THE NATIONAL RECREATIONAL AND INDIGENOUS FISHING SURVEY

Transcription

1 THE NATIONAL RECREATIONAL AND INDIGENOUS FISHING SURVEY Edited by Gary W. Henry NSW Fiseries PO Box 21 Cronulla, NSW 2230 and Jeremy M. Lyle Tasmanian Aquaculture & Fiseries Institute Marine Researc Laboratories Taroona, Hobart, TAS 7053 FRDC Project No. 99/158 January 2003 NSW Fiseries Report Series No ISSN abcdef

2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Many people in Australia contributed to te development and implementation of te national recreational and indigenous fising survey. Senior researc and management staff from Commonwealt and State government agencies, recreational and commercial fising associations, environmental and indigenous groups were responsible for developing te concept, securing te funding, determining te outputs and progressing te concept to te implementation stage. Te foresigt, ard work and support of tese people was gratefully acknowledged. Following agreement on te metodology, a smaller team of people was formed to conduct te survey. Tis team recruited and trained staff, supervised te collection, collation and editing of data and managed te survey on a daily basis as an independent project witin teir own States/ Territories. Members of te implementation team (listed below) undertook te substantial body of work required to complete te survey. Teir persistence and dedication was greatly appreciated by everyone associated wit te project. Tree people deserve special mention. Laurie West and David McGlennon were involved in te project from its inception and teir ard work, advice and encouragement were fundamental to te success of te project. Jeff Murpy managed te complex tasks associated wit data manipulation and analyses and is efforts were greatly appreciated by team members. Finally, te assistance of te interview staff and te cooperation of tens of tousands of Australian recreational fisers was acknowledged and applauded. New Sout Wales Gary Henry Jeff Murpy Dennis Reid Jon Mattews Victoria Simon Conron Jo Dickson Maasiki Macida Queensland Kirrily McInnes Emma Brewis Jim Higgs Sout Australia Ben Malseed Tasmania Jeremy Lyle Jane Forward Nortern Territory Anne Coleman Cris Uttley Garry Eckermann ACT Pil Salqvist Kewagama Researc P/L Laurie West David Campbell & Associates David Campbell Val Boxall Sonia Venema David McGlennon Western Australia Neil Sumner

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY BACKGROUND Introduction Origins of te Survey Development and Implementation Recreational Survey Literature Literature on Australian Recreational Fising Surveys NEED FOR THE SURVEY Fiseries Management Potential Impact of Recreational Fising Te Regulation of Recreational Fising Fisery Management Plans Stock Assessment and Sustainability Resource Allocation between Sectors Information Base on Resource Users OBJECTIVES SURVEY CONTEXT Overview Specialist In-ouse Teams Implementation Strategies National Perspective of te Project NATIONAL RECREATIONAL FISHING SURVEY Introduction Survey Overview Survey Scope Sampling Design Survey Components National Screening Survey Diary Survey Attitudinal Survey Supplementary Survey Data Calibration Surveys Non-response follow-up Unexpected fising On-site surveys Data Management Database Data Imputation Data Analysis Data Expansion - Screening Survey Demograpic bencmarking Non-response adjustment Data Expansion Diary Survey Diary non-response adjustment Correction for fisers entering or leaving te fisery Estimation Procedures Number of fisers and fiser-ouseolds... 40

4 Fising effort Catc Economic activity Attitudinal/awareness issues Response Profiles Recreational Fising Participation Number of Fisers Age and Gender Oter Caracteristics Fising club/association membersip Fising licences Boat ownersip Recreational Fising Effort Total Effort Interstate Fising Effort Fising Frequency Effort by Water Body Type Effort by Fising Metod Effort by Fising Platform Recreational Catc Total Harvest Harvest of Key Species Finfis Non-fis Release Rates Harvest Weigts Expenditure by Recreational Fisers National and State Expenditure Expenditure Items Fisers Attitudes and Awareness Fiser Motivation NORTHERN AUSTRALIA INDIGENOUS FISHING SURVEY Overview Historical Accounts of Indigenous Fising Traditional Management of Fis Stocks Current Indigenous Fiseries Management Need for te Study Metods Survey Scope Sample Design Primary Data Sources Background Survey Screening Survey Catc and Effort Survey Data Management Results Response to te Survey Indigenous Fising Effort Indigenous Fis Catc Total Harvest Harvest of Key Species Species Diversity of te Indigenous Catc Furter Analyses and Reporting

5 7. OVERSEAS VISITING FISHER SURVEY Overview Metods Results Annual Number of Tourists to Australia Annual Number of Visiting Fisers Country of Origin Duration of Stay Expenditure in Australia Age and Gender of Fisers Estimated Catc of Visiting Fisers BENEFITS FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS CONCLUSIONS National Survey Overview National Recreational Fising Survey (NRFS) Response Profile Participation in Recreational Fising Recreational Fising Effort Recreational Fis Catc Expenditure by Recreational Fisers Motivation for recreational fising Nortern Australia Indigenous Fising Survey (NAIFS) Indigenous fising effort Indigenous fis catc Overseas Visiting Fiser Survey (OVFS) Conclusions REFERENCES APPENDICES

6 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 5.1 Diagrammatic representation of National Recreational Fising Survey Figure 5.2 Map of Australia sowing ABS statistical divisions Figure 5.3 Fising participation in te 12 monts prior to May 2000 by State or Territory of residence for persons aged 5 or older: (a) Number of persons and (b) proportion of te resident population. Error bars represent one standard error Figure 5.4 Houseold (private dwelling) fising participation in te 12 monts prior to May 2000 by State or Territory: (a) Number of ouseolds and (b) proportion of ouseolds witin te population. Error bars represent one standard error Figure 5.5 Fising participation in te 12 monts prior to May 2000 by age class and gender for Australian residents aged 5 or older: (a) Number of persons and (b) proportion of te resident population Figure 5.6 Fising club/association membersip in te 12 monts prior to May 2000 by State or Territory of residence for recreational fisers aged 5 or older: (a) Number of members and (b) proportion of fisers Figure 5.7 Fising licensing status for te 12 monts prior to May 2000 by State or Territory of residence for recreational fisers aged 5 or older: (a) Number of licence-olders and (b) proportion of fisers Figure 5.8 Houseold boat ownersip for te general population and for fising ouseolds by State or Territory: (a) Number of ouseolds and (b) proportion of te total number of ouseolds Figure 5.9 Caracteristics of Australian recreational fising boats: (a) Distribution (%) of vessels by lengt class; (b) distribution by propulsion category; (c) distribution (%) by storage location; (d) proportion (%) of vessels wit eco sounder by lengt class; and (e) proportion of vessels (%) wit GPS by lengt class Figure 5.10 Annual fising effort by State or Territory fised for Australian recreational fisers aged 5 or older. (a) Fiser days (b) number of fising events, (c) ours fised Figure 5.11 Interstate fising activity by Australian recreational fisers age 5 or older: (a) Proportion of annual fising effort (events) imported into eac State or Territory by interstate residents, (b) proportion of annual effort (events) exported interstate by State or Territory of residence and (c) balance between imported and exported fising effort (events) by State or Territory fised Figure 5.12 Mean annual number of days fised per recreational fiser aged 5 or older, by State or Territory of residence Figure 5.13 Distribution of annual fising effort (days fised) amongst Australian recreational fisers aged 5 or older

7 Figure 5.14 Relationsip between te number of fisers and teir cumulated impact in terms of fising effort (days fised) for Australian recreational fisers aged 5 or older Figure 5.15 Annual recreational fising effort (events) by water body type for Australian recreational fisers aged 5 or older. Error bars represent one standard error Figure 5.16 Proportion of annual fising effort (events) for recreational fisers aged 5 or older by water body type and State or Territory fised Figure 5.17 Proportion of annual fising effort (events) in salt and freswater by State or Territory fised for recreational fisers aged 5 or older Figure 5.18 Annual fising effort (events) by fising metod for Australian recreational fisers aged 5 or older Figure 5.19 Proportion of annual fising effort (events) by metod and State or Territory fised for recreational fisers aged 5 or older Figure 5.20 Proportion of annual fising effort (events) by fising platform and State or Territory fised for recreational fisers aged 5 or older Figure 5.21 Proportion of annual fising effort (events) by water type and State or Territory fised for recreational fisers aged 5 or older: (a) Boat-based and (b) sore-based effort Figure 5.22 Proportion of annual boat fising effort (events) by vessel type and State or Territory fised for recreational fisers aged 5 or older Figure 5.23 Harvest (numbers of organisms) taken by Australian recreational fisers aged 5 or older for te major taxonomic groups. Error bars represent one standard error Figure 5.24 Relative distribution of te annual recreational arvest (based on numbers) by State and Territory fised for key recreational species Figure 5.25 Expenditure by recreational fisers in Australia Figure 5.26 Recreation expenditure by category Figure 5.27 Expenditure per angler per annum Figure 5.28 Primary motivation for recreational fising as identified by Australian recreational fisers (% respondents) Figure 6.1 Indigenous communities in Nortern Australia Figure 6.2 Annual fising effort, expressed as (a) fising events, (b) fising days and (c) ouseold days by indigenous fisers in nortern Australia Figure 6.3 Annual fising effort (events) by water type for indigenous fisers in nortern Australia Figure 6.4 Annual indigenous fising effort (events) by water type and State in nortern Australia Figure 6.6 Annual fising effort (events) by metod and State for indigenous fisers in nortern Australia Figure 6.7 Annual fising effort (events) by platform (boat/ sore) for indigenous fisers in nortern Australia

8 Figure 6.8 Annual fising effort (events) by salt/ freswater for indigenous fisers in nortern Australia Figure 6.9 Annual fis arvest (main taxon) for indigenous fisers in nortern Australia Figure 7.1 Country of residence of visiting fisers Figure 7.2 Age structure of overseas visiting fisers

9 LIST OF TABLES Table 5.1 Total numbers of private dwelling ouseolds and gross sample sizes by ABS statistical divisions and survey strata Table 5.2 Response analysis for te screening and diary surveys by State and Territory - based on net sample (total gross sample less sample loss ) Table 5.3 Details of recreational boat ownersip in Australia. Number of vessels, number used for fising and estimated market value of recreational fising vessels by State or Territory Table 5.4 Estimated annual arvest (numbers) taken by Australian recreational fisers, aged 5 or older, for key species by State and Territory fised Table 5.5 Estimated annual arvest (numbers) taken by Australian recreational fisers, aged 5 or older, for key species by water body type Table 5.6 Estimated annual arvest (numbers) taken by Australian recreational fisers, aged 5 or older, for key species by metod. Boat-based proportion of te total arvest is indicated Table 5.7 Estimated annual arvest and released/discarded catc (numbers) taken by Australian recreational fisers, aged 5 or older, for selected species. Proportion of te catces released are indicated Table 5.8 Estimated annual arvest (kilograms) taken by Australian recreational fisers, aged 5 or older, for selected species by State or Territory fised Table 5.9 Importance of factors to do wit recreational fising motivation (% of respondents) based on nationally aggregated data Table 5.10 Primary reason for recreational fising (% of respondents) by State or Territory of residence Table 6.1 Indigenous communities in nortern Australia tat participated in te survey Table 6.2 Indigenous communities sampled Table 6.3 Annual arvest (caugt and kept) of Key Species/ groups by Indigenous fisers in nortern Australia Table 6.4 Annual arvest (caugt and kept) of Key Species/ groups by Indigenous fisers in nortern Australia by Water Body Type Table 6.5 Annual arvest (caugt and kept) of Key Species/ groups by Indigenous fisers in nortern Australia by Fising Metod Table 7.1 Number of tourists to Australia Table 7.2 Number of overseas visiting fisers to Australia Table 7.3 Percentage of visiting tourists tat go fising in Australia

10 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix 5.1 Ci-square significance tests comparing survey sample against ABS bencmark population data (bold values indicate significant differences) Appendix 5.2 Description of te procedure used to develop ouseold and person integrated weigts. 146 Appendix 5.3 Estimated number of persons and proportion of te Australian resident population aged 5 or older wo fised recreationally in te 12 monts prior to May 2000 by State or Territory of residence, Statistical Division and sample stratum Appendix 5.4 Estimated number of ouseolds and te proportion of Australian private dwelling ouseolds tat contained persons wo fised recreationally in te 12 monts prior to May 2000 by State or Territory, Statistical Division and sample stratum Appendix 5.5 Number of recreational fisers and proportion of te resident population by age class and gender and State or Territory of residence Appendix 5.6 Annual fising effort, expressed as fiser days, fising events and fiser ours, by State or Territory of residence and State or Territory fised for Australian recreational fisers aged 5 or older se is standard error, rse is relative standard error Appendix 5.7 Annual fising effort (fising events) by water body type and State or Territory fised for Australian recreational fisers aged 5 or older Appendix 5.8 Annual fising effort (events) by fising metod and State or Territory fised for Australian recreational fisers aged 5 or older Appendix 5.9 Annual fising effort (fiser ours) by fising metod and State or Territory fised for Australian recreational fisers aged 5 or older Appendix 5.10 Mean duration (ours) of recreational fising events by metod and by State or Territory Appendix 5.11 Recreational fising effort by fising platform and State or Territory fised for Australian recreational fisers aged 5 or older Appendix 5.12 Common and scientific names of species taken by recreational fisers and groupings (ig level and key species groupings) used for analysis and reporting Appendix 5.13 Estimated annual arvest (numbers) taken by recreational fisers, aged 5 or older, by species group and by State or Territory fised Appendix 5.14 Estimated annual arvest and released/discarded catc (numbers) taken by Australian recreational fisers, aged 5 or older. Te released proportion of te total catc is indicated Appendix 5.15 Estimated mean weigts (kg) for key recreational species in Australia by State or Territory Appendix 5.16 Expenditure by recreational fisers in Australia

