Explaining Differences in Angling Rates in the United States

Abstract

The 1985 resident and nonresident angling rates for 49 U.S. states were examined in relation to an array of 19 independent variables that reflected population, resource, and management budget characteristics of each state. Descriptive analyses characterized clusters of states that were above the national average in resident and nonresident angling rates, resident angling rates only, nonresident angling rates only, and those states that were below the national average in resident and nonresident angling rates. Regression analyses isolated those independent variables that may be the most significant explanations of high resident and nonresident angling rates combined, resident, and nonresident angling rates. High resident angling rates were found in those states with lower populations, abundant land and water resources, and healthy fisheries management budgets. High nonresident angling rates were found in those states with high populations. Regression analysis isolated the greater importance of population variables as explanations of angling rates when compared to resource and management budget variables. The effects of population trends, resource assessments, and the public's recreational choices on the future of fishing in the United States are discussed.

Explaining participation rates in recreational fishing across industrialised countries

“…Not surprisingly, more urbanised states and countries tend to host fewer recreational fishers (Adams et al . ; Aas ; Arlinghaus ) and hunters (Heberlein et al . ), corroborating the findings of this work in relation to the second hypothesis.…”

“…However, even if a person has the motivation to go fishing, this can only be accomplished if fishing opportunities exist and are accessible (Edwards ; Adams et al . ). Moreover, one has to have the resources (time, money and physical abilities), interest and knowledge to engage in fishing (Walsh et al .…”

“…Along the same rationale, countries with higher water availability and greater cultural importance of fishing should reveal increased fishing participation rates compared with countries or states with a scarcity of fishing opportunities (Adams et al . ).…”

“…Several mechanisms associated with post‐industrialisation and urbanisation such as reduced cultural importance of fishing and hunting, and altered access to fish and wildlife, are likely contributing to the decline of interest in hunting and fishing in many post‐industrialised societies (Adams et al . ; Aas ; Arlinghaus ; Arlinghaus et al . ).…”

“…Walsh et al 1989;Floyd & Lee 2002;Arlinghaus 2006;Thunberg & Fulcher 2006;Kuehn et al 2013). By moving the sampling units from the individual person to countries, country-level (and by the same token state-level) participation rates in recreational fishing have also been found to be related to state-level demographic and geographical variables (Loomis & Ditton 1988;Edwards 1989;Murdock et al 1992Murdock et al , 1996Adams et al 1993).…”