each month and in each of the three modes. This information is used in the selection process so that the more heavily used sites have a higher probability of selection.
Information provided about each site in the Site Register includes a twodigit State code, a threedigit county code, a six-digit latitude code (degrees, minutes and seconds), a six-digit longitude code (degrees, minutes and seconds), and a unique fourdigit site code. These codes are followed by a description of the site and its location. Each site description must include the name of the nearest town, directions from a discrete starting point such as a recognizable landmark or intersection, and, if available, the name and phone number of a primary contact person who supervises the site.
The Site Register includes an estimate of the monthly weekday fishing pressure at each site for each mode and wave. Fishing pressure is a scaled value representing the average number of anglers using that site on a weekend day. (A key to the pressure information is found at the top of each page.) All sites with a scaled pressure value from "0" to "7", inclusive, are eligible for assignment. Sites are selected randomly with non-uniform probability based on angling pressure.
Sites are listed in numerical order by county. The sites are not in any geographical order. Sites are uniquely coded and they keep their same codes through time. For example, a marina that changes its name through new ownership will keep the same site code. Codes for deleted sites will not be reassigned.
Each interviewer must be given a Site Register for his/her State(s) or county(s) of coverage. A new Site Register must be issued for each wave.
Since sites to be sampled are selected according to fishing pressure, it is imperative that the Site Register contain the best information possible. The Site Register is not static, since fishing activity is constantly changing. It must be updated at least once a wave based on information obtained from interviewers. Interviewers provide information to add sites, delete sites, or change the description of an existing site on the master Site Register. The Site Register must contain as much information as possible to help interviewers locate each site and sample it most productively. For example, names and telephone numbers are very useful for party/charter boat sites, as are the best times of day for sampling.
Interviewers are responsible for estimating fishing pressure during each visit to each site. They must estimate the average number of anglers using each site on a weekend day for each month of the year. Anecdotal information from marina operators, pier owners, etc. can be used in the estimation of fishing pressure. Newspaper and weekly magazine fishing reports also provide useful background information for adjustment of fishing pressures and adding and deleting sites.
Field supervisors must ensure that each site in his/her area will be visited at least once a year for the purpose of updating the Site Register, regardless of whether or not that site was assigned during the year. Any site that contains a pressure of "8" (unknown) must be visited as soon as possible, so that a valid pressure ("0-7" or "9") can be assigned.
If more than one set of pressure estimates for a site are submitted by different interviewers, field supervisors must make the final determination of the "best" values to use in updating the Site Register. More weight should be placed on pressure estimates for waves during which sites were visited and empirical data was gathered, as opposed to pressures estimated almost a year in advance. Field supervisors should also consider the experience of interviewers submitting pressure estimates for the same site. Data from newer interviewers may not be as reliable as that from more experienced interviewers.
For the 1997-98 fiscal year, the MRFSS allocated 25,825 intercepts among Pacifc States. In data collection sizes have been decreasing in the Pacifc. The 1998 allocation is expected to be similar to the 1996 year, but may be different. Intercepts are allocated among regions, States, modes and waves proportionate to fishing effort. The effort index used during 1997 was a three year (1993-95) average of estimated coastal, non-coastal and non-resident trips by state/subregion. Effort indices from the shore mode were divided by three to allow more sampling in the two boat modes.
Within each State, a base level of intercepts was allocated for each unique wave and mode combination (cell) to assure that sufficient data were available to produce estimates. These base levels were 30 intercepts in the shore and private/rental boat modes and 45 intercepts in the party/charter boat mode. The higher base level in the party/charter boat mode was chosen to reduce the clustering effect for this mode which has a high proportion of group catches. Further allocations beyond this base level were proportional to the fishing effort index by mode and wave.
The sampler supervisor must estimate the number of assignments needed to achieve the quota of interviews in each state/wave/mode. Historical interviewer productivity data should be used for this purpose. The estimated number of assignments needed to achieve the quota should be increased to allow for weather problems, interviewer unreliability and other unforseen difficulties.
It is possible to assign two assignments to one interviewer on the same day dependent on MRFSS approval of a workable implementation plan. Of particular concern is the assurance that clustering effects in time and space would be minimized. A workable plan would impose limitations on the number of days with multiple assignments. Examples include: limiting multiple assignments to waves 1, 2 and 6; or setting a maximum percentage of days with multiple assignments per state and mode for each wave.
There must be regular communication and coordination by field and project supervisors with State fishery agency and NMFS regional personnel. Some adjustment of sampling assignments may be necessary to prevent MRFSS and other NMFS and State samplers from working at the same site at the same time.