11 Appendix 5.17 Importance ratings for reasons to do wit recreational fising motivation (% of respondents) by State or Territory of residence Appendix 6.1 Annual fising effort, expressed as ouseold fising days, person fising days and person fising events for indigenous fisers in nortern Australia by State or Territory Appendix 6.2 Annual fising effort (fising events) by water body type for indigenous fisers in nortern Australia by State or Territory Appendix 6.3 Annual fising effort (fising events) by fising metod for indigenous fisers in nortern Australia by State or Territory Appendix 6.4 Annual fising effort (fising events) by fising platform (boat/ sore) for indigenous fisers in nortern Australia by State or Territory Appendix 6.5 Annual fising effort (fising events) by fres or saltwater for indigenous fisers in nortern Australia by State or Territory Appendix 6.6 Annual fis catc (number of animals) for indigenous fisers in nortern Australia by State or Territory Appendix 6.7 Annual fis catc (number of animals) of Key Species/ Groups by indigenous fisers in nortern Australia by State or Territory

12

13 Non Tecnical Summary 13 NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 99/158 Implementation of te National Recreational and Indigenous Fising Survey PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Mr Stan Jarzynski ADDRESS: Fiseries Action Program Department of Agriculture, Fiseries and Forestry - Australia GPO Box 858 CANBERRA ACT 2601 Pone: Fax: Stan.jarzynski@affa.gov.au OBJECTIVES: Te primary objective of te national recreational and indigenous fising survey was to collect nationally consistent and comparable fisery statistics (fis catc, fising effort, species composition) for te non-commercial components of Australian fiseries. Te survey also collected information on te number of fisers, teir demograpic profile, expenditure associated wit fising and te attitude and awareness of anglers to prominent fiseries management issues. Te specific objectives of te project were; To determine te participation rate in recreational fising nationally, by States and Territories and regionally, and profile te demograpic caracteristics of recreational fisers. To quantify catc and effort of te recreational fising sector nationally, by States and Territories and, were appropriate, regionally. To collect data on expenditure by te recreational fising sector nationally and regionally. To establis te attitudes and awareness of recreational fisers to management issues of relevance to teir fisery. To quantify fising activity by indigenous fising communities in nortern Australia. To quantify fising activity by overseas visiting fisers. NON TECHNICAL SUMMARY: A national survey of recreational and indigenous fising was conducted in Australia during Te survey was a joint initiative of Commonwealt and State governments. Grants from te Natural Heritage Trust (NHT), Fiseries Researc and Development Corporation (FRDC) and State fisery agencies supported te project. Te national survey was a multifaceted project designed to provide a range of information about non-commercial fising in Australia. Te project was comprised of tree independent surveys, te National Recreational Fising Survey (NRFS), te Nortern Australia Indigenous Fising Survey (NAIFS) and te Overseas Visiting Fiser Survey (OVFS). Different metodological and analytical approaces were required for eac of tese surveys, reflecting teir varying caracteristics. A telepone/ diary survey metodology was developed to collect information on recreational fising in Australia wile modified on-site survey tecniques were used to collect information from indigenous and overseas fisers. Non-response and beavioral biases were assessed using a suite of innovative follow-up surveys. Houseold samples drawn for te survey were cecked for representation against Australian Bureau of Statistics population bencmark data.

14 Non Tecnical Summary 14 An estimated 3.36 million Australian residents, aged 5 years or older, fised at least once in te 12 monts prior to May Tis represented a national recreational fising participation rate of 19.5%. NSW ad te greatest number of recreational fisers (999,000) followed by Queensland (785,000) and Victoria (545,000). Almost 70% of te nations recreational fisers resided in tese East Coast States. However, te igest fising participation rates were recorded from Nortern Territory (31.6%), Tasmania (29.3%) and Western Australia (28.5%). Regional participation rates were lowest in Sydney (13.1%) and Melbourne (10.2%), but tese capital cities ad a large number of fisers by virtue of teir population size. An estimated 1.8 million Australian ouseolds contained at least one recreational fiser representing 24.5% of ouseolds nationally. On average, eac fising ouseold contained 1.9 recreational fisers. Recreational fising was more popular wit males (2.3 million fisers) tan females (1.1 million fisers) and te predominance of males involved in fising was evident across all age groups. Te age group contained te greatest number of recreational fisers for bot gender (644,000 males and 325,000 females), altoug participation rates were igest among cildren (5-14 age group). Fising club membersip among recreational fisers was low (4.3% nationally) and te number of recreational fising licence olders varied according to state jurisdictional arrangements. More tan 512,000 boats wit a capital value of $3.5 billion were used for recreational fising. Australian recreational fisers expended an estimated 20.6 million fiser days of effort during te survey year, representing 23.2 million separate fising events or million fiser ours. NSW recorded te greatest effort (7.7 million events) followed by Queensland (5.8 million events) and Western Australia (3.4 million events). More tan 11% of te national fising effort (2.6 million events) occurred outside a fiser s ome state. Patterns in interstate fising effort indicated tat NSW, Queensland, Nortern Territory and to a lesser extent Western Australia were net importers of fising effort, wile Victoria, ACT and Sout Australia were net exporters of effort. Recreational fising effort by individual fisers ranged from 1 to 169 days per annum and te average fising effort was 6.1 days/ fiser/ year. Te most active 15% of fisers recorded about 50% of te fising effort. Nationally, about 41% of te total fising effort (9.5 million events) occurred in coastal waters, wit estuarine waters accounting for a furter 35% (8.1 million events). Te level of recreational fising directed at offsore waters was relatively low, about 4% (937,000 events). Freswater fising accounted for almost 20% of te national fising effort, around 11% (2.7 million events) in rivers and 8% (1.9 million events) in lakes or dams. Fising from te sore attracted a greater level of activity (57% of events) tan fising from a boat (43% of events). Of te boat-based fising effort, more tan 93% of fising events were conducted from private fising boats as opposed to carter vessels (4%) and ire boats (3%). Tese national trends were broadly consistent across States, but te geograpical and population variations between States contributed to some differences. Line fising metods (lines, lures, jigs, flys, setlines) accounted for 19.7 million fising events (85% of te national total). Fising wit pots and traps (7%), arvesting bait wit pumps, rakes and spades (4%), fising wit nets (3%) and diving wit spears or and collecting (1%) followed in importance. Te average duration of a line (bait) fising event was 3.6 ours, but fising time varied widely wit tecnique. Recreational fisers in Australia arvested approximately 136 million aquatic animals during te survey year. Te arvest included 60.4 million finfis, 11.5 million small baitfis, 6.1 million crabs and lobsters, 47.7 million prawns and yabbies, 1.8 million cepalopods, 7.2 million oter molluscs and 1.2 million oter taxa. Te weigt of te recreational arvest was estimated to be in excess of 30,000 tonnes. Te prominent species/ groups in te recreational arvest were witing (8.1 million fis), flatead (7.4 million), Australian erring (6.9 million), bream (4.9 million), mullet (2.9 million), garfis (2.4 million), tailor (2.3 million), Australian salmon (1.7 million) and pink snapper (1.3

15 Non Tecnical Summary 15 million). Two pest species (European carp and Englis perc) were arvested in large numbers (2.1 million fis) and (1.3 million), respectively. Substantial numbers of blue swimmer crabs (3.9 million crabs) and freswater crayfis (7.4 million crayfis) were arvested. Recreational fisers in Australia spent more tan $1.8 billion on fising related items during te survey year. Regional expenditure was generally related to te size of te population and te number of fisers. NSW ad te largest expenditure ($554 million) and ACT te smallest ($19 million). Te national average expenditure was $552 per fiser per annum. Australian recreational fisers reported more tan 45 different expenditure items. Expenditure on boats and trailers ($872 million) was te largest individual expense for fisers. Travel associated wit fising ($432 million), accommodation ($184 million) and fising tackle ($146 million) followed in importance. Wen asked about teir reason for fising, Australian recreational fisers identified to relax and unwind (37% of respondents), fising for sport (18%), to be wit family (15%) and to be outdoors (13%) as teir primary motive. Only a small proportion of fisers (8%) considered catcing fis for food as teir primary motivation for fising. Indigenous fisers in nortern Australia expended an estimated 420,000 fiser days of effort during te survey year, representing 671,000 separate fising events. Almost two tirds of te fising effort occurred in Nortern Territory wile Queensland and Western Australia reported 21% and 14% of te effort, respectively. Indigenous fisers arvested aquatic animals from a range of environments, but insore waters accounted for more tan alf te fising effort. Indigenous fisers used line fising metods (53%), and collecting (26%), nets (12%) and spears (9%) as teir primary fising metods. Indigenous fisers arvested more tan 3 million aquatic animals from te waters of nortern Australia. Te arvest included approximately 910,000 finfis, 1.1 million sellfis, 655,000 prawns and yabbies, 181,000 crabs and lobsters, 98,000 small baitfis and 93,000 oter taxa. Te most prominent finfis species in te indigenous catc were mullet (182,000 fis), catfis (109,000), seaperc/ snappers (84,000), bream (71,000) and barramundi (63,000). Te most prominent non-fis species in te indigenous catc were mussels, (586,000), cerabin (517,000), oter bivalves (233,000), prawns (132,000), oysters (114,000) and mud crabs (108,000). A relatively small proportion of te indigenous catc (1.7%) was returned to te water. Indigenous fisers arvested a number of species groups tat were out-of-scope or protected from non-indigenous fisers. Approximately 4.6 million international tourists came to Australia during Approximately 4% of tese tourists (191,000 people) engaged in fising wile tey were in Australia. Te largest number of tourist fisers (46,100 people) came from United Kingdom, Japan (23,900), USA (19,300) and New Zealand (14,800). Tourist fisers in Australia were composed of all age groups from 15 years to more tan 70 years, but iger numbers of fisers were found in te younger age groups. Te project as acieved its goals regarding te collection of fisery statistics for te non-commercial components of Australian fiseries. A compreensive Australian recreational fising database as been establised. A survey metodology as been developed, tested and proved for monitoring largescale recreational fiseries. Te project as delivered on a primary goal of te National Policy on Recreational Fising and te stated objectives of Commonwealt and State fisery agencies regarding te acquisition of researc data to support te management of recreational fiseries and te conservation of fisery resources.

16

17 Background BACKGROUND 1.1. Introduction A national survey of recreational and indigenous fising in Australia was conducted during Te survey represents te first national examination of te non-commercial components of Australian fiseries. Te survey obtained estimates of te level of participation, fising effort and catc by recreational fisers. Te survey also sougt information on te economic activity associated wit fising and te attitude of anglers to prominent fiseries issues. Tese data were required at a national, state and regional level by Australian fisery agencies. Te project was planned, developed and supported by Commonwealt and State governments, peak commercial and recreational fising groups, indigenous and environmental associations. A team of scientists from te State fiseries agencies and several external consultants implemented te project. Te survey database represents te most compreensive body of information ever collected on te recreational sector in Australia. Fiseries statistics were gatered on a range of major issues of significance to recreational fising and its management. Tese data will be used to support te future management of recreational fising in Australia Origins of te Survey Te growing number of recreational fisers over te last few decades as raised questions about teir impact on fisery resources. Terefore, recreational fising surveys ave been conducted by State fisery agencies to support te sustainable arvesting of fis stocks and to allocate fising opportunity among resource users. Recreational fising surveys were first conducted in Australia in te mid s and tey ave grown in size and complexity ever since. Most State fisery agencies routinely conduct recreational fising surveys as part of teir core activity. However, tere is rarely a common approac to te spatial or temporal scales of tese surveys or te preferred metodology. Researc staff ave discussed te need for a standard, comparable national survey metodology since te early 1990 s. Te national recreational fising survey, terefore, ad its origins in te evolution and expansion of te scope of te work already being conducted in States and te desire for a national metodological standard as well as large-scale recreational fising bencmark statistics. State fisery agencies also recognised te need to establis long-term recreational fising monitoring systems of a similar standard to tose for te commercial sector. More formal support for a national approac to recreational fising researc arose from te National Policy for Recreational Fising in Australia tat was developed by government and industry and publised in December Te Policy endorsed te principle tat fiseries management decisions sould be based on sound information including fis biology, fising activity, catces and te economic and social values of recreational fising. Te Policy also noted tat tere was an urgent need to obtain accurate national information on te values of recreational fising, and canges in tese values over a period of time as all levels of government ave inadequate information for managing many fis stocks of importance to recreational fising. Te Policy recommended tat a national survey of recreational fising sould be undertaken on a five-yearly basis. In addition, te Policy suggested tat tere was also a need to identify te attitudes of recreational fisers to teir sport and determine te reasons wy people fis and te best means of incorporating tese needs into management polices.

