Characterizing the Preferences and Values of U.S. Recreational Atlantic Bluefin Tuna Anglers

Abstract

The Atlantic Bluefin Tuna Thunnus thynnus is the target of a recreational fishery along the U.S. East Coast that is thought to be of considerable economic value. In some years, recreational landings have exceeded the sector's annual subquota due to changes in fish availability, limited predictability of angler effort, and difficulties in real‐time monitoring of catch. Understanding the drivers of angler behavior is critical for predicting how effort and harvest may vary as a function of changing fish availability, regulations, or costs. To investigate angler decision making, preferences, and values, we surveyed private recreational anglers from Maine to North Carolina and employed discrete choice experiments to determine how regulatory and nonregulatory trip‐specific variables influence trip‐taking behavior. A latent class‐ranked logit model identified two distinct classes of anglers who exhibited differing preferences in regard to the importance of nonconsumptive aspects of Bluefin Tuna fishing (e.g., catch and release). Income and recent Bluefin Tuna targeting were the primary determinants of class membership, and higher‐income anglers who had targeted Bluefin Tuna in the past 5 years were significantly more likely to be in the class that derives substantive benefits from nonconsumptive angling activities. An annual consumer surplus exceeding US$14 million was estimated for the 2015 fishery. We considered potential angler welfare impacts of possible management changes (compensating surplus) and identified a large amount of latent effort currently present in the fishery in the form of consumptive‐oriented anglers. As a result, liberalization of harvest regulations could potentially lead to a large influx of effort into the fishery, which could impede the ability of managers to maintain harvest levels within prescribed limits.

Economic Values of Potential Regulation Changes for the Southern Flounder Fishery in Louisiana

“…There are several examples of survey findings that indicate angler preferences for the liberalization of fishery regulations (Lew and Larson 2012; Goldsmith et al. 2018), and there are also numerous studies that display the negative economic impacts of increasing levels of restriction among fishery regulations (Gilig et al. 2003; Whitehead et al.…”

“…First, based on total travel cost, the aggregate economic value of the Southern Flounder fishery among coastal Louisiana anglers reached an estimated $119.7 million in 2019. This value is regulations (Lew and Larson 2012;Goldsmith et al 2018), and there are also numerous studies that display the negative economic impacts of increasing levels of restriction among fishery regulations (Gilig et al 2003;Whitehead et al 2011a;Liese and Carter 2017;Scheld et al 2020). These study results are contrary to our findings that Southern Flounder regulation increases are supported by anglers and would not affect total participation within Louisiana coastal fisheries.…”

Characterizing preferences of fishermen to inform decision-making: A case study of the Pacific halibut (Hippoglossus stenolepis) fishery off Alaska

“…Fishermen often have expert knowledge and understanding of their local regions and communities that outside experts do not possess [7,8]. Documenting preferences of stakeholders—including fishermen—in structured, systematic ways may improve marine spatial planning [9]; provide information about risks and trade-offs for maximizing resilience in the face of climate change [6]; provide guidance about local conditions or vulnerabilities to enhance local adaptation to environmental changes [10]; help define social objectives in fisheries management [11–13]; assist fisheries managers in predicting impacts of harvest strategies [14]; and, serve as a basis for evaluating investment or diversification strategies in the fishing industry [15,16]. Increased stakeholder participation in the regulatory process can also increase compliance with fishery regulations [17].…”

Nonmarket Valuation of Marine Resources in the Northeast: Implications for Recreational Fisheries Management and Offshore Wind Energy Development

“…Angler preferences for marginal changes in catch and regulations have been estimated jointly for summer flounder in the Northeast (Massey et al 2006;Hicks 2002), trout and grayling in Norway (Aas et al 2000), paddlefish in Oklahoma (Cha and Melstrom 2018), trout in Michigan (Knoche and Lupi 2016), and pacific halibut and salmon in Alaska (Lew and Larson 2012;Lew and Seung 2010). In addition to catch rates and regulations, other studies have evaluated nonconsumptive aspects of recreational fishing, such as hooking and losing, or seeing a target species (Goldsmith et al 2018;Duffield et al 2012). Lew and Larson (2015) exclude catch attributes from the utility function and estimate Alaskan charter boat angler preferences and WTP for alternative bag and size limit restrictions.…”

“…We address this question in the context of the recreational Atlantic striped bass fishery by quantifying both economic and biological returns to a variety of minimum length only and harvest slot policies and by doing so, compliment the stream of recent biological literature on the topic.4 Relevant Economic LiteratureMany of the economic studies concerned with assessing the potential economic effect of recreational fishing regulations estimate angler preferences or willingness-to-pay (WTP) values for marginal changes in fishing trip characteristics. As fishery managers are often concerned with the potential effect of new policies, many economists have employed stated preference (SP) methods for nonmarket valuation(Hicks 2002;Aas et al 2000;Cha and Melstrom 2018;Knoche and Lupi 2016; Lew and Larson 2014, 2012, 2015Lew and Seung 2010;Duffield et al 2012;Goldsmith et al 2018). SP methods allows researchers to evaluate angler preferences for and behavioral responses to virtually any hypothetical policy scenario because, in contrast to revealed preference methods that require data on observed behavior, they rely on data obtained from individual responses to survey questions, carefully designed to compensate for missing or inadequate observational data.While estimating angler WTP values is a viable way to understand the value an average angler places on catching, harvesting, or releasing fish, or on alternative sets of regulations, these values poorly describe broad economic effects of policy-induced and, separately, model catch at a particular fishing site as a function of the historical catch rate, time spent fishing, and experience.…”