Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Recall bias in recreational summer flounder party boat trips and angler preferences to new approaches to bag and size limits

  • Original Article
  • Fisheries
  • Published:
Fisheries Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Three innovative approaches to bag and size limits were evaluated in the recreational summer flounder Paralichthys dentatus fishery. Each approach was designed to reduce discard mortality while increasing angler satisfaction, yet still limiting recreational take within management goals. Each was compared to the 2006 legal bag and size limits on party boat trips from New Jersey and New York. Angler-specific catch data were collected during the trips, and anglers completed a questionnaire while sailing back to port. Comparison of questionnaires to observer records revealed that anglers could not accurately recall the number of fish kept or released. Anglers overestimated both kept and discarded fish by a factor of about two. Neither fishing scenario, age, sex, nor years fished significantly influenced the accuracy of survey reports of kept fish. Anglers on three of five boats over-reported landings. Reported landings were nearly accurate on two boats. Survey accuracy for reported discards was influenced by bag-and-size-limit scenario and differed among boats, sexes, and fishing experience, but no predictable pattern was evident. In particular, bias in reporting was unrelated to angler sex, age, experience, and performance on observed trips or any other criterion measured in this study. Anglers preferred the slot limit most and the 2006 legal bag and size limit least. High grading and transfer of fish among anglers were rare occurrences. Our study demonstrated that the summer flounder fishery is a consumptive fishery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. NMFS (2006) Statistical highlights. Fisheries of the United States 2006. Fisheries Statistics Division, NMFS-F/STI 4. Silver Spring, MD

  2. Terceiro M (2002) The summer flounder chronicles: science, politics, and litigation, 1975–2000. Rev Fish Biol Fisher 11:125–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Terceiro M (2006) Stock assessment of summer flounder in 2006. NEFSC Ref Doc 06-17. Northeast Fisheries Science Center, Gloucester, MA

  4. Bochenek EA, Powell EN, DePersenaire J, King SE (2010) Evaluating catch, effort, and bag limits on summer flounder directed trips in the recreational party boat fishery. Mar Coast Fish Dyn Manag Ecosyst Sci J 2:412–423

    Google Scholar 

  5. Powell EN, Bochenek EA, DePersenaire J, King SE (2011) Injury frequency for discarded summer flounder in the recreational fishery of the Mid-Atlantic Bight: influence of landing size regulations. In: Beard Jr TD, Arlnghaus R, Sutton SG (eds) The angler in the environment: social, economic, biological, and ethical dimensions. Proceedings of the 5th World Recreational Fishing Conference. American Fisheries Society, Symposium 75, Bethesda, MD, pp 171–187

  6. Diewert RE, Nagtegaal DA, Hein K (2005) A comparison of the results of the 1988 Georgia Strait creel survey with an independent observer program. Can Manuscr Rep Fish Aquat Sci 2716:1–39

    Google Scholar 

  7. Connelly NA, Brown TL, Knuth BA (2000) Assessing the relative importance of recall bias and nonresponse bias and adjusting for those biases in statewide angler surveys. Hum Dimens Wildl 5:19–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Connelly NA, Brown TL (1995) Use of angler diaries to examine biases associated with 12-month recall on mail questionnaires. Trans Am Fish Soc 124:413–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Thompson T, Hubert WA (1990) Influence of survey method on estimates of statewide fishing activity. N Am J Fish Manag 10:111–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Pollock KH, Hoening JM, Jones CM, Robson DS, Greene CJ (1997) Catch rate estimation for roving and access point surveys. N Am J Fish Manag 17:11–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hiett RL, Worrall JW (1977) Marine recreational fishermen’s ability to estimate catch and recall catch and effort over time. Research report HSR-RR/13-CD. Human Sciences Research, McClean, VA

  12. Chase DR, Harada M (1984) Response error in self-reported recreation participation. J Leis Res 16:322–329

    Google Scholar 

  13. Claussen SE (1998) Applied correspondence analysis: an introduction. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA

  14. Green RH (1993) Relating two sets of variables in environmental studies. In: Patil GP, Rao CR (eds) Multivariate environmental statistics. Elsevier Science, New York, pp 149–163

    Google Scholar 

  15. Ghertsos K, Luczak C, Dauvin JC (2001) Identification of global and local components of spatial structure of marine benthic communities: examples from the Bay of Seine (eastern English Channel). J Sea Res 45:63–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1998) Biometry: the principles and practice of statistics in biological sciences, 3rd edn. WH Freeman, New York

    Google Scholar 

  17. Boesch DF (1977) Application of numerical classification in ecological investigations of water pollution. US Dept. Commerce NTIS PB-269-604, EPA-60013-77-033. US EPA, Corvallis, OR

  18. Pollock KH, Jones CM, Brown TL (1994) Angler survey methods and their application in fisheries management. Am Fish Soc Special Pub 25:1–317

    Google Scholar 

  19. Sullivan MG (2003) Exaggeration of walleye catches by Alberta anglers. N Am J Fish Manag 23:573–580

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. USFWS (2006) National survey of fishing, hunting, and wildlife associated recreation. US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, and US Department of Commerce, US Census Bureau, Washington DC

  21. Oh C-O, Ditton RB (2006) Specialization differences in anglers’ preferences for red drum (Sciaenops ocellatus) harvest regulations. Proc Gulf Caribb Fish Inst 57:869–880

    Google Scholar 

  22. Schroeder SA, Fulton DC, Currie L, Goeman T (2006) He said, she said: gender and angling specialization, motivations, ethics, and behaviors. Hum Dimens Wildl 11:301–315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Stoll JR, Ditton RB (2006) Understanding anglers’ willingness to pay under alternative management regimes. Hum Dimens Wildl 11:27–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eleanor A. Bochenek.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bochenek, E.A., Powell, E.N. & DePersenaire, J. Recall bias in recreational summer flounder party boat trips and angler preferences to new approaches to bag and size limits. Fish Sci 78, 1–14 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12562-011-0413-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12562-011-0413-0

Keywords

Navigation