18 Background 18 Finally, community support for information on te arvest of fis stocks by te recreational sector arose from a Federally-funded community-based natural resources program (Fiscare) tat was establised in Fiscare eld community worksops around Australia wit key stakeolders of te aquatic environment to canvass a range of natural resource and abitat issues of interest or concern to a broad cross-section of te Australian community. A common issue at tese worksops was te lack of scientific information on te status of many fisery resources and te level of exploitation by commercial and recreational fisers. Community groups lamented te paucity of information on recreational fising in view of te apparent growt in te number of participants in tis activity. It was acknowledged tat government fisery agencies ad an obligation to better understand te impact of recreational fising and te sustainability of fis stocks. Te worksops strongly agreed wit te need for a program to obtain more information on recreational fising Development and Implementation Te national recreational fising survey was progressively developed troug a tree-pase process during te late 1990 s tat involved a feasibility study, a development (pilot) project and te final implementation of te survey. A survey design consultant (Kewagama Researc Pty Ltd) was commissioned to review angling survey metodologies in 1998 and to recommend an appropriate survey instrument for Australian fiseries. Kewagama consolidated te output specifications of eac State/ Territory, provided a literature review of potential survey metodologies (including international surveys), discussed survey metodologies in ligt of te output specifications and caracteristics of Australian recreational fiseries and explored alternative implementation strategies. Kewagama recommended a national screening and diary instrument as te most appropriate survey tecnique for gatering national recreational fisery statistics. Te feasibility study also provided an assessment of development and implementation costs of a national survey. Standing Committee on Fiseries and Aquaculture (SCFA) endorsed te feasibility study and approved te development of a national recreational fising survey, along wit additional components for indigenous fising communities and international visiting fisers. Te development pase of te national recreational and indigenous fising survey occurred during Te objectives of te development pase were to advance te national survey concept (as per te feasibility study), into working documents and sampling plans ready for implementation. Tis required te finalisation/ refinement of te output specifications, sampling design, questionnaires and oter survey elements for te tree major components of te survey. Te survey instrument was pilot tested during 1999/2000. Tis involved a 2-mont pilot survey in eac State and Territory and a 12- mont pilot in NSW, Tasmania and te Nortern Territory. Significantly, te pilot testing provided te key survey researc staff in eac State and Territory wit direct experience in te conduct of te various survey components and database management systems as well as refining survey procedures. Te development pase allowed te final documentation and costings for te survey proper to be agreed to by te funding agencies and States. Altoug a complex and callenging project in many respects, te development pase acieved its stated objectives and te project team recommended tat te final implementation of te national survey proceed according to scedule in Recreational Survey Literature Recreational fising surveys are used by fiseries agencies in many parts of te world to obtain information for management purposes. Recreational surveys may vary in teir complexity and scope, but seven basic designs are commonly used to gater fising information. Tese are mail surveys, telepone surveys, door-to-door surveys, diary or logbook surveys, access point surveys, roving

19 Background 19 surveys and aerial surveys (Pollock et al., 1994). Te first four are regarded as off-site metods (surveys conducted away from fising sites) and te last tree are regarded as on-site metods (surveys conducted at te fising site). Wile te survey metods may differ, te information gatered by fising surveys is essentially te same. Recreational fising surveys seek to obtain information on te fis catc (kg or numbers), fising effort (trips, ours or days fised), catc rate (kg per our), species diversity, size and age of fis. Surveys of te expenditure incurred by recreational fisers generally seek information on value of te fisery to regional communities wile studies of te attitude/ awareness or motivation of fisers are used to examine social and management issues. Te metods used to collect data on recreational fising are determined by te type of information required, te temporal and spatial scale of te study area, te caracteristics of te fisery and te resources (personnel, funds, gear) available. Survey outcomes are reported in a broad range of media from popular fising magazines to scientific journals. A summary of te content of scientific journals as been publised in a number of recreational fising texts tat describe te current status of recreational fising researc and management. Sigler and Sigler (1990) and Koler and Hubert (1993) provided texts on te conceptual basis of freswater fiseries management. Tese texts included a istory of fiseries researc and management and a description of te procedures for collecting, recording and interpreting scientific data relative to fiseries management goals. In 1990, te American Fiseries Society convened an international symposium on recreational fising surveys in Texas tat brougt togeter over 300 people involved in researc and management. Te symposium drew togeter current survey information and focused tese tecniques on fisery problems. Proceedings of te symposium were publised in Gutrie et al. (1991). A furter outcome of te symposium was te publication of a manual of recreational survey tecniques for practical use in fiseries management (Pollock et al., 1994). Tis publication provides a compreensive review of angler survey metods and as become te autoritative text on recreational survey metods. More recently, te status of recreational fiseries researc and management in Europe was described in te proceedings of te European Inland Fiseries Advisory Commission symposium (Hickley and Tompkins, 1998). Te most recent significant contribution to te literature on recreational fising was te text by Pitcer and Hollingwort (2002) on te ecological, economic and social evaluation of recreational fiseries. Tis book arose from a selection of papers presented at an international conference on evaluating te benefits of recreational fising eld at te University of Britis Columbia in Tis text not only provides an analysis of te value of recreational fising, but an update of te management, assessment and policy making for recreational fiseries worldwide. Different approaces to te collection of recreational fising information are used according to te particular circumstances of te fisery and te desired outcomes. However, large-scale surveys (national or statewide) commonly use off-site tecniques for teir lower cost and greater utility in dealing wit large numbers of fisers dispersed over large geograpical areas. Remote (off-site) survey tecniques ave been used to collect information on recreational fiseries in Britian (NRA, 1995), Canada (Dominy, 1992), England and Wales (Lyons, Hickley and Gledill, 2002), France (Jantzen, 1998), Germany (Steffens and Winkel, 2002), New Zealand (Teirney, 1995; Teirney et al., 1977), Nordic Countries (Toivonen, 2002), Sout Africa (Griffits and Lambert, 2002), Sweden (Bogelius, 1998) and te United States (Essig and Holliday, 1991; Grambsc and Fiser, 1991; Gentner and Lowter, 2002). Te present survey of recreational fising in Australia used a remote (telepone/ diary) survey tecnique in conjunction wit a number of validation/ calibration surveys to minimise non-response and beavioural biases. Like most large-scale survey tecniques, te survey instrument was constrained by te availablity resources. A justification and discussion of te metods used for te Australian national survey was provided in te feasibility study (Kewagama Researc, 1998).

20 Background Literature on Australian Recreational Fising Surveys Recreational fising surveys ave been conducted in Australia since te mid-1970 s (Tilzey 1977a, b), but te real growt in recreational fising researc occurred during te 1980 s as fisery agencies recognised te need to consider estimates of arvest from all fising groups in te management of aquatic resources. Recreational fising survey metodology as developed to include te full range of remote, on-site and biological tecniques and te scope of Australian surveys as expanded to include social, economic and motivational factors as well as traditional biological issues in fiseries management. Several undred recreational fising surveys ave now been conducted in Australia and tese surveys encompass te range and diversity of recreational fiseries. Consequently, a substantial body of quantitative information on recreational fising now exists for a range of Australian fiseries. Unfortunately, most surveys are limited in teir temporal or spatial (single lake or estuary) scale and tis as reduced teir value in resource assessment, resource allocation and management disputes on a national or state-wide basis. Sort-term surveys ave resolved immediate management issues, but tere is a growing desire to incorporate large-scale and longer term monitoring programs, suc as tose in place for commercial fiseries, into te management of recreational fiseries. Te first attempt to provide national information on recreational fising in Australia was commissioned by te Australian Recreational and Sport Fising Confederation in te early 1980 s to draw attention to te size (number of fisers) and economic impacts (expenditure associated wit fising) of te fising industry (P.A. Management Consultants, 1984). General population or omnibus surveys ave now been conducted in all Australian States and Territories. Wile suc surveys ave provided estimates of te level of participation in recreational fising and te demograpic caracteristics of recreational fisers, tey do not provide estimates of catc and effort. Since te mid s tere ave been a number of large-scale surveys directed at evaluating recreational catc and effort. Tey include state-wide surveys of te recreational catc in Nortern Territory (Coleman, 1998) and Queensland (Higgs, 1999), wile a number of states ave conducted large-scale state-wide surveys on particular fis or fiseries (Steffe et al., 1997; McGlennon, 1999; Sumner and Williamson, 1999; Lyle, 2000; Forward and Lyle, 2002). All states ave conducted regional, single water body or fisery-specific fising surveys in freswater, estuarine and marine waters to resolve specific fiseries management issues. Reviews of te Australian recreational fising survey literature can be found in McGlennon (1995), Kewagama Researc (1998) and McIlgorm and Pepperell (1999).

21 Need NEED FOR THE SURVEY 2.1. Fiseries Management Fiseries legislation is te principal instrument of government policy wit regard to te exploitation of natural resources. Fiseries management is te means by wic a government agency implements te provisions of te fiseries legislation. Tere are various biological, economic and social objectives of fiseries management, wic may vary among governments depending on te state of fisery resources and community expectations. In fact, most management agencies are concerned wit a range of management objectives and teir interactions. Australian fiseries management agencies ave similar goals in regard to te management of fisery resources. Tey seek to conserve fis stocks, manage sustainable arvesting, protect aquatic abitat and sare te resource among users. Te primary role of government is to ensure long-term sustainable fiseries production for te prosperity and well being of te community. To acieve tis goal, government fisery agencies conduct scientific researc to understand fis populations and implement arvesting strategies to control te impacts of fising activity on fis stocks. Te quantification of te commercial and recreational arvest by species and region is fundamental to te determination of appropriate fising regulations, sustainable arvesting and good management. Many agencies also conduct a range of additional measures to protect and restore fis abitat and enance te basis of fis production troug aquaculture Potential Impact of Recreational Fising A number of Australian studies ave sown tat recreational fisers take a substantial proportion of te resource and te seer weigt of numbers involved in recreational fising is forcing managers to divert teir attention from commercial activities (Ramsay, 1991). Results of creel surveys in te New Sout Wales metropolitan estuaries ave sown tat te recreational catc is probably larger tan te commercial catc for some areas and species (SPCC, 1984; Henry, 1984). Recreational catces of bream and prawns are probably many times te commercial catc in a number of New Sout Wales estuaries (Kearney, 1991). It is becoming clear tat te potential impact of recreational fising on te total resource may be greater tan was previously tougt. Recreational fising effort continues to sow dramatic increases in intensity and effectiveness, wit inevitable declines in catc rates, particularly near major population centres (Kearney, 1991). Tecnological advances in position fixing and fis sounding equipment and te proliferation of information in te fising media may be expected to raise te level of competence of te recreational fising community. As suc, te impact of recreational fisers on te environment and te fis stocks, may warrant more stringent management. To effect te protection and increased productivity of fisery resources, as well as to ensure and enance te quality, quantity and diversity of recreational fising opportunities, recreational fising needs to be considered in regard to te total environmental and fiseries management objectives (Edwards, 1991) Te Regulation of Recreational Fising Fiseries management agencies provide te government wit recommendations for resource conservation and use. Tese recommendations may include policies and rules concerning fising opportunity, resource allocation and arvesting strategies. Management arrangements for arvesting

22 Need 22 fis are broadly classified as input and output controlled strategies. Input managed fiseries are regulated by limiting te fising effort tat may be applied to te resource. Tere is no fixed upper limit on te arvest of fisery resources under input controls. Terefore, improvements in fising tecnology (fis sounding and position fixing equipment, vessel size and quality etc) and numbers of fisers may negate attempts to control fising effort and te arvest. Output control strategies set upper limits on te total catc to be taken by fisers. Output controls are more common to commercial fiseries particularly tose tat ave fiseries legislation influenced by economic objectives. Recreational fising in Australia is generally managed by a combination of input and output controls. Fisers are required to adere to daily fis bag and possession limits, minimum and/or maximum fis size limits, restrictions on te type, size and quantity of fising gear and closures on fising areas and seasons. Tese regulations ave been implemented to regulate te impacts of te recreational arvest and to sare te resource among fisers. Recreational fiseries statistics obtained during te current survey will provide bencmarks against wic future management can be assessed as well as igligting issues tat may require management or researc attention Fisery Management Plans Australian fisery agencies are placing increased empasis on ensuring tat fising activities are environmentally sustainable and te rules governing fiseries are transparent and well known by te participants and te community. Tis requires te development of fisery management strategies for te major components of commercial and recreational fiseries. It also requires tat tese strategies are documented in a form tat provides fisers and te community wit a clear statement of intent regarding te exploitation of fisery resources and aderence to sustainability principles. In NSW, te management strategy and environmental impact assessment for eac fisery are joined togeter in a document termed te Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for te fisery. Te EIS for eac fisery contains a list of te current management rules operating in te fisery, a description of te proposed management arrangements for te next five years and an outline of te alternative management approaces. Te EIS also contains an assessment of te biopysical, economic and social impacts of te management rules proposed for te fisery, te findings of te environmental impact assessment for te fisery and a justification for te cosen strategy. Public release of te EIS provides an opportunity for te community to review te environmental performance of te fisery and ave input to its future management Stock Assessment and Sustainability Te recreational fising information obtained from te current survey will be used by management agencies for fisery stock assessments. Stock assessments seek to explain and predict te responses of fis populations to exploitation. Suc assessments draw on a range of information sources and are subject to a wide variety of uncertainties. Te quality of assessments depends on te nature of te species being studied, te value of te fisery and te cost of gatering information. Te basis for all assessments is an understanding of te key demograpic processes tat limit population size. Tese are te rates at wic fis grow, reproduce and die (natural and fising mortality), recruit and move. Biological data and fiseries statistics are used to construct models of a fisery. Suc models range in complexity and sopistication. For example, te relatively simple biomass dynamic models use a time series of catc and a time series of relative abundance data to estimate canges in te biomass of te population over time. In contrast, more complex age- and lengt-structured models of populations

