1. Developing Species-Specific Recreational Values for Allocation: Snapper-Grouper in the Gulf of Mexico 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

2. Previous NMFS/MRFSS Recreational Valuation Research McConnell and Strand, 1994 Hicks, Steinbeck, Gautam, Thunberg, 1999 Haab, Whitehead, and Ted McConnell, 2000

3. Single Species Models Targeting behavior Species substitution Preference heterogeneity

4. 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 (28% PRIM1 is missing) –n = 18,709 +/- Targets a species –n=11,257 +/-

5. Fishing mode

6. State of intercept

7. 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

8. 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

9. Top target species of interest from RFP Red drum20% Dolphin6% King mackerel6% Spanish mackerel4%

10. Four demand models Florida Atlantic big game (dolphin) Gulf of Mexico reef fish (red snapper) Inshore small game (red drum) Offshore small game (mackerel)

11. GOM Reef Fish Intercept Sites (n = 1224)

12. Target Species

13. “Snappers” (n = 160) gray snapper48.13% white grunt11.88% black sea bass3.75% crevalle jack3.75% amberjack genus1.88% gray triggerfish1.88% snapper family1.25% yellowtail snapper1.25% atlantic spadefish0.63% blackfin snapper0.63% blue runner0.63% vermilion snapper0.63%

14. Shallow water groupers (n = 725) unidentified grouper73.38% gag17.38% red grouper6.07% grouper genus Mycteroperca2.9% black grouper0.28% Red snapper (n = 239)

15. Mode

16. Random Utility Models Conditional Logit Nested Logit Mixed Logit Latent Class Model

17. Conditional Logit Party/charter boat county sites Private/rental boat county sites

18. Nested Logit Party/charter Private/rental Counties

19. Variables 71 Species/Mode/Site choices Trip cost –[party/charter] TC = charter fee + travel cost + time costs –[private/rental] TC = travel costs + time costs Quality –5-year historic (type 1) targeted catch rate Number of MRFSS interview sites in the county

20. Table 1. Choice Frequencies ModeTargetFrequency Party/charterSnappers14 Party/charterShallow Water Groupers150 Party/charterRed snapper84 Private/rentalSnappers108 Private/rentalShallow Water Groupers575 Private/rentalRed snapper155

21. Table 3. Random Utility Models Single Species Conditional LogitNested Logit Coeff.t-statCoeff.t-stat Trip cost-0.04-24.2-0.11-22.4 Grouper catch11.1020.075.786.00 Ln(sites)0.8714.860.517.53 Inclusive value0.1212.37 Choices30 Cases725 LL-1354-1045

22. Table 3. Random Utility Models Multiple Species Conditional LogitNested Logit Coeff.t-statCoeff.t-stat Trip cost-0.04-29.9-0.10-26.9 Grouper catch3.2727.413.1115.83 Snapper catch0.8910.210.838.71 Red snapper catch4.4321.763.8213.93 Ln(cites)0.9817.020.7211.76 Inclusive value0.1414.79 Choices71 Cases1086 LL-2377-2028

23. WTP for 1 additional fish