Individual variation in the willingness of recreational fishermen with different fishing styles to comply with zoning management strategies of mountain stream fishing in Japan

DOI JASI Web Site Web Site 3 References
  • TAMAKI Yasuji
    Research Center for Fisheries Economics and Business Administration, National Research Institute of Fisheries Science, Japan Fisheries Research and Education Agency
  • SAJIKI Takahiro
    Research Center for Fisheries Economics and Business Administration, National Research Institute of Fisheries Science, Japan Fisheries Research and Education Agency
  • KUBOTA Hitoshi
    Tochigi Prefectual Fisheries Experimental Station

Bibliographic Information

Other Title
  • 渓流釣り場のゾーニング管理に対する釣り方別遊漁者の志向の差異
  • ケイリュウ ツリバ ノ ゾーニング カンリ ニ タイスル ツリ カタ ベツユウギョシャ ノ シコウ ノ サイ

Search this article

Abstract

<p>　In the mountain streams of Japan, there are four popular recreational fishing styles: bait fishing, lure fishing, fly-fishing, and tenkara fishing. Although the consciousness of fisheries management and conservation can vary among different types of anglers, few studies have been conducted involving an extensive quantitative survey. In order to promote recreational mountain stream fishing as well as to manage mountain stream fishery resources, it is important to understand how different types of anglers express willingness towards a variety of fisheries management strategies. Here, we conducted a quantitative questionnaire survey of a total of 304 recreational fishermen who visited the Ooashi River, in the Kanuma, Tochigi Prefecture. The questionnaire survey revealed that lure and fly fishermen had access to more information, including the internet and magazines, to choose the fishing area, compared to the bait fishermen. Irrespective of the fishing types, approximately 90% of those surveyed agreed to the establishment of prohibited and suspended fishing areas. According to the contingent valuation method (CVM), bait, fly and lure fishermen were willing to pay more than the usual fishing license fee by 14.2%, 19.4% and 27.7% on average, provided that the ban is lifted. In such a situation, 75.6%, 64.0%, and 40.3% of fly, lure, and bait fishermen, respectively, also agreed to limit the maximum catch (i.e., bag limit) as a fisheries management measure. It may be effective for the management and conservation of mountain stream fishery resources to enforce increased fishing license fees as well as bag limits when the fishing ban is lifted.</p>

Journal

References(3)*help

See more

Keywords

Details 詳細情報について

Report a problem

Back to top