23 Need 23 incorporate more information about te biology of a species (e.g. rates of growt, natural mortality) and specifically consider multiple ages or lengt-classes, rater tan simply te exploitable biomass. Many types of model explicitly acknowledge uncertainty in te process of fitting te model to istorical data and in providing estimates of te risk associated wit alternative arvesting strategies. One of te basic requirements of models of populations and fiseries is a time-series of catces (i.e. witdrawals) from te stock. Consequently, bot catces from te commercial sector and from te recreational sector are of importance. Models tat ignore a significant component of te total catc (e.g. do not account for recreational catc) may be biased, may result in incorrect conclusions about te status of a stock and may lead to inappropriate management of a stock or fisery. Tus, estimates of te recreational arvest of a species are fundamental to determining weter te fising mortality by te recreational sector is significant compared to oter sources of fising mortality. Moreover, in cases were te recreational arvest does represent a significant component of fising mortality, knowledge of te recreational catc is fundamental to accurately representing te total catc from a fisery in models tat are subsequently used to assess te status of stocks and te advantages of alternative arvest strategies Resource Allocation between Sectors Australian management agencies generally seek to sare te nation s fisery resources among te various sectors tat use te resources. Tis objective, owever, as been one of te more difficult to acieve because of te common property nature of te resource. Tere are many community groups wit an interest in fisery resources, fis abitat or te water tat sustain fiseries. Most groups ave a legitimate rigt of access to a community resource and will use a range of biological, economic, political and social arguments to enance teir sare of te resource and/or reduce te sare of oter users. Te greatest source of friction for recreational fisers as been te debate wit te commercial fising sector over te relative impact on stocks of eac group. Recreational fisers often blame commercial fisers for reductions in stocks, wo in turn will often deny tis, and counter wit te claim tat te recreational take is under-estimated. In te absence of an appropriate researc program to provide relevant fisery statistics, te question is insoluble. Commercial and recreational fisers do not target te same stocks in all fiseries, and teir proportional sare of te catc in tose common fiseries is generally not clear. A compounding factor in tis debate is an inability of many recreational fisers to relate teir own (peraps small and disappointing) catc to te total recreational catc. Also, recreational fisers tend to overlook te fact tat te beneficiaries of commercial fising are not only te operators, but related businesses, regional economies and te substantial proportion of te national population wo are seafood consumers. Fiseries management agencies play te major role in te allocation of fising opportunity between commercial and recreational fisers as tey implement particular regulatory controls and arvest strategies. Input and output controls, restricted entry fiseries and statutory fising rigts evoke great debate in te fising community and rivalry between fising groups. Consequently, regulatory control measures and arvest strategies sould not be implemented witout scientific evidence of teir effect, or monitoring programs to verify te expected outcome. Fundamental decisions regarding fising equity sould be made prior to te granting of fising opportunity and a compreensive consultation program implemented. Estimates of te recreational arvest need to be obtained and expressed as a percentage of te combined arvest by all fising sectors. Tis ratio will determine te significance of te recreational sector and te appropriate level of management. Te current survey will provide information on te significance of te recreational sector in Australia. Tis knowledge will underpin te management strategies, te industry and community consultation programs and te acievement of legislative objectives for fisery resource management.

24 Need Information Base on Resource Users Fiseries management agencies now require a knowledge of te biology of fis, te dynamics of fis populations, arvesting tecniques, indices of fising success, operational capabilities of fising vessels and gear, environment perturbations, te political and social alternatives for resource use, and teories relating to economic coice. Management objectives are scrutinised by a broad cross-section of te community including fisers, processors, lawyers, resource managers, scientists, scolars and te general public, all of wom will interpret scientific data and management regulations in relation to teir own interests. Te broader role of fiseries management now requires an improved ability to forecast te response of a stock to canges in fising pressure, environmental variability and te economic, social and political agendas. Fiseries agencies are involved in negotiating biological and population outcomes wit te full range of interested groups and te community. Fiseries management objectives in te 21 st Century appear to be more formally stated, specific and quantifiable. Clearly, governments require an information base on all extractive and non-extractive users of te resource to effectively manage tese fiseries. Tis as generally been well establised for te Australian commercial fising sector were legislated catc and effort returns ave been in place for many decades. However, many Australian insore fiseries incorporate a significant recreational sector were arrangements to collect fisery statistics are not standard practice. Recreational fising researc as generally been in response to critical management needs suc as resource allocation disputes, rater tan an orderly monitoring of te status of te sector and its target species. Most State/Territory fiseries agencies ave recognised te need for recreational fising catc statistics and ave made progress towards routine data collection. However, few agencies ave been able to acquire te resources necessary to conduct a compreensive, all-encompassing survey of recreational fising. Tis total fisery information is most important for resource allocation and stock assessment. Recreational fising surveys of sound design and implementation are necessary to obtain tis information for te recreational sector (Pollock et al., 1991). Te national recreational and indigenous fising survey will fulfill te scientific requirements of management agencies and ensure tat fising regulations implemented at te conclusion of te survey ave te best opportunity to sustain resources and improve fising.

25 Objectives OBJECTIVES Te objectives of te National Recreational and Indigenous Fising Survey were to obtain estimates of te primary fisery statistics for te non-commercial components of Australian fiseries. Tese fisery statistics include estimates of te number of fisers, te proportion of te Australian population tat goes fising, fising effort, fis catc and te diversity of species taken by te non-commercial fising sectors. Te survey also sougt information on te economic activity associated wit fising and te attitude and awareness of fisers to a range of prominent fiseries management issues. Te non-commercial components of Australian fiseries were defined as te recreational (angling) sector, indigenous fising in nortern Australia and fising undertaken by international visitors to Australia. Recreational fising as received considerable researc attention in Australia. But te indigenous and tourist fiseries ave received little attention despite teir potential to impact on aquatic resources and contribute to regional economies. Te specific project objectives of te survey were; To determine te participation rate in recreational fising nationally, by States and Territories and regionally, and to profile te demograpic caracteristics of recreational fisers. To quantify catc and effort of te recreational fising sector nationally, by States and Territories and, were appropriate, regionally. To collect data on expenditure by te recreational fising sector nationally and regionally. To establis attitudes and awareness of recreational fisers to issues relevant to teir fisery. To quantify fising activity by indigenous fising communities (were significant) in terms of participation, catc and effort and attitudes. To quantify fising activity of overseas visiting fisers. Tese fiseries statistics and related data were required at a national, state and regional level and sould be spatially and temporally comparable. Catc information from tese non-commercial sectors, wen combined wit te commercial catc estimates, will provide te first complete estimate of te arvest of fisery resources in Australia. Tese data will support te management of all fising sectors and assist fisery resource agencies wit stock assessment and resource allocation issues. It is anticipated tat te survey will provide a metodological and information baseline for future largescale recreational fising researc projects in Australia. Te real value of te information collected during te present survey will be realised in future years as te survey is repeated and a time series of recreational data becomes available for trend analysis.

26

27 Survey context SURVEY CONTEXT 4.1. Overview Te National Recreational and Indigenous Fising Survey was developed as a multifaceted project designed to provide a range of information about non-commercial fising in Australia. Te project was comprised of tree independent surveys, te National Recreational Fising Survey (NRFS), te Nortern Australia Indigenous Fising Survey (NAIFS) and te Overseas Visiting Fiser Survey (OVFS). Different metodological and analytical approaces were required for eac of tese surveys, reflecting teir varying caracteristics. Eac survey itself was composed of a number of different components for te collection, analysis and validation of data. Output specifications, sample sizes, survey documentation and implementation strategies for eac survey were described in detail in te development report (SDWG, 2000). Te tree different components were meant to encapsulate te range of non-commercial fising in Australia. Fiseries statistics obtained from tese sources, wen combined wit tose for te commercial sector, will provide a more compreensive view of te utilisation of aquatic resources of Australia. Te NRFS gatered data on Australian resident recreational fisers using a telepone/ diary survey metod to contact fisers. Te survey obtained data on te number of recreational fisers in Australia, teir demograpic caracteristics, levels of fising activity or effort, catces and economic data. Te NAIFS gatered data on fising activity and catces for indigenous fisers from coastal communities across nortern Australia. A modified on-site survey metod was used to interview fisers to obtain fisery statistics. Te OVFS gatered fising information from overseas visitors to Australia based on face-to-face interviews conducted in departure lounges at international terminals prior to departure. Information on te level of participation in fising, country of origin and demograpic profiling data were obtained. Specific details of te sampling metodology and resulting fisery data is provided in te following sections Specialist In-ouse Teams Te sampling metodology, survey outputs, statistical analyses, data management and survey documentation were specifically tailored to tis survey. Te concept of a national survey for te Australian recreational fiseries needed to be developed into working documents (e.g. interviewer manuals, questionnaires, workflow plans) and sampling plans ready for implementation. Additionally, database and analytical tools were required for implementation, along wit training of key personnel trougout Australia. Expertise for preparation of tis material was not universally available, altoug more generalised expertise in recreational fiseries did exist witin fisery agencies in eac State and Territory. Te preferred approac, terefore, was to establis a development team, involving specialist consultants, to prepare all material for te implementation of te national survey and to work closely wit representatives from eac State and Territory to ensure tat te needs of all fisery agencies were met Implementation Strategies After considering various options for 'out-sourcing' project functions, staff associated wit te survey recommended a largely 'in-ouse' approac to te management, conduct, analysis and reporting of te survey. A national project manager was appointed to co-ordinate te primary functions of te survey,

28 Survey context 28 including liaison wit oter survey management/consultant staff. Te commissioning of consultants was minimised to five areas of expertise (survey design, interviewer training and management, statistics, economics and data management). A manager was appointed for eac State fisery agency to take responsibility for te day-to-day functions witin eac of te seven Australian States/ Territories (NSW would ave responsibility for te ACT). Te State manager s responsibilities included recruitment, training and management of survey staff. Eac State manager was assisted by an office manager recruited for te various administrative, clerical, data entry and editing functions. Additional support staff were required for specific functions suc as data entry at peak times. Te largest group of people to be appointed were te telepone interview staff. Tese people were recruited locally (to te agency concerned) and in accordance wit specific criteria required for teir functions witin te project. A total of 96 interviewer positions were appointed nationally. Tese staff (and Office Managers) received toroug formal and 'on-te-job' training in all facets of te survey work. Working from ome-based offices, interviewers conducted telepone pases of te survey, including te Screening, Diary and Attitudinal Surveys. Regular liaison/ feedback/ performance monitoring was undertaken by survey management staff. Fisery agencies in eac State/Territory were responsible for all data entry and editing/tabulation of survey data. Final editing, tabulation, expansion, analysis and reporting of te survey results was te primary responsibility of an analysis team. Te current national survey report was prepared in accordance wit a structure agreed by all agencies. Relevant timing, resource inputs and budgetary issues for te implementation of te survey were presented in te development report (SDWG 2000) National Perspective of te Project Te national recreational and indigenous fising survey was supported at te igest level of government in Australia. Te Standing Committee on Fiseries and Aquaculture, te Ministerial Council on Forestry, Fiseries and Aquaculture and State fisery agencies adopted te recommendations of te National Policy on Recreational Fising and supported te development and implementation of te survey. Ministerial fising advisory councils, fising associations, fising clubs, environmental and indigenous groups and many oter community groups expressed teir support for te collection of fisery statistics troug a range of media. State fisery agencies contributed financial and uman resources. Financial grants from te Australian Natural Heritage Trust (NHT), Fiseries Researc and Development Corporation (FRDC) and State fiseries agencies supported te survey. Te Fiseries Action Program (FAP) of te Department of Agriculture, Fiseries and Forestry Australia (AFFA), administered te project.

29 National Recreational Fising Survey NATIONAL RECREATIONAL FISHING SURVEY J.M. Lyle, G.W. Henry, D.D. Reid and L. West 5.1. Introduction Recreational fising is a popular outdoor activity in Australia. It attracts a large number of people wo derive a range of benefits from te sport. For te past 25 years, community-based surveys in Australia ave suggested tat up to a tird of te population goes fising (McNair Anderson, 1978; P.A. Management Consultants, 1984; Sweeney and Associates, 1988; Pepperell, 1996). Eac year, millions of recreational fisers use a variety of fising tecniques to arvest a diversity of aquatic species trougout Australia. Until recently, it as generally been anticipated tat recreational fising effort would continue to increase in Australia, irrespective of demograpic forecasts, since te predominant socio-economic trend was toward more outdoor leisure activities. Te attention drawn to recreational fising by programs in te national broadcast and print media as raised te level of interest in recreational fising and lifted community expectations regarding te management and conservation of aquatic resources. Australian fiseries management agencies apply a range of measures to protect fis abitat and conserve fis stocks. In regard to recreational fising, most agencies conduct scientific researc to understand fis populations, collect fisery statistics on te recreational sector and implement arvesting strategies to regulate fising activity. However, te recreational fisery is larger and more diffuse tan oter fising sectors and requires special metods to examine and understand te industry. Te financial resources necessary to develop and implement an appropriate national survey ave not (until recently) been available. Consequently, tere are no precise estimates of te national recreational fis catc in Australia. Tere are, owever, a number of related sources of information wic suggest tat te national recreational arvest may be substantial (PA Consulting, 1992; Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1992; Kearney, 1995). Due to teir limited nature and/or te different goals of te relevant studies tese reports are tougt to provide, at best, indicative estimates of te national catc. Intuitively toug, te large number of recreational fisers in Australia would suggest tat te recreational arvest is significant and indeed several small-scale regional surveys ave indicated tat, for some species and situations, recreational catces are comparable to or exceed commercial catces (Hancock, 1995). Te current national survey as been developed to derive fiseries statistics and related data at national, state and regional levels to support te long-term management of recreational fising Survey Overview Te design of te National Recreational Fising Survey (NRFS) built on experiences wit oter largescale recreational fising surveys and incorporated components developed specifically to address data quality issues (Lyle et al. 2002). Te survey was implemented in early 2000 as a series of concurrent state-wide surveys, conducted and managed in-ouse by eac State and Territory fiseries agency, but co-ordinated nationally. Survey interviewers were specifically recruited and trained by project staff and were managed by te appropriate fiseries agency.