At the time the sites are selected, they are randomly assigned to a date within the wave. Since more recreational fishing takes place on weekend days, more of the assignments are given to these days. For the purposes of the MRFSS, weekend days are defined as Saturday, Sunday, and the dates on which the Federal government celebrates the holidays of New Year's Day, Martin Luther King Day, Presidents' Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Columbus Day, Veterans Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. The required ratio of weekend to weekday intercepts is 60:40. Actual assignments may differ from this 60:40 ratio because of different interviewer productivity between weekend and weekday days.
Sites must be assigned throughout each wave and throughout months within waves on the basis of monthly pressure estimates. This requirement is intended to prevent the quota from being met and sampling cease early in the wave or all sampling be clustered at the first of a month. Fishing pressure estimates for most sites and modes are equal for both months of each wave, however, there are waves in certain States and modes that are transitional in terms of fishing activity. For example, boat fishing activity typically ceases in late November in Virginia. Therefore an even allocation of sampling throughout wave 6 would result in wasted effort in December.
There may be occasions when it is not feasible to obtain 30 interviews in the assigned mode at the assigned site. When this occurs the interviewer will have to travel to alternate sites. These can be identified by checking the Site Register. The following rules apply when selecting alternate sites:
1. Any alternate site(s) selected must be in the same State and mode, and must be the nearest to the assigned site, but not further than a one hour drive.
2. Alternate site(s) must have fishing activity in the assigned mode. "Fishing activity" means that the site would be expected to have one or more anglers in the assigned mode on a typical weekend day during the wave (i.e., a "pressure" estimate of "0" to "7" on the site register).
3. Only two alternate sites (or a total of three sites) may be visited on one assignment.
4. If the assigned site for a man-made (MM) assignment is a beach, bank or natural shoreline, then any alternate site(s) visited must also be a beach, bank or natural shoreline area. Interviewers cannot select a pier, bridge, jetty or other man-made structure as an alternate site in this situation.
The restrictions on selecting alternate sites prevent interviewers from continually visiting the same highly productive sites as alternates.
The interviewer must use their own judgment to decide when alternate sites should be visited. Some examples of when it would be appropriate to search for alternate sites are:
1. If there is no fishing activity (no anglers at a shore site or no boat trailers at a boat ramp) in the assigned mode at the assigned site.
2. If fishing activity is low and a preliminary canvass shows that it will be quite a while before any anglers will be finished for the day.
3. Anytime the interviewer has reason to believe that they can not obtain at least one interview per onsite hour.
It is not necessary to obtain all the interviews at one site. If three sites are visited, interviews may be conducted at any or all of these sites. In addition, interviewers may return to previously visited sites at any time if they have information from local anglers or marina operators that eligible anglers will be present later in the day. It is important, however, that the site code recorded on the interview form be for the site where the interview was actually conducted (not necessarily the code for the assigned site).
As long as the interviewer has reason to believe that there might be fishing activity in the assigned mode within a one hour drive of the assigned site, any alternate site(s) visited must have estimated fishing pressure coded of 0-7 in the assigned mode. If, after visiting the assigned site and one alternate site, the interviewer determines that there is no fishing activity in the assigned mode on that day within a one hour drive of the assigned site, they may interview in an alternate mode. If possible, interviewing in the alternate mode should take place at one of the previously visited sites. If those sites do not have an alternate mode, the interviewer can select up to three alternate sites with an alternate mode in mind (see Section 2.3.1.4).
There may be occasions when the interviewer will be unable to locate the assigned site. When this happens the interviewer should select an alternate site as close as possible to where the assigned site was thought to be located. This site would be treated as a starting site, and up to two alternate sites may still be visited. The interviewer must contact the field supervisor afterwards to attempt to locate the site and include better descriptive information in the Site Register.
All assigned sites will be on the Site Register. New sites discovered by interviewers should be added to the master Site Register as soon as they are discovered. A new site may be used as an alternate even if it has not yet been added to the Site Register, as long as that site is in the same mode and is the nearest in location to the assigned site. Interviews conducted at new sites would be sent in without site codes, but with the site description written out in the white space on the intercept form. A Site Description Form must also be completed and sent in with the intercept forms. Field supervisors will assign codes for these new sites and they must be added to the Site Register. In addition to discovering new sites by accident, interviewers and field supervisors should maintain contacts with local anglers, residents, State fisheries personnel, NMFS regional personnel, marina operators, bait stand owners, etc. in order to learn when new sites are planned or established. State agencies must use 10% of Sport Fish Restoration Funds (Wallop-Breaux funds) for boating access and safety programs; state personnel in charge of these programs would be valuable contacts.