The Value of Recreational Fishing in California

The statewide organization Caltrout released a document entitled: The Value of Recreational
Fishing in California; Direct Financial Impacts.  The report is a historical review of original
research completed examining recreational fishing and its economic impacts and values
on California.

The report focuses on how much anglers spend and what kinds of goods and services they
buy in order to better understand the financial significance and economic impacts of sport
fishing in communities near recreational fishing destinations.  The document relies heavily
on previous work completed by government agencies.

While the press release by Caltrout paints a commendable perspective of the need to protect
habitat and restoration, one must read the 32 page document to fully appreciate the lack of
information and data presented on its economic impacts and the short comings of this document
related to fully understanding California’s recreational fishing industry.

For example, the document reviews the most recent national survey illustrating that anglers
directly spend over $2 billion a year in California on recreational fishing trips and related equipment. 
The National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife Associated Recreation (conducted every five
years by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) showed that in 2006, 1.7 million people that fished in
California spent this money and that over three-fourths of these were freshwater anglers.

                                                              

Of greater interest, but not mentioned in the Caltrout press release is that over the last decade, the
number of anglers in the state has declined from 2.7 million in 1996 to 2.4 million in 2001 and 1.7
million in 2006 (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2007, 2002 and 1997). Additionally, the document
fails to illustrate why there are fewer anglers.  Also it fails to account for the change in anglers current
spending patterns. For example, given that there are fewer anglers in 2006, why are they spending
nearly has much money per capita as compared to the peak year in 1996 with 2.7 million anglers?
And why the document acknowledges the reduced numbers it makes mention of efforts to reverse
the trend but makes no mention of who or what or where these efforts are taking place.

In addition, the report fails to illustrate the direct and indirect economic impacts for the latest year.
 It appears that the true impact is much larger than identified in the Caltrout press release.  The 2006
numbers should at least reflect the previous input-output model completed by the US Fish and Wildlife
Service from 2001 showing an output of over $4 billion as identified in the report, but makes no connection. 

The report fails to show any shortcomings to any if all of the reports as it translates into trying to
understand the full economic impacts of recreational fishing.  For example, no discussion is made
on the acquisition of recreational fishing boats?  Understanding there significant costs, there is no
indication of these numbers being captured in any study, let alone any impacts identified as No
Where Else Classified, NEC, such as insurance for vehicles for a boat.

It appears that recreational fishing in California is much larger than what has been presented in this
document.  This is not a criticism but a thought that if Caltrout really wants the political leadership to
stand up and take notice of the value of recreational fishing and its importance, it deserves a full and
complete analysis.

To view the report go to: http://www.caltrout.org/documents/caltrouteconomicreportjan2008.pdf

Tim Johnson
www.CaliforniaBusinessMinute.com