30 National Recreational Fising Survey 30 Te primary data sources for te NRFS were a general population screening survey, a diary survey and an attitudinal survey. Te major functions of te screening survey were to estimate te level of participation in recreational fising, provide a socio-demograpic profile of recreational fisers and to recruit fisers to participate in te diary survey. Fising and fising-related economic activity was ten monitored over a 12-mont period using te diary survey. At te completion of te diary period, respondent awareness and attitudes to fising related matters was assessed in a final interview, te attitudinal survey. Data quality issues were addressed troug a series of calibration surveys designed to provide adjustments for non-response and to assess te extent of beavioural cange (unexpected fising) during te diary period. Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) resident population information was used to bencmark survey data for coverage and representation and to provide te basis for expansion of data to population estimates. On-site (creel) surveys were also conducted in eac State and Territory to assess fis identification skills of recreational fisers, determine te size distribution of common species and provide independent verification of certain recreational fising activities. Te relationsips of te various components of te NRFS are represented in Figure 5.1. Australian resident population Private dwelling ouseolds Pone owners wite page listed Non-pone owners incl. unlisted numbers Calibration/validation surveys Screening survey Screening sample ABS bencmark data Sample loss Disconnects, etc. Response Non-response Refusal/non-contact Intending fiser Non-intending fiser Non-response follow-up Diary survey Accept diary Refuse diary Non-intending fiser follow-up Fised No fising On-site creel surveys Figure 5.1 Diagrammatic representation of National Recreational Fising Survey

31 National Recreational Fising Survey Survey Scope Te NRFS encompassed te private dwelling resident population of Australia 1, aged five years and older, and teir recreational fising activity. Recreational fising was defined as te capture or attempted capture of aquatic animals in Australian waters (freswater, estuarine, marine) oter tan for commercial purposes. All recreational fising tecniques and arvesting activities were included in te survey. Economic activity related to recreational fising (expenditure and selected investment) was also witin scope Sampling Design Te survey design for te general population sampling was based on single-stage cluster sampling (Tompson, 1992) were te ouseold (cosen by random sampling) represented te primary sampling unit and recreational fisers witin te ouseold te secondary unit, wit all fisers in te ouseold included in te sample. Cluster designs are recommended were tere is no frame listing of all elements or were a frame listing is proibitively expensive to obtain (Scaeffer et al., 1996). Te major advantages of cluster sampling over simple random sampling (sub-sampling of fisers witin a ouseold) are te provision of correct weigtings to bot single and multiple fiser-ouseolds and a cost benefit in providing multiple fiser data troug a single (screening survey) contact. Te basis for sampling ouseolds was te wite pages telepone directory (electronic version), wic was used as a proxy for listings of private dwelling ouseolds. Available census data indicate tat about 98% of te Australian population reside in private dwellings, suc as ouses, units and apartments, as opposed to non-private dwellings suc as otels, ospitals, jails, military establisments (ABS, 1996). Te use of directory lists rater tan random digit dialling enabled obvious business numbers and multiple ouseold listings to be filtered out and te sample population to be stratified into regions consistent wit tose used by te ABS to report statistical data. A total of 49 strata were identified for te national sample, wit stratification at te Statistical Division (SD) level in all but a few instances were SD s were eiter amalgamated or furter subdivided (Figure 5.2, Table 5.1). Stratum sample sizes were cosen to provide general consistency in terms of te level of precision for reporting of state-wide estimates of participation, total effort and arvest (target levels were less tan 5% relative standard error) (SDWG, 2000). Assumed values of regional participation rates, mean effort, catc rates and response rates, were used to model te effects of stratification and sample size on te precision of state-wide estimates. Systematic random sampling was used in te selection of telepone numbers (and te ouseold attaced to tese numbers). Tis approac provided a probability-sample of telepone numbers, wic gave an equal probability of selection witin a stratum. Te sampling fraction assigned to te stratum was determined by te size of sample required to acieve te required precision (as described above). Telepone numbers for wic survey data were not collected, eiter troug non-response or sample loss, were not substituted. 1 Note: residents of Australia s external territories and indigenous communities in nortern Australia were excluded. Te latter group was te focus of te Indigenous Fising Survey of Nortern Australia.

32 National Recreational Fising Survey 32 Figure 5.2 Map of Australia sowing ABS statistical divisions

33 National Recreational Fising Survey 33 Table 5.1 Total numbers of private dwelling ouseolds and gross sample sizes by ABS statistical divisions and survey strata. Statistical ABS ABS Bencmark Selected Survey Survey Comment Division SD Code Aust Houseolds Houseolds Sample Houseold Stratum Sample NSW Sydney , Hunter Illawarra Ricmond-Tweed Mid Nort Coast Nortern Nortern + Central West Nort Western Nort Western + Far West Central West Sout Eastern Murrumbidgee Murray Murrumbidgee + Murray Far West Total , VIC Melbourne , Barwon Western District Central Higlands Wimmera Mallee Mallee + Wimmera Loddon-Campaspe Goulburn Ovens-Murray Goulburn + Ovens-Murray East Gippsland Gippsland Gippsland + East Gippsland Total , QLD Brisbane , Moreton , Wide Bay-Burnett Darling Downs Sout West Fitzroy Central West Sout + Central + NortWest Mackay Nortern Far Nort Nort West Total , SA Adelaide , Outer Adelaide Yorke/ Lower Nort Murray Lands Sout East Eyre Nortern Total , WA Pert , Sout West Lower Great Soutern Upper Great Soutern Upper + Lower Great Soutern Midlands Sout Eastern Central Pilbara Kimberley Total , TAS Greater Hobart , Soutern Nortern Mersey-Lyell Total , NT Darwin NT Balance (Darwin Rural) Darwin + Darwin rural NT Balance (Coastal) NT Balance (Hinterland) Total , ACT Canberra , Canberra + Balance Balance 10 2 Total , AUSTRALIA ,

34 National Recreational Fising Survey Survey Components National Screening Survey A sample of approximately 44,000 Australian telepone numbers (Table 5.1) was selected for te national screening survey tat was conducted in Marc and April Respondents were given a structured telepone interview designed to collect a range of profiling information. Demograpic information, including age, gender and aboriginality, was collected for all ouseold members. Te level of participation in recreational fising in te previous 12 monts (including an estimate of te number of days fised) and te likeliood to fis in te coming 12 monts were establised for ouseold members aged 5 years or older. Days fised in te previous 12 monts was only used as an indicator of previous fising avidity, since issues suc as recall bias render suc estimates imprecise (Pollock et al., 1994). In addition, fising/dive club or association membersip and fising licence status was determined for all persons, regardless of weter tey ad fised in te previous 12 monts or not. For tose ouseolds containing recreational fisers (or intending fisers), socio-economic information including labour force status (employment and job category), education and etnicity, was also recorded for all ouseold members aged 5 or older. Houseold boat ownersip was establised, wit eac vessel caracterised according to lengt, propulsion (jet ski, row, sail or motorised) and usage for recreational fising during te previous 12 monts. An estimate of market value along wit te presence of eco sounders and Global Positioning System (GPS) were establised for all vessels used for recreational fising purposes. All respondents wit an intention to go recreational fising in te 12 monts following te screening interview (i.e. corresponding to te diary period), regardless of weter tey ad fised previously or not, were invited to participate in te diary survey Diary Survey Respondents wo agreed to participate in te diary survey were provided wit a survey kit, comprising a covering letter (to establis survey legitimacy), a species identification booklet of te most common species/species groups relevant to teir State or Territory and a fising diary for eac intending fiser witin te ouseold. Te random nature of te sample at tis stage was inerited from te random selection in te screening survey. Te diary survey was conducted between May 2000 and April 2001, inclusive. After receiving te diary kit, data requirements were explained to respondents in a brief telepone interview and te next contact arranged. Unlike traditional mail-back diary surveys, te diary was employed more as a memory jogger tan a logbook, and significantly, responsibility for data collection rested wit survey interviewers rater tan te respondents. Regular telepone contact was maintained wit diarists trougout te diary period in order to collect details of any fising or fising related expenditure, including kilometres travelled 2, tat ad occurred since te last contact. Te level of fising activity determined te frequency of suc contact but, as a general rule, respondents were contacted at least once a mont, even if no fising was planned. Tus any activity not recorded in te diary could still be collected over te telepone wit minimal concern about recall bias influences. In effect, tis approac meant tat te survey was tailored to matc te level of fising activity of te individual respondent, reducing burden and enancing data quality and response rates. 2 Private veicle travel by te respondent in relation to fising.

35 National Recreational Fising Survey 35 Te use of interviewers in tis manner allowed for greater detail and reporting precision tan could be acieved in a self-administered diary, wit interviewers being able to immediately clarify any misunderstandings or apparent reporting errors. Terefore, data consistency and completeness was ensured. Importantly, respondents were only required to record basic information in teir diaries, for example start and finis times, catc and release details by species and expenditure by item category. Tis, in addition to more detailed information regarding target species, fising location, fising metod, fising platform (boat/ sore category) and water body type (lake/ dam, freswater river, estuary, coastal or offsore marine) were collected and recorded by survey interviewers during te regular telepone contact wit diarists. For water body type and specifically te delineation between marine and freswater environments, respondent perception was ultimately relied upon, since a more objective assessment was regarded as impractical. Expenditure associated wit fising, region in wic expenditure occurred and level of attribution of expenditure to recreational fising, was also collected during telepone interviews. Level of attribution was expressed in terms of te proportion (percentage) tat respondents considered te expenditure to be directly linked to te recreational fising experience as opposed to oter activities Attitudinal Survey An attitudinal survey was conducted wit diarists at te completion of te diary survey, in May/ June 2001, as te final telepone interview. Tis survey sougt te opinion of respondents on a range of fising related issues. A randomly selected diarist, aged 15 years or older in eac diary ouseold was asked a range of questions to assess awareness and opinions about fising regulations, management issues, researc and compliance programs and teir motivation for recreational fising. Te probability of selection was, terefore, a function of te number of fisers aged 15 and older witin te ouseold. Attitudinal surveys were customised for eac State and Territory to address issues of relevance to te particular jurisdiction. In terms of nationally applied questions, key motivating factors relating to recreational fising participation were explored Supplementary Survey Data Supplementary economic data were collected from respondents during te 12-mont diary survey and te final interview. Supplementary expenditure information for food/drink and private veicle fuel/oil and repairs/maintenance tat occurred away from ome (greater tan 40 km away from ome) on fising-related trips was collected for eac responding ouseold over two consecutive monts during te diary survey. Te diary period was divided into six two-mont blocks and eac responding ouseold was randomly allocated to one of tese blocks for te reporting of supplementary economic information. In effect, at any point in time during te diary survey one sixt of te responding ouseolds provided supplementary economic information. Tis strategy was adopted to reduce te reporting burden for respondents. Oter less obvious fising-related expenditure suc as annual registration and insurance costs for boats or trailers as well as information associated wit veicle usage (make, model and engine capacity for veicles used on fising trips) and seafood consumption was collected as part of te final (attitudinal) interview for diarist ouseolds.

36 National Recreational Fising Survey Calibration Surveys Issues of data quality were investigated troug tree calibration surveys conducted during te survey period, tey were; (i) non-response follow-up, (ii) unexpected fising follow-up and (iii) on-site (creel) surveys Non-response follow-up Two factors, sample loss and non-response, impacted on te number of ouseolds responding to te screening survey. Sample loss arose from te inclusion of non-private dwellings (including business numbers) and disconnected telepone numbers in te sample, and ad te effect of reducing te actual screening sample size. Non-response, on te oter and, as te potential to introduce biases if response and non-response groups differ in teir caracteristics. Tere were two main causes of non-response, non-contact, i.e. cases were no effective contact was made wit te ouseold and tus no survey data were obtained, and refusals, i.e. cases were incomplete or no substantive data were obtained due to te respondent declining to take part in te survey. Wile bencmarking against ABS census data adjusted for demograpic representation of te sample (refer section ), beavioural biases (e.g. fising participation) tat can result from nonresponse were addressed using non-response follow-up surveys. Non-responding ouseolds to te screening surveys were grouped according to te type of nonresponse (non-contact, full refusal and partial refusal) and a random sample from eac category was resurveyed using an abbreviated screening interview. For eac State and Territory, a sample of about 150 telepone numbers based on non-contacts, based on full refusal and based on part refusal at screening were selected for non-response follow-up (total sample size of 2,095). As tese interviews were conducted several monts after te initial screening interview, it was necessary to confirm tat te telepone number was still attaced to te same ouseold as tat at te time of te screening survey. Discounting sample loss, te net non-response sample size was 1,670, wit response rates of 47% for te non-contact sample 3, 69% for te full refusal sample and 88% for te part-refusal sample. Information collected included age, gender and fising participation (occurrence and level of activity or avidity in te previous twelve monts) for all ouseold members. At te ouseold-level tis enabled te non-response group to be caracterised according to fising participation (i.e. weter at least one recreational fiser resided in te ouseold) and ouseold avidity (a function of te level of fising activity of te individual fisers witin te ouseold). At te person-level, te nonresponse group was caracterised in terms of fising participation, based on age and gender, and level of avidity for fisers Unexpected fising Te primary objective of tis aspect of te survey was to address te issue of fisers leaving or entering te fisery, tat is drop-ins and drop-outs. Fisers leaving te fisery are addressed in part troug te diary survey, tat is diarists wo were previous fisers wo do not go fising during te 12-mont diary period. Similarly, fisers entering te fisery were partially covered by te diary survey, measured in terms of te beaviour of persons wo did not fis in te 12-monts prior to te diary survey (non-fisers at screening). 3 Non-contacts accounted for a furter 47% of te non-contact sample.

