[1] 1991 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation[2] Figures were generated with data obtained from the National Marine Fisheries Service’s Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistics Surveys (1985-1994).
[3] See Fishery Management Plan for the Bluefish Fishery section 9.2.2.2 Recreational fishery.
[4] See Amendment 2 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Summer Flounder Fishery section 9.2.2.2.1 Possession limits, minimum size limits, and seasonal closures.
[5-6] See Kahn 1991, Norton, Smith and Strand 1983, and Rockland 1983.
[7] Economists generally refer to consumers’ surplus as the maximum willingness-to-pay for a good in excess of what was sacrificed to obtain the good. In other words, consumer surplus would be the difference between the maximum an angler would be willing to pay to catch a fish and the amount actually sacrificed to catch the fish.
[8] See Bockstael, McConnel and Strand 1987, Agnello 1987 and Samples and Bishop 1985.
[9] See Strand, I.E., K.E. McConnell, N.E. Bockstael, and D.G. Swartz, 1991.
[10] The MRFSS considers each two month block to be a “wave” in the survey. Wave 3 corresponds to May and June, wave 4 to July and August, etc.
[11] Quantech Marine Sciences Group, 1911 North Fort Myer Drive, Suite 1000, Rosslyn, Virginia 22209.
[12] Key questions are designated with an asterisk in Appendix B.
[13] Final Report of the Add-On MRFSS Economic Survey 1995.
[14] Since the purpose of this report is to simply present the findings of the survey on marine recreational fishing participants in the Northeast Region, statistical analyses were not used to test for significant differences among subregions, modes or states.
[15] Anglers under the age of 16 were not interviewed and hence, not included in the analysis.
[16] See Milon and Thunberg (1993), Johnson et al. (1986), and National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation (1991).
[17] See Hiett et al. (1983), National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation (1991), and Milon and Thunberg (1993).
[18] See NMFS’s MRFSS (1990-1991).
[19] Due to budget and interview time constraints, we were unable to collect expenditure information pertaining to bait, tackle, ice, or meals. General information of this kind, is available in the 1991 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation.
[20] Anglers typically indicated only one or two reasons for site choice. Therefore, only the first and second stated preferences for site choice are presented. Additionally, because anglers were not required to indicate more than one site choice reason, the responses are not additive.
[21] See Milon and Thunberg (1993).
[22] Unfortunately, given the current MRFSS survey design, separation of the party/charter mode into two distinctive categories--a party mode and a charter mode was not possible. Additionally, although the characteristics and behavior of private and rental boat anglers may differ, the data did not allow for this distinction.
[23] Johnson, et. al. 1986.
[24] “Years fished” is assumed to be a proxy for “experience.”
[25] As explained in Chapter 3, the variable Lodging (>0) is an estimate of the mean lodging expense per night for those anglers who indicated they spent at least one night away from their residence and personally incurred a lodging cost. Subsequently, the second variable Lodging (all) is an estimate of mean lodging expenses across all over-night anglers, regardless of whether an angler incurred a lodging expense.
[26] In this case, total expenditures include Lodging (all), boat fees, and one-way travel expenses.
[27] Include money spent on gas, travel fares, tolls, ferry and parking fees.
[28] One-day fishing trips are defined as trips in which an angler departs and returns on the same day.
[29] The predetermined responses are illustrated under question 6 in the economic telephone follow-up survey.
[30] Anglers were asked to rate recreational fishing as their most important outdoor activity, their second most important outdoor activity, or only one of many outdoor activities during the past two months.
[31] These opinions apply to regulatory measures implemented on species the angler typically fishes for.
[32] Anglers under the age of 16 were not included in the analysis.
[33] Anglers were asked to describe themselves as white, black, hispanic, asian, or some other racial or ethnic origin.
[34] Regression analysis could be used to determine if a statistically significant relationship exists. Participation could be regressed on annual household income and a dummy variable that controls for differences in coastal populations across states.
[35] The assumption was made that “years fished” is a proxy for “experience.”
[36] See Chapter 3 section 3.1.6 Expenditures for a complete description of the illustrated variables.
[37] One-day fishing trips were defined to be trips in which an angler departs and returns on the same day.
[38] See question 6 in the economic follow-up survey for a list of preestablished responses.
[39] Unfortunately, the ‘other’ category was not specified in the coding process. However, it is likely that this category constitutes an assortment of negligible responses.
[40] Anglers were asked to rate marine recreational fishing as their most important outdoor activity, their second most important outdoor activity, or only one of many outdoor activities during the past two months.
[41] The survey asked anglers if they supported or opposed the following regulation methods when considering the species they typically fish for: (1) limits on the minimum size of fish they could keep; (2) limits on the number of fish they can keep; (3) limits on the times of the year when they can keep the fish they catch; and (4) limits on the area they can fish.
[42] Models will be estimated for bluefish, striped bass, summer flounder, Atlantic cod, black sea bass, tautog, scup, and weakfish.