Centner: Sensitivity of angler benefit estimates to the definition of substitute sites considered by tfie angler 167 



E 

 o 

 O 



set. It would be interesting to examine the 

 effect of the aggregation strategy by using 

 the individual MRFSS intercept sites. It is 

 possible that using average catch-and-keep 

 rates calculated over a longer time series 

 would result in far fewer empty cells, which 

 are the main hurdle to using the individual 

 MRFSS sites. 



Mean one-way travel distance in the data 

 set is 41.5 miles (Table 1). All of the choice 

 sets at and above the 150 mile cut-off have 

 an almost equal proportion of sites in the 

 choice set and sites chosen at the cut-off 

 point. That is, the percentage of substitutes 

 within the cut-off and the percentage of 

 sites chosen within the cut-off are equal 

 (near QO'/f for both) for the full, 300-, 250-, 

 and 200-mile choice sets. At the 150 mile 

 cut-off this equality begins to fail and the 

 percentage of chosen sites inside the cut-off 

 fall to 98% and 94% for the 150- and 100-mile cut-offs, 

 respectively. This fall is being driven partially by the 

 aggregation strategy. Although this result has not been 

 examined by the author, it is likely that the average 

 distance for an angler to travel outside his county of 

 residence is somewhere between 100 and 150 miles. 

 Again, if the historic catch rate could be calculated 

 to examine individual MRFSS sites, this aggregation 

 restriction could be examined to determine the overall 

 sensitivity of welfare estimates to the designation of 

 distance-based choice sets. 



In conclusion, when estimating the net benefits 

 of quality changes for recreational anglers with the 

 MRFSS data, it matters little how restrictive the choice 

 sets become with a distance metric, as long as the re- 

 searcher does not ask more of the aggregation strategy 

 than it can provide. This result quantifies the signifi- 

 cance of the difference in welfare estimates across ag- 

 gregation strategies and indicates the strengths and the 

 weaknesses of a nationwide data set on marine angling 

 in estimating net benefits and thus makes policy analy- 

 sis quicker and easier. 



Literature cited 



Bockstael, N. E., K. E. McConnell, and I. E. Strand. 



1991. Recreation. Iii Measuring the demand for envi- 

 ronmental quality (J. Braden, and C. Kolstad, eds.), 

 227-268 p. North-Holland Pubis., Amsterdam, The 

 Netherlands. 

 Gentner, B. J., S. Steinback, and M. Price. 



2001. Marine angler expenditures in the Pacific coast 

 region, 2000. NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-F/SPO-49, 66 p. 

 Haab, T., and R. Hicks. 



1997. Accounting for choice set endogeneity in random 



$25.00n 



I $20. DO- 



CT $15.00- 



§ $10.00- 



S5.00 



$0.00 



\ \ \ 



 Unrestricted 



 300 Mile 

 -250 Mile 

 A 200 Mile 

 XI 50 Mile 



• 100 Mile 



Cfioice sets 



Figure 1 



Mean benefits as measured by compensating variation (with 9.5 '?( 

 confidence intervals) for a one-fish increase in the catch-and-keep 

 rate by distance-based choice set. 



utility models of site choice. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 

 34:127-47. 

 Haab, T, and R. Hicks. 



1999. Choice set considerations in models of recreation 

 demand. Mar. Res. Econ. 14:271-281. 

 Hicks, R., A. B. Gautam, D. VanVoorhees, M. Osborn, and B. 

 Gentner. 



1999. Thalassorama: an introduction to the NMFS 

 marine recreational fisheries statistical survey with 

 an emphasis on economic valuation. Mar. Res. Econ. 

 14:375-385. 



Hicks, R., and I. E. Strand. 



2000. The extent of information: Its relevance for random 

 utility models. Land Econ. 76:374-385. 



Jones, C. A., and F. Lupi. 



1999. The effects of modeling substitute activities 

 on recreational benefit estimates. Mar. Res. Econ. 

 14:357-374. 

 Krinsky, I., and A. L. Robb. 



1986. On approximating the statistical properties of 

 elasticities. Rev. Econ. Stats. 68:715-719 

 Maddala, G. S. 



1983. Limited dependent and qualitative variables in 

 econometrics, 401 p. Economic Soc. Monographs. Cam- 

 bridge Univ. Press, New York, NY. 

 Parsons, G. R., D. M. Massey, and T. Tomasi. 



1999. Familiar and favorite sites in a random utility model 

 of beach recreation. Mar. Res. Econ. 14:299-315. 

 Parsons, G. R., and A. B. Hauber 



1998. Spatial boundaries and choice set definition in 

 a random utility model of recreation demand. Land 

 Econ. 74:32-48. 



Steinback, S., B. Gentner, and J. Castle. 



2004. Economic impacts of marine recreational angling 



in the United States. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA Prof. 



Pap. NMFS 2, 169 p. 

 Whitehead, J. C, and T C. Haab. 



1999. Distance and catch based choice sets. Mar. Res. 

 Econ. 14:283-299. 