37 National Recreational Fising Survey 37 In order to assess te beaviour of respondents wo, at screening did not intend to go fising during te diary period (and ence were not included in te diary survey), a stratified random sample of nonintending fiser ouseolds was re-contacted at te end of te diary period. Stratification was based on weter te ouseold at screening contained previous fisers or not, wit a iger sample take from te previous fiser ouseold group. Approximately 250 non-fiser and 100 previous fiser ouseolds per State and Territory (total of 2,325 ouseolds) were sampled. After confirming tat te sampled telepone number was attaced to te same ouseold as tat at te time of screening (as per non-response follow-up), ouseold members were asked weter tey ad done any recreational fising during te diary period. Were fising was indicated, te age, gender and an estimate of days fised (based on recall) was establised. Discounting sample loss, te net sample size was 1,996 ouseolds, wit response rate of 91%. Te non-intending fiser follow-up survey provided symmetry in te overall survey design, wit a proportion of respondents in te diary survey actually doing no fising wereas oters reporting no intention to go fising may ave actually done some fising On-site surveys On-site (creel) surveys were conducted in eac State and Territory during te diary period, wit sampling effort directed at sites and during periods of greatest recreational fising activity. In tis regard te surveys were not designed to provide representative catc and catc rate information but were primarily intended to evaluate te identification skills of fisers, in terms of te level of detail required by te diary survey, and to assess te size structure of te catc. Recognising te problems wit estimates of fis size and weigt, diarists were only required to report catces in terms of numbers. Creel survey data were used to assess mean lengts and weigts for key recreational species, te latter being applied to convert catc numbers to weigts. Were necessary, size composition information was supplemented wit data from previous creel surveys. Altoug not a primary objective, te on-site surveys also provided an opportunity for limited independent verification of certain fising activities were sampling coverage for bot diary and onsite surveys was adequate Data Management Database A relational database management system (RDBMS) was developed in Microsoft Access according to te general entity relationsip model described by Finney and Lyle (2000). Eac State and Territory was provided wit a copy of te database tailored for teir specific requirements (ouseold, fising region and species codes) at te commencement of te survey. Eac State and Territory was responsible for managing its own database during te data collection, entry and editing pases. Editing of data forms and data entry was undertaken in-ouse, and werever feasible, incomplete or ambiguous forms were referred back to survey interviewers for follow-up wit respondents. Tis process, linked to range, logic and sequencing cecks in-built into te database, and coupled wit toroug survey interviewer training and management systems provided for compreensive reporteddata quality cecks. Individual State and Territory databases were combined at te end of te survey for national analysis and reporting.

38 National Recreational Fising Survey Data Imputation Imputation of missing substantive screening information (age, gender, previous fising and likeliood to fis) was undertaken in some instances, but only were complete information was available for at least some oter ouseold members. Imputation was, terefore, applied to enable te ouseold, and persons witin te ouseold, to be used in subsequent analyses. Imputation was applied subjectively, but wit reference to te caracteristics of oter members of te ouseold. Were ages were imputed tey were taken as age class mid-points of tose used for demograpic bencmarking, gender was allocated randomly and previous fising and likeliood was imputed wit reference to te activity of oter ouseold members. In te vast majority of cases, data imputation was limited to one piece of missing substantive information, for instance te age of one ouseold member. Te impact of imputation on data quality was considered minimal wit only 0.2% of persons profiled at screening wit any substantive information subject to imputation Data Analysis Data Expansion - Screening Survey Demograpic bencmarking Directory list sampling does not provide coverage of ouseolds witout a telepone or wit an unlisted number. For commercial and privacy reasons te exact proportion of Australian ouseolds wit a telepone listing was unavailable. However, comparison between te number of non-business telepone listings (electronic wite pages) and numbers of private dwelling ouseolds (census data) suggests a nominal coverage factor of over 80% nationally. ABS Estimated Resident Population (ERP) for June 2000 (ABS, 2001a) was used to assess sample representation and provide correct weigtings for expanded population estimates. Person-based bencmarks by age and gender, and ouseold-based bencmarks by size (number of adults and cildren) were developed for eac of te survey strata and were ten compared wit screening survey results. Bencmarking did indicate some minor differences between te sample and population bencmarks witin some strata (Appendix 5.1), toug overall differences were considered to be witin acceptable limits (E. Szoldra, ABS pers comm). Non-coverage of non-pone owners and impacts of non-response will ave contributed to te differences between te caracteristics of te sample and population. A metod known as integrated weigting was applied to adjust for sample representation at ouseold and person levels by calculating weigting factors to expand sample data to population estimates (Lemaitre and Dufour, 1987). Integrated weigting considers ouseold (size and composition) and person (age and gender) based caracteristics simultaneously and seeks to maximise convergence wit bencmarks at all levels, namely stratum, ouseold and person (Appendix 5.2). By using tis approac all persons in a particular ouseold and te ouseold itself were given te same weigt, and tis weigt is applied wen determining person and ouseold level estimates. Te application of integrated rater tan simple weigts 4 is more consistent wit cluster sampling, since te latter can result in different weigts for eac person witin a ouseold and a different weigt for te ouseold itself. 4 Simple weigts are derived by divided bencmark population by sample size.

39 National Recreational Fising Survey Non-response adjustment Wereas te development of integrated weigts produced demograpic representation for te sample, te effects of non-response may also ave a beavioural aspect (e.g. in terms of fising participation) and tus a furter adjustment to te integrated weigts was required. In developing suc adjustments, te non-response follow-up survey data at ouseold and person-levels were weigted in accordance wit te sampling fractions (refer section ) and ten aggregated nationally to caracterise te non-response group in terms of fising participation rates and avidity amongst fisers or fiser ouseolds. Compared to te response group, non-response analysis revealed significantly lower fising participation rates and, amongst fisers, a bias towards lower avidity groups. National non-response adjustment factors for participation were calculated as te ratio of proportions, based on te comparison of non-response and response groups. For person based analysis, participation rates were compared by age class and gender wereas for ouseold analysis, participation rates (i.e. weter te ouseold contained fisers or not) was based on ouseold size (number of residents). Te second component of non-response adjustment related to avidity. Amongst fisers and fiser ouseolds, te proportional breakdown into avidity categories was compared for response and non-response groups based on nationally aggregated data. Avidity adjustment factors were calculated as te ratio of proportions of te avidity classes witin te two response groups. Te national non-response adjustment factors were applied as correction factors to te integrated weigts (ouseold and person) but were made sensitive to te actual level of non-response witin te particular stratum. Tus, in a stratum wit alf te national non-response level te adjustment effect would be alved. As noted above, non-response adjustment represented a beavioural adjustment only and was applied to maintain bencmark populations Data Expansion Diary Survey Diary non-response adjustment Non-response to te diary survey occurred were eligible respondents (tose intending fisers) eiter refused to participate in te diary survey (at screening) or failed to complete te diary survey. Te latter was mainly due to loss of contact (usually as a result of telepone disconnection) but did include a small proportion of respondents wo refused to participate part way troug te diary period. Experience revealed tat once respondents accepted te diary, te vast majority fully participated for te entire diary period (refer section 5.8). In order to correct for diary non-response, te inverse of te proportion of eligible persons/ouseolds (based on expanded data) tat fully responded to te diary survey was applied as an adjustment to te non-response corrected expansion factor (section 5.7.1). Tat is, only information for tose diarists wo participated for te entire diary period was used in subsequent catc and effort and economic analyses. Analysis of te reported beaviour of diarists confirmed a strong positive relationsip between fising activity in te diary period (number of days fised and catc) and previous avidity (reported at screening). Furtermore, diary response rates were consistently iger amongst te more avid fisers. As a consequence diary adjustments were calculated at te stratum level and categorised by avidity group. Failure to account for previous avidity in applying tis adjustment would ave resulted in te over-representation of te more avid (active) fisers and under-representation of te least avid group, leading to over-estimation of catc and effort.

40 National Recreational Fising Survey Correction for fisers entering or leaving te fisery Nationally about 31% of te diarists wo fully participated in te survey reported no fising activity during te survey period. In te development of te NRFS, it ad been anticipated tat analysis of non-intending fiser follow-up (section ) and fiser beaviour (based on te Diary Survey) would be used to assess te impacts of fisers entering and leaving te fisery. However, analysis of te follow-up survey indicated tat participation rate adjustments based on unexpected fising were very unstable, due to inadequate sample sizes and terefore could exert undue influence on overall participation rates. In te absence of robust data about te dynamics of participation in fising, te number of persons or ouseolds (for economic information) leaving te fisery was assumed to balance te number of persons/ouseolds entering te fisery. In effect an equilibrium state was assumed. Tis approac for dealing wit te dynamics of participation as been applied in oter large-scale studies in Australia (Higgs, 1999; 2001) and overseas (Bradford, 1998). Te adjustment for participation was calculated as te inverse of te number of diarists or ouseolds tat fised (expanded numbers corrected for diary non-response section ) divided by te number of fisers (persons or ouseolds) in te population (derived from te screening survey section 5.7.1). Adjustments were calculated at te stratum level and made sensitive to previous fising avidity (and gender for person based estimates) 5. Previous fising avidity (profiled at screening) and subsequent fising participation in te diary were strongly correlated, wit lowest rates of participation amongst diarists from te lowest previous avidity group and igest amongst te igest avidity group. Tat is to say, less avid fisers were more likely to drop out of te fisery and not fis in te diary period. Witout adjusting for avidity, disproportionate weigt would ave been given to te more avid fiser groups, resulting in furter overestimation of catc and effort levels (refer also section ) Estimation Procedures Number of fisers and fiser-ouseolds Te number of fisers/fiser-ouseolds for eac sample stratum was estimated using te cluster sampling estimator given by Tompson (1992). Estimates for te State or Territory and national levels were derived by summation of te appropriate stratum estimates. Variances of te summed estimates were estimated by summation of te appropriate variance estimates (covariance terms ignored). Te primary data inputs to tis analysis were te national screening survey, population census information and adjustments for screening survey non-response. 5 A minimum number of 20 fiser diarists per stratum-avidity-gender cell was specified, were fewer diarists fised cells were collapsed until a minimum sample of 20 was acieved. Similarly for ouseold adjustments, a minimum of 10 fiser ouseolds per stratum-avidity cell was specified, were fewer ouseolds ad any diarists wo fised cells were collapsed until a minimum sample of 10 was acieved.

41 National Recreational Fising Survey 41 Estimate of number of fisers in population for any stratum : Following are definitions of te terms comprising te equations: Cfi = correction factor for ouseold i in sample stratum mean over persons witin te ouseold. Adjusts for different fising participation rate of nonrespondents from screening sample and for fising avidity of respondents. Source: Non-response follow-up survey (section ). NFH ˆ = estimated number of fiser ouseolds in population. (calculation) NFP ˆ = estimated number of fisers (>4 years old) in population. (Calculation) NHH = number of ouseolds in population. Source: ABS ERP data (2000) NP nhh nfh nfp i nm = number of persons(> 4 years old) in population (estimated resident population). Source: ABS ERP data (2000) = effective number of ouseolds in sample (gross sample less sample loss and non-responding ouseolds. Source: Screening survey = number of fiser ouseolds in sample. Source: Screening survey = number of fisers 6 in sample ouseold i of sample stratum. Source: Screening survey (fised in previous 12 monts) = weigted mean number of fisers per ouseold in sample. w i = integrated weigt for ouseold i in sample stratum. Te estimator of te weigted mean number of fisers per ouseold for stratum is given by: nm = nhh i= 1 w i cf nhh i= 1 i w i nfp i Estimated number of fising ouseolds in stratum : nfh N FH ˆ = NHH nhh 6 Fised in te 12 monts prior to te Screening Survey

42 National Recreational Fising Survey 42 Tis is te usual binomial estimator, wit variance given by: * * 2 nfh nfh var( NFH ˆ ) = NHH ( 1 ) /( nhh nhh nhh 1 ) Estimated number of fisers in stratum : NFP ˆ = nm NHH Te variance of tis estimator is te variance estimator for a cluster sample (Tompson 1992), viz: 2 var( NFP ˆ ) = NHH ( NHH nhh ) s / nhh Were for eac sample stratum, s 2 is te weigted sample variance for te number of fisers in a ouseold from te screening survey: s 2 = ( nhh i= 1 1 w i [ 1) nhh i= 1 w i nfp 2 i ( nhh i= 1 w i nfp i ) 2 / nhh i= 1 w i ] Te standard error (se) and relative standard error (rse) for te estimate of number of fisers in stratum are defined by: se ( NFP ˆ ) = var( N F P ) rse ( NFP ˆ ) = se ( N F P ) / N F P Fising effort Te primary data input for tis analysis was te diary survey, wit effort based on ouseolds in wic at least one diarist fised and participated fully in te diary survey. Fising effort may be expressed in terms of te number of fising events, te number of fiser-days or number of fiser-ours. Te estimation metod is te same for eac of tese measures, viz. for eac sample stratum, estimated effort is te product of te estimated number of fiser ouseolds and te estimated weigted mean effort for all active diarist ouseolds over te full diary period:

43 National Recreational Fising Survey 43 Components of te estimator of effort are: Ê = Estimated fising effort (events, ours, days) by te total population of fisers for sample stratum. Source: (calculation). NFH ˆ = Estimated number of fising ouseolds for sample stratum. Source: (calculation) (section ) newm = sample weigted mean effort per ouseold for sample stratum over full diary period. Te weigtings were obtained from te integrated weigting procedure, wit adjustments for avidity and diary uptake. Source: Diary survey calculation (section 5.7.2). For subsets restricted to particular waterbody/ fising metod combinations, te above variables are sown wit te superscript r. r p = proportion of sample ouseolds in stratum aving a fising event belonging to subset r (particular waterbody/fising metod combination). Estimate of total effort for te population of fisers regardless of fising metod and waterbody type in a given sample stratum is given by: E ˆ = newm NFˆ H Variance estimate: ˆ ˆ 2 2 var( E ) = ( NFH ) var( newm ) + ( newm ) var( NFH ˆ ) var( newm ) var( NFˆ H ) Were var( NFH ˆ ) is given in above, and te variance of te sample weigted mean effort in sample stratum is given by: var( newm ) = nfh ( 1 nfh i= 1 w i [ 1) nfh i= 1 w i E 2 i ( nfh i= 1 w i E i ) 2 / nfh i= 1 w i ] Were E i is te fising effort for ouseold i in sample stratum. For estimates of effort for subsets of te data, means and variances were conditional on ouseolds meeting te criterion for te subset. For example for te estimation of fising effort in freswater for a particular substratum, te data on wic estimates were based were limited to tose ouseolds wic recorded at least one freswater fising event during te diary period. Te estimator of fising effort and its variance for subsets of te data are given in te following equations:

44 National Recreational Fising Survey 44 Te estimator of fising effort for subset r (particular combination of waterbody type/fising metod) in a given sample stratum is given by ˆ r r E = newm NFH ˆ r Variance estimate: ˆ ˆ r r r 2 ) ( ) var( ) ( ) var( ˆ r r var( E = NFH newm + newm NFH ) var( newm ) var( NFˆ H 2 r ) r Were var( NFH ˆ ) is given by: var( NFH ˆ r and var( p ) = ( p r r ) 2 nfh ) = nfh var( NFH ˆ r nfh (1 nfh ) + ( NFH ˆ r 1 ) nfh r ) 2 var( p 1 = nfh r ) nfh (1 nfh r ) and te variance of te sample weigted mean effort for subset r of sample stratum is given by: var( newm r ) = nfh r ( 1 r nfh i= 1 w r i 1) [ r nfh i= 1 w r i ( E r i ) 2 ( r nfh i= 1 w r i E r i ) 2 / r nfh i= 1 w r i ] Catc Catc information, weter arvested (i.e. retained) or released (including discarded), was derived from diary survey and reported as numbers of individuals. Components of te estimator of catc are: Ĉ = Estimated catc by te total population of fisers in a given stratum. Source: (calculation). NFH ˆ = Estimated number of fising ouseolds in a given stratum. Source: (calculation, section ) ncwm = weigted mean catc over te full diary period by all responding diaristouseolds in a given stratum (excluding zero-effort ouseolds). Te weigtings were obtained from te integrated weigting procedure and subsequently adjusted for avidity and diary uptake. Source: Diary survey, calculation.

