recreational values of gulf grouper

Recreational Values of Gulf Grouper

John Whitehead, Appalachian State University

Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council

Socioeconomic Panel

Miami, Florida

Thursday May 3, 2007

“Outline”

An overview of the MARFIN project Decisions made to date about MRFSS

data Progress report / future effort Preliminary results from the Gulf of

Mexico reef fish model

Angler Heterogeneity and Species-Specific Demand for Recreational Fishing in the Southeast United States*

Tim Haab (Ohio State University)Rob Hicks (College of William and Mary)Kurt Schnier (University of Rhode Island)John Whitehead (Appalachian State University)

*MARFIN #NA06NMF4330055

Previous NMFS/MRFSS Recreational Valuation Research

McConnell and Strand, 1994 Hicks, Steinbeck, Gautam, Thunberg,

1999 Haab, Whitehead, and Ted

McConnell, 2000 Haab, Hicks, Whitehead, 2004

Targeting behavior Compare various

angler targeting models

• single-species• aggregates of related

species• all species combined

We are considering:

We are considering:

Species substitutionEstimate angler willingness to

substitute to other species or species groups when fishing quality or fishing management changes

We will:

Estimate how willingness to substitute species might differ by angler typesocioeconomic factorspreferencesgear type (i.e., mode)

We will:

Provide species-specific estimates of economic value for: changes in fishing

quality management (e.g.,

size limits, bag limits)

To date:

We have identified the feasibility of demand modeling at the species level

Estimated two preliminary demand models

MRFSS 2000

LA to NC n = 70,781

Southeast 2000 (Limited Valuation Round) n = 42,079

Hook and line trips only (99%), day trips only (67%) [self-reported and < 200 miles one-way distance], delete missing values on key variables n = 18,709 +/-

Targets a species n=11,257 +/-

Fishing mode

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Shore

Party/Charter

Private/Rental

State of intercept

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

LA

MS

AL

FL (GoM)

FL (SA)

GA

SC

NC

Species

425 unique species caught by recreational anglers sampled by the MRFSS

15 species account for 82% of the targeting activity and 38% of the (type 1) catch

Target Behavior (Prim1)sign

Intercept + p < .01

Years fished + p < .01

Boat owner + p < .01

Shore mode - p < .01

Charter mode - p < .01

Days fished + p < .01

Wave 4 -

Wave 5 + p < .01

Wave 6 + p < .01

Gulf - p < .01

Traditional species groups

Big game 4%

Bottom fish 4%

Flat fish 5%

Small game 11%

Snapper - grouper 15%

Top target species of interest from RFP

Red drum 20%

Dolphin 6%

King mackerel 6%

Spanish mackerel 4%

Four demand models are being pursued

Florida Atlantic Big GameDolphinBig game fish

Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish“Snappers”Shallow water groupersRed snapper

Four demand models …

Inshore small game: Red drum, spotted seatrout, small game

Offshore small game: King mackerel, spanish mackerel, small game

GOM Reef Fish Intercept Sites (n = 1224)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

State

AL

FL

LA

MS

Target Species

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Target Species

Snappers

Groupers

Red snapper

“Snappers” (n = 160)gray snapper 48.13%

sheepshead 23.75%

white grunt 11.88%

black sea bass 3.75%

crevalle jack 3.75%

amberjack genus 1.88%

gray triggerfish 1.88%

snapper family 1.25%

yellowtail snapper 1.25%

atlantic spadefish 0.63%

blackfin snapper 0.63%

blue runner 0.63%

vermilion snapper 0.63%

Shallow water groupers (n = 725)

unidentified grouper 73.38%

gag 17.38%

red grouper 6.07%

grouper genus Mycteroperca 2.9%

black grouper 0.28%

Red snapper (n = 239)

Mode

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Mode

Party/Charter

Private/Rentalboat

Random Utility Models

Conditional Logit Nested Logit Mixed Logit Latent Class Model

Conditional Logit

Party/charter boatcounty sites

Private/rental boat county sites

Nested Logit

Party/charter Private/rental

Counties Counties

Variables

71 Species/Mode/Site choices Travel cost

[party/charter] TC = charter fee + driving costs + time costs

[private/rental] TC = driving costs + time costs

Quality 5-year historic (type 1) targeted catch rate Predicted type 1 catch rate

Number of MRFSS interview sites in the county

Conditional Logit

Coeff t-stat

tcfee -0.038 -30.58

snapper 0.077 7.41

grouper 1.178 29.71

redsnapper 0.628 22.87

Log(sites) 0.767 14.16

Mixed Logit

Coeff t-stat

tcfee_M -0.070 -28.04

tcfee_S 0.034 7.79

snapper 0.046 3.5

grouper 1.19 20.88

redsnapper 0.77 24.35

lognsite 0.66 11.93

Value of one additional fish per trip

Conditional Mixed

Snapper $2 $1

Grouper $31 $17

Red snapper $17 $11

Recreational value of an allocation change

$ = V x xHValue per fish = V Change in harvest = Current harvest = H

Gag

STATE MODE H Value

ALABAMA CHARTER 997 $16,944

ALABAMA PRIVATE/RENTAL 1,193 $20,276

WEST FLORIDA CHARTER 10,503 $178,551

WEST FLORIDA PRIVATE/RENTAL 29,971 $509,512

LOUISIANA CHARTER 304 $5,161

LOUISIANA PRIVATE/RENTAL 381 $6,475

Red Grouper

STATE MODE H Value

ALABAMA CHARTER 447 $7,602

ALABAMA PRIVATE/RENTAL 104 $1,765

WEST FLORIDA CHARTER 7,659 $130,203

WEST FLORIDA PRIVATE/RENTAL 12,012 $204,199

Contact

John Whitehead

Department of Economics

Appalachian State University

Boone, NC 28608

whiteheadjc@appstate.edu

http://www.appstate.edu/~whiteheadjc