Michigan Department of Natural Resources
Fisheries Research Report No. 1797, 1973
Evaluation of the Demands for Michigan's Salmon and Steelhead Sport Fishery of 1970
Daniel R. Talhelm
Abstract.-This study was undertaken to quantify the benefits of Michigan's salmon and steelhead sports fishery. An estimate of the all-or-none value of the entire fishery was the primary goal, although a model was also constructed to evaluate how potential changes in the nature and/or location of the fishery would change anglers' benefits. The all-or-none value is most useful in evaluating a decision of whether or not to have such a fishery, whereas the other values are more useful in evaluating alternative stocking plans or other management decisions. In addition, the study (1) determined which attributes of the fishery anglers apparently find most important, (2) analyzed the willingness of anglers to substitute one kind of angling for another, (3) examined the costs to anglers of angling, and (4) examined other aspects of angler preferences, or demands. The maximum net all-or-none value of salmon-steelhead angling to anglers is nearly $30 million per year (in 1970). This means they would be willing to pay the state (or other resource owner) a maximum of that amount, if necessary, to prevent the total loss of the opportunity for salmon-steelhead angling. The exact value depends strongly upon the assumptions made about the availability of other kinds of angling. The most important kind of non-salmon-steelhead fishery affecting the value of salmon-steelhead angling is the Great Lakes lake trout fishery. It was found to be strongly complementary to salmon-steelhead angling. If the lake trout fishery were not available, the value of the salmon-steelhead fishery would be about $20 million, whereas if the lake trout fishery remains as available as it is now, the value of the salmon-steelhead fishery would be about $30 million. In either case, since the annual cost to the state of the anadromous fishery is only about $1.6 million (Ellefson, 1973), it is clear that the fishery is highly beneficial to anglers. Two attributes of salmon-steelhead angling seemed to describe its character fairly adequately: (1) the salmon-steelhead species mix and (2) the respective catch rates of the steelhead and salmon species. Each "character" of angling is a different kind of angling to at least some anglers, just as each make and model of automobile is a different kind of automobile. Some refinements in salmon-steelhead angling character description may be made by including attributes such as (1) urban or non-urban angling environment, (2) publicity, (3) early or late salmon migration, (4) the nature of the streams in which the fish migrate, and (5) the availability of complementary types of recreation. As expected, anglers apparently prefer salmon-steelhead angling with higher catch rates to that with lower catch rates. This is indicated by three factors: (1) the demand is greater for the former, (2) anglers are quite willing to switch from lower-catch-rate angling locations to high-catch-rate locations, but not vice-versa, and (3) a stronger positive relationship between personal income per capita in the angler's origin county and the demand for higher-catch-rate angling. Other conclusions about salmon-steelhead anglers are: (1) they consider inland trout angling2 as roughly equivalent to salmon-steelhead angling, (2) they strongly prefer high-catch-rate salmon-steelhead angling to other game fish angling (bass, muskellunge, walleye and pike), and (3) they even more strongly prefer high-catch-rate salmon-steelhead angling to perch- panfish angling, particularly during summer. The few examples explored in a simulation model seem to indicate that a general statewide increase in stocking efforts would have much greater benefits than costs (assuming a direct relationship between stocking and catch rates). The value of each particular change in catch rate at a particular location depends greatly upon the kinds of angling available at nearby locations and the number of people living nearby. Therefore, greater benefits would result from increases in catch rates at particular locations than from a general statewide increase. The modeling capability developed in this study permits examination and evaluation of many such fish stocking options and locations, singly or in combination. Further analysis of hypothetical alternatives in the simulation model would be highly useful in determining a more nearly optimum management plan. For example, the simulation model developed in this study shows that further investment in chinook stocking in the highly populated counties adjacent to southern Lake Michigan would be highly beneficial. Similarly, reducing the chinook stocking in counties adjacent to central Lake Michigan below 1970 levels would not appear advantageous. The average all-or-none value of salmon-steelhead angling is $10 to $15 per angler day, but this analysis makes it clear that every increase or decrease in angler days should not be evaluated at $15 per angler day or any other fixed figure. In general, changes in angler days that are the indirect result of changes elsewhere (e. g., increased angling effort at stream A caused by pollution in stream B) should be given zero value. Otherwise, angler days may be valued between zero and $20, or even $30 or more per angler day, depending upon the above circumstances and other factors. The simulation technique could quantify such values in many situations. It is recommended that further modeling of this type be carried out for Michigan's fisheries resources because of a high potential usefulness for fisheries management and planning. With sufficient data acquisition and analysis, computerized simulation models could become highly accessible and easily used management tools.