45 National Recreational Fising Survey 45 For subsets restricted to catces of particular species/species groups or catces from particular fising regions, te above variables are sown wit te superscript r. r p = te proportion of sample ouseolds in stratum wit at least one fis of species/group r caugt (kept or released) over te full diary year. Estimate of total catc for te population in a given stratum is given by: Cˆ = ncwm NFˆ H Variance estimate: ˆ ˆ 2 2 var( C ) = NFH var( ncwm ) + ncwm var( NFH ˆ ) var( ncwm ) var( NFˆ H ) Were te variance of te sample weigted mean catc in sample stratum is given by: var( ncwm) = nfh ( 1 nfh i= 1 w i [ 1) nfh i= 1 w i C 2 i ( nfh i= 1 w i C i ) 2 / nfh i= 1 w i ] C i is te catc for ouseold i in sample stratum over te full diary period. For estimates of effort for subsets of te data, suc as a particular species or species groups, means and variances were conditional on ouseolds meeting te criterion for te subset. For example, for te estimation of catces of witing for a particular substratum, te data on wic estimates were based were restricted to tose ouseolds wic recorded at least one event wen a witing was captured or released during te diary period. Te estimator of catc for a particular subset (e.g. species/group) and its variance are given by te following equations: Te estimator of catc effort for subset r (e.g. a particular species/group) for a given sample stratum is given by ˆ r r C = ncwm NFˆ H r Variance estimate: ˆ ˆ r r r 2 ) ( ) var( ) ( ) var( ˆ r r var( E = NFH ncwm + ncwm NFH ) var( ncwm ) var( NFˆ H 2 r )

46 National Recreational Fising Survey 46 Were var( N ˆ r FH ) is given by: var( NFH ˆ r and var( p ) = ( p r r ) 2 nfh ) = nfh var( NFH ˆ r nfh (1 nfh ) + ( NFH ˆ r 1 ) nfh r ) 2 var( p 1 = nfh r ) nfh (1 nfh r ) and te variance of te sample weigted mean catc for subset r of sample stratum is given by: var( ncwm r ) = nfh r ( 1 r nfh i= 1 w r i 1) [ r nfh i= 1 w r i ( C r i ) 2 ( r nfh i= 1 w r i C r i ) 2 / r nfh i= 1 w r i ] Similar calculations apply to te estimation of te number of released fis Economic activity Components of te estimator of total expenditure on fising are: Ê = Estimated total expenditure by te population of fisers in a given stratum. Source: Diary, Calculation. NFH ˆ = Estimated number of fising ouseolds in a given stratum. Source: Calculation (section ) ndwm = weigted mean expenditure over te full diary period by all responding diaristouseolds in a given stratum (excluding zero-effort ouseolds). Te weigtings were obtained from te integrated weigting procedure, adjusted for fising avidity of te ouseold. Source: Diary survey. Estimate of total expenditure for te population in a given stratum is given by: Dˆ = ndwm NFˆ H wit variance estimate: ˆ ˆ 2 2 var( D ) = NFH var( ndwm ) + ndwm var( NFH ˆ ) var( ndwm ) var( NFˆ H )

47 National Recreational Fising Survey 47 Were te variance of te sample weigted mean catc in sample stratum is given by: var( ndwm ) = nfh ( 1 nfh i= 1 w i 1) [ nfh i= 1 w i D 2 i ( nfh i= 1 w i D i ) 2 / nfh i= 1 w i ] D i is te total expenditure for ouseold i in sample stratum over te full diary period. For estimates of expenditure for subsets of te expenditure data, suc as expenditure on fising gear, travel, boat and trailer, variance calculations used all ouseolds wic were fully responding, and te above equations were also used to compute estimates and errors for tese subsets of expenditure Attitudinal/awareness issues Responses ave been summed in accordance to te weigting factor applicable to te selected respondent (i.e. one respondent aged 15 years or older per ouseold) and results reported as te proportion (%) of weigted sum of respondents. In tis context te expanded population effectively represented respondent ouseolds wit recreational fisers aged 15 or older rater tan recreational fisers aged 15 or older.

48 National Recreational Fising Survey Response Profiles Response profiles, were te levels of response and non-response are compared, represent important indicators of data reliability in surveys. Tis is because response and non-response groups often differ in teir caracteristics and if non-response is not calibrated and/or represents a large component of te sample, significant biases can be introduced into te survey estimates (Pollock et al., 1994). An initial sample of 43,945 telepone numbers was drawn from Australian electronic wite page telepone directories. However, wen sample loss, tat is disconnected numbers, non-private dwelling numbers (mainly businesses), fax/modem lines or oliday omes 7, was discounted te net sample was reduced to 37,243 (Table 5.2). All primary demograpic, fising and boating information was obtained from 29,837 ouseolds (an effective response rate of 80%). Despite extensive call-backs over a period of several weeks no contact was made wit 1,794 ouseolds (5% of te sample). Of te remainder, 1,351 ouseolds (4%) fully refused to participate in te survey wile 4,261 (11%) provided incomplete information (partial refusal) and were excluded from subsequent analyses (Table 5.2). Response profiles to te initial survey contact were relatively consistent across te nation, wit te igest response rates being acieved in Sout Australia. Te initial screening survey identified 21,491 persons aged 5 and older, from 10,212 ouseolds, wit an intention to go fising in te coming twelve monts (Table 5.2). All suc persons were eligible to participate in te diary survey and 18,370 (86%) from 9,122 (89%) ouseolds agreed to do so. Of te diarists wo commenced te survey, 17,092 (93%) fully participated for te entire 12 mont diary period. Diary non-response was, terefore, primarily related to uptake rater tan completion, wit an overall 80% (75-84% depending on State) of eligible persons completing te survey (Table 5.2). Houseold response rates for diary completion (at least one diarist in te ouseold) were very ig at 93% for tose ouseolds tat commenced te survey, equivalent to an overall response rate of 83% for eligible ouseolds. Not all diarists reported fising activity during te diary period, in fact only 69% of te diarists fised, providing information on over 93,000 fising events. On a diarist ouseold basis, 81% of te responding ouseolds included at least one active fiser. Comparison of te response profile for tis study wit oter fising surveys is complicated by te fact tat most oter studies do not fully report issues of non-response. For instance, non-contacts are often discounted (or substituted) and partial or incomplete responses (e.g. simply establising weter a ouseold contained fisers or not, witout determining oter key profiling information) are treated as responses (or substituted). In terms of diary surveys, response rates are generally reported as diary completion rates, witout taking account te proportion of eligible respondents wo actually refused to accept te diary survey. Considering diary completion rates, te present survey acieved a response rate of 93% (84-96% depending on State or Territory) wic is very ig and comparable wit oter Australian studies employing te telepone/diary survey metodology (Coleman 1998; McGlennon 1999; Lyle 2000; Forward and Lyle 2002). By contrast, response rates for traditional selfadministered mail-back diary surveys tend to be below 70% (e.g. Bradford 1998; Higgs 1999, 2001), indicating greater potential for problems relating to non-response bias. 7 Holiday omes were treated as sample loss if tey did not represent te primary residence for te ouseold, tis ensured te ouseold only ad a single cance of selection.

49 National Recreational Fising Survey 49 Table 5.2 Response analysis for te screening and diary surveys by State and Territory - based on net sample (total gross sample less sample loss ). SAMPLE (Houseolds) NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT TOTAL Gross Sample 9,101 9,055 7,900 5,090 5,400 4,022 2,178 1,199 43,945 Sample Loss 1,304 1,098 1, ,702 Net Sample 7,797 7,957 6,665 4,422 4,407 3,392 1, ,243 SCREENING SURVEY Full Response 6,316 6,028 5,183 3,785 3,638 2,755 1, ,837 Refusal (Full and Partial) 1,182 1,517 1, ,612 Non-Contacts ,794 % Response % Non-response DIARY SURVEY (Houseolds) Eligible Houseolds 1,776 1,509 1,919 1,451 1,661 1, ,212 Diary Uptake 1,635 1,345 1,706 1,308 1, ,122 Diary Completion 1,488 1,228 1,606 1,220 1, ,449 % Uptake % Completion % Response (Eligibles) Number fised 1, ,315 1,032 1, ,852 % Fised DIARY SURVEY (Fisers) Eligible Fisers 3,729 2,902 4,261 2,888 3,669 2,214 1, ,491 Diary Uptake 3,327 2,418 3,480 2,578 3,136 1,765 1, ,370 Diary Completion 3,033 2,232 3,309 2,429 2,982 1,696 1, ,092 % Uptake % Completion % Response (Eligibles) Number fised 2,058 1,453 2,222 1,740 2,182 1, ,730 % Fised Fising Events (no.) 16,101 11,477 17,353 14,936 18,310 10,788 3,169 1,186 93,320

50 National Recreational Fising Survey Recreational Fising Participation Te following analyses are based on information derived from te national screening survey and expanded, wit non-response adjustment, to represent te resident private dwelling population of Australia. Te primary purpose of tis report is to provide a big picture assessment of recreational participation, i.e. based primarily on analyses at te State/Territory and national levels. Subsequent reports to be produced by te participating fiseries agencies will examine data in more detail at regional scales appropriate to addressing specific resource and management issues Number of Fisers Based on reported fising activity in te 12 monts prior to May 2000, an estimated 3.36 million Australian residents aged 5 or older fised at least once, representing a national participation rate of 19.5% (Figure 5.3, Appendix 5.3). New Sout Wales ad te greatest number of recreational fisers (999,000) followed by Queensland (785,000) and Victoria (550,000). Te ig numbers of recreational fisers in New Sout Wales and Victoria were more a reflection of teir large population sizes, since participation rates in tese States were below te national average (17.1 and 12.7%, respectively). Rates of fising participation above te national average were recorded in te Nortern Territory (31.6%), Tasmania (29.3%), Western Australia (28.5%), Queensland (24.7%) and Sout Australia (24.1%). Te participation rate for te Australian Capital Territory (19.2%) was very close to te national average. Witin eac State/Territory, lowest participation rates were generally associated wit te capital cities (Appendix 5.3). Tis pattern was particularly evident in New Sout Wales and Victoria, were participation rates for Sydney (13.1%) and Melbourne (10.2%) were te lowest in te nation and substantially lower tan oter regions witin tese States. Noneteless, te large population sizes in tese and te oter capital cities meant tat, witin eac State/Territory, a large proportion of te fisers resided witin tese urban centres. Te present survey sampled ouseolds and tus it is also possible to report on fising participation on a ouseold basis. An estimated 1.8 million Australian ouseolds contained at least one recreational fiser wo fised in te 12 monts prior to May 2000, representing 24.5% of ouseolds nationally (Figure 5.4, Appendix 5.4). In Western Australia, Tasmania and te Nortern Territory over one in tree ouseolds (i.e. >33%) contained recreational fisers, compared to less tan one in four (i.e. <25%) for New Sout Wales, te Australian Capital Territory and Victoria. Te rate of ouseold fising participation in Queensland and Sout Australia was intermediate (almost 29%), and sligtly above te national average. In absolute terms, New Sout Wales ad te greatest number of recreational fising ouseolds (528,000) followed by Queensland (389,000) and Victoria (314,000) (Figure 5.4, Appendix 5.4). Based on numbers of fisers, tere was an average of 1.9 fisers per fising ouseold nationally, wit a range of 1.8 (Victoria) to 2.0 (Queensland) at te State/Territory level.

51 National Recreational Fising Survey 51 a) No. of fisers (x1000) b) million nationally NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT State/Territory % of population % nationally NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT State/Territory Figure 5.3 Fising participation in te 12 monts prior to May 2000 by State or Territory of residence for persons aged 5 or older: (a) Number of persons and (b) proportion of te resident population. Error bars represent one standard error.

52 National Recreational Fising Survey 52 a) No. ouseolds (x1000) b) million nationally NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT State/Territory % of ouseolds % nationally NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT State/Territory Figure 5.4 Houseold (private dwelling) fising participation in te 12 monts prior to May 2000 by State or Territory: (a) Number of ouseolds and (b) proportion of ouseolds witin te population. Error bars represent one standard error Age and Gender Nationally, recreational fising was more popular wit males, wit over twice as many males (2.27 million) tan females (1.09 million) aged 5 or older participating in recreational fising in te 12 monts prior to May Tis represented approximately 26.4% of te male and just 12.4% of te female resident population (Figure 5.5, Appendix 5.5). Te ratio of participation rates for males and females in eac of te States and Territories, apart from Victoria, was relatively consistent, ranging between times iger for males. In Victoria, owever, te participation rate amongst females was very low (just 3.6%), some six times lower tan for males (22.1%), a fact tat contributed significantly to te low overall participation rate for tat State. Te reason for te disproportionately low participation amongst females in Victorian is unclear but would appear to be an important feature of te recreational fisery in tat State. Te predominance of males involved in fising, by number and proportion of population, was evident in across all age groups (Figure 5.5, Appendix 5.5). By age class, te greatest numbers of recreational fisers were in te age group for bot sexes (644,000 males and 325,000 females), altoug participation rates were igest amongst cildren in te 5-14 age class (28.5% overall or 33.4 and 23.4% for males and females, respectively). Participation rates fell sligtly in te age group (19.1% overall), increasing again in te age bracket (22.7%), and ten declined progressively in

53 National Recreational Fising Survey 53 eac subsequent age group, to just 3.8% (7.9% of males and 1% of females) for te 75 years plus group. Tis general pattern of participation by age and gender was relatively consistent for eac State and Territory (Appendix 5.5). a) No. of fisers (x1000) b) Male 2.3 million Female 1.1 million Total 5 to to to to to to 99 Age Group % of Age Group Male 26% Female 12% Total 5 to to to to to to 99 Age Group Figure 5.5 Fising participation in te 12 monts prior to May 2000 by age class and gender for Australian residents aged 5 or older: (a) Number of persons and (b) proportion of te resident population Oter Caracteristics Fising club/association membersip Fising club/association membersip for te 12 monts prior to May 2000 amongst recreational fisers was low, wit an estimated 143,000 members, representing about 4.3% of fisers nationally (Figure 5.6). Wile te level of membersip was low in all States and Territories, te Nortern Territory (6.8%) and Australian Capital Territory (5.6%), New Sout Wales (5.6%) and Victoria (5.4%) registered membersip rates iger tan te national average. By contrast, membersip rates for te remaining States were below 3.4%, wit te lowest being just 2.3% for Sout Australia. Fising club membersip was lower among female fisers (3%) tan males (5%).

54 National Recreational Fising Survey 54 a) No. of fisers (x1000) b) % of fisers ,419 nationally NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT State/Territory 4.3% of fisers nationally NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT State/Territory Figure 5.6 Fising club/association membersip in te 12 monts prior to May 2000 by State or Territory of residence for recreational fisers aged 5 or older: (a) Number of members and (b) proportion of fisers Fising licences Approximately 445,000 Australian residents aged 5 or older eld a licence for some recreational fising activity in te 12 monts prior to May 2000 (Figure 5.7). Most Australian States ave some form of recreational fising licence in place toug tere are many different categories of licence required and few consistent standards across te nation. Variability in te proportion of licence olders found in tis survey generally reflected tese management arrangements. For instance, te Victorian government introduced an all waters general fising licence during 1999 and consequently tis State ad te igest number of licence olders (225,000) and te igest level of licence ownersip (41% of fisers) (Figure 5.7). Te disparity between te number of licence olders and te estimated number of fisers in Victoria, owever, can be explained by te fact tat te licence was introduced during, rater tan prior, to te 12 mont period for reporting of past fising activity. Tat is to say, some fisers were still yet to take out te new licence at te time of te initial screening survey. Furtermore, te Victorian licensing system as a number of exemption categories and not all fisers are required to old licences. Tasmanian fisers ave been required to old licences for freswater fising and several forms of saltwater fising activities for many years. As a consequence te level of licence ownersip was also relatively ig, about 31% of fisers (Figure 5.7). In Western Australia about 14% of fisers were licensed, wit certain forms of saltwater fising requiring licenses.

55 National Recreational Fising Survey 55 In New Sout Wales, a freswater fising licence was in place at te commencement of te survey but subsequently (during te diary survey) a general fising licence, similar to tat for Victoria, was introduced. Te impact of tis all waters licence was not, terefore, reflected in te licensing figures, wic indicated tat just 8% of New Sout Wales fisers eld licences. Queensland as a small number of freswater dams were an angling fee is carged and tese arrangements are reflected in te low levels of licensing for residents of tat State. Altoug te Nortern Territory as no recreational licences, te survey establised tat a small number of Nortern Territory residents did old interstate fising licences. a) No. of fisers (x1000) b) % of fisers ,182 licence olders nationally NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT State/Territory 13.28% nationally NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT State/Territory Figure 5.7 Fising licensing status for te 12 monts prior to May 2000 by State or Territory of residence for recreational fisers aged 5 or older: (a) Number of licence-olders and (b) proportion of fisers Boat ownersip Of te 7.2 million Australian ouseolds, an estimated 789,000 (11% of total) owned at least one recreational vessel as at April Te total number of vessels (including jet skis, canoes, sailing boats, row boats and power craft) owned by Australian residents at tat time was about 925,000 vessels (Table 5.3). Not unexpectedly, te level of boat ownersip was iger for ouseolds containing recreational fisers, wit approximately 574,000 (32%) of te 1.8 million Australian fising ouseolds owning a boat. Not all recreational vessels are used for fising and out of te total, only 512,000 (55%) were identified as aving been used for recreational fising in te twelve monts prior to May Te largest number of boat owning ouseolds was in New Sout Wales, followed by Queensland and Victoria (Figure 5.8). As a proportion of te population, Tasmania and te Nortern Territory ad te

56 National Recreational Fising Survey 56 igest boat ownersip rates bot witin te general and fising ouseold populations. Te lowest rate of boat ownersip was recorded in te Australian Capital Territory. As a proportion of te total number of vessels in eac State or Territory, it was establised tat about alf of te vessels in New Sout Wales, Victoria and Sout Australia were used for fising, compared wit around 60% in Queensland, Western Australia and Tasmania and over 70% in te Nortern Territory (Table 5.3). Based on te estimated market value of te fising boats and adjusted for te proportion of time (attribution) spent using te boat for fising (as opposed to oter boating activities), te total attributed value of recreational fising vessels in Australia was approximately $3.3 billion (Table 5.3). Te value of fising vessels in New Sout Wales and Queensland exceeded of $750 million wile te recreational fising fleet in Victoria and Western Australia was valued in excess of $600 million. Nationally, vessels in te 5-10 m size range ad te igest overall value ($1.7 billion). Some caracteristics of recreational fising vessels are described below. Vessels used for fising ranged in lengt from 2 to 46 m. At te lower end of te size scale, fising vessels were generally non-powered canoes and dingies, wile te largest vessels were more likely to be multi-purpose cruisers. Te majority of recreational fising boats (71% or 365,511 boats) were less tan 5 m wit a furter quarter (135,596 boats) between 6-10 m (Figure 5.9a). Very few vessels above about 15 m were used for recreational fising. Vessels were categorised according to teir primary mode of propulsion, viz jet skis, powered vessels, sailing vessels and paddle/row boats. Wile all types were used for recreational fising, te vast majority (93%) of te recreational fising vessels were powered (Figure 5.9b). Approximately 5% of te recreational fising fleet were paddled vessels. Sailing boats and jet skis were of negligible significance as recreational fising platforms. Te primary storage location of fising boats was anoter feature tat may be used to categorise te recreational fleet. Te survey establised tat te majority (80%) of recreational fising vessels were stored on trailers (trailer boats), te balance was distributed more or less equally between moorings/marinas, on te sore or carried as car toppers (Figure 5.9c). Dept sounding and global position fixing (GPS) electronic aids were also used to caracterise te fising fleet. Tese electronic devices are generally used to assist fisers in te location of fis and wit navigation. Dept sounding and position fixing equipment was present on 232,000 (45%) and 100,000 (19%) of te recreational fising vessels respectively. Te prevalence of electronic aids increased wit vessel size up to vessels of 15 m lengt ten declined (Figure 5.9d,e). Table 5.3 Details of recreational boat ownersip in Australia. Number of vessels, number used for fising and estimated market value of recreational fising vessels by State or Territory. State/Territory NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT TOTAL No. of vessels 307, , ,599 74, ,059 39,739 11,717 10, ,466 No. of used for fising 159,300 86, ,150 38,713 64,047 23,111 8,590 6, ,590 % used for fising Estimated value ($million) ,293

57 National Recreational Fising Survey 57 a) No. of ouseolds (x1000) b) NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT State/Territory General population Fiser ouseolds % of ouseolds NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT State/Territory Figure 5.8 Houseold boat ownersip for te general population and for fising ouseolds by State or Territory: (a) Number of ouseolds and (b) proportion of te total number of ouseolds.

58 National Recreational Fising Survey 58 a) 80 % 60 Total 511,590 vessels b) 100 % c) 80 % < >25 Lengt (m) Jetski Power Sail Paddle Vessel Type d) % e) % Trailer Mooring Car Top Sore Vessel location n = 230,254 vessels (45% of total) < >25 Lengt (m) n = 98,461 vessels (19% of total) < >25 Lengt (m) Figure 5.9 Caracteristics of Australian recreational fising boats: (a) Distribution (%) of vessels by lengt class; (b) distribution by propulsion category; (c) distribution (%) by storage location; (d) proportion (%) of vessels wit eco sounder by lengt class; and (e) proportion of vessels (%) wit GPS by lengt class.

59 National Recreational Fising Survey Recreational Fising Effort Fising effort is used to describe te pressure being applied to a resource by fisers and to derive (wit catc data) indices of resource abundance and fising success. Te response of fis populations to variations in fising effort is an important foundation for stock assessment and population modelling. Fising effort was derived from information provided by fisers during te 12-mont diary survey and is presented as expanded population estimates (based on ABS estimated resident population and participation rates obtained from te screening survey). Information was collected on an event basis, were an event was defined as a discrete fising episode. Separate fising events were recorded were tere was a cange in fising region or water body type, target species and/or fising metod. In tis way a day s fising trip could comprise more tan one event, for instance fisers commonly gater bait prior to fising. Bot te gatering of bait and te subsequent fising were considered to be separate events since te effort expended in te capture of bait cannot be attributed to te capture of sport fis and vice versa. Similarly, te use of passive fising gear, suc as pots for crabs or rock lobster, wilst line fising for finfis were recorded as separate fising events. Te delineation of fising activity in tis manner provided an ability to analyse effort (and catc) on te basis of fising/collection metod and target species/fisery. Furtermore, using tis approac, tree measures of effort could be defined, namely fising days (i.e. separate days in wic some for of fising was undertaken), fising events or ours fised. It sould be noted tat for tis report, person based effort as been calculated, for metods suc as line fising tis is clearly appropriate, but were sared or joint activities occur, suc as fising wit crab pots or using drag nets to catc prawns or bait, tis can over estimate effort. For example, if tree persons in a fising party fised wit pots (one or more pots) our analysis would indicate 3 person days of pot fising, 3 person pot events and, on an ours fised basis, tree times te fising time 8. In tis instance it would be more appropriate to analyse pot effort on te basis of te number of pots fised (i.e. per pot) wen reporting metod based effort (and metod based catc rates). Te primary purpose of tis report is to provide a big picture assessment of recreational fising effort, i.e. based primarily on analyses at State/Territory and national levels. Subsequent reports will be produced by te participating fiseries agencies and will examine data at regional scales appropriate to addressing specific resource and management issues Total Effort Australian residents aged 5 or older expended an estimated 20.6 million fiser days of effort during te period May 2000 to April 2001, representing 23.2 million separate fising events or million fiser ours (Appendix 5.6). Based on were te fising occurred (rater tan State/Territory of residence), New Sout Wales recorded te greatest effort (6.9 million fiser days, 7.7 million events or 30.4 million fiser ours), followed by Queensland (4.6 million fiser days, 5.8 million events or 25.4 million fiser ours) and Western Australia (3.4 million fiser days, 3.4 million events or 19.7 million fiser ours) (Figure 5.10, Appendix 5.6). Recreational fising effort was clearly concentrated on te east coast of Australia, wit more tan alf te national total (measured eiter as days, events or ours) reported from New Sout Wales and Queensland. Reflecting te fact tat many fisers undertake more tan one episode of fising (i.e. fising event) per day, tis analysis of effort indicated an average of 1.12 events per fiser day nationally, ranging from 1.02 (Western Australia) to 1.24 (Queensland). 8 Note: catc information was recorded on a person basis and were joint effort occurred te catc was attributed between fisers in suc a manner to avoid multiple counting.

60 National Recreational Fising Survey 60 Wit te exception of Victoria, te relativity of effort levels across te nation generally reflected te size of te resident fiser populations (refer Figure 5.3). Fising effort was lower tan expected on te fiser population basis in Victoria and can be explained by te fact tat comparatively large numbers of Victorians fis outside of te State, an observation clearly demonstrated below in te analysis of interstate fising activity. (a) No. of fiser days (x1000) 0 (b) No. of events (x1000) (c) No. of ours (x1000) Total million fiser days NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT 7671 Total million events NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT Total million fising ours NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT State/Territory Figure 5.10 Annual fising effort by State or Territory fised for Australian recreational fisers aged 5 or older. (a) Fiser days (b) number of fising events, (c) ours fised.

61 National Recreational Fising Survey Interstate Fising Effort A benefit of conducting te survey nationally as been te ability to monitor all fising activity, including tat wic occurred outside of te State or Territory of residence 9. Overall, an estimated 2.6 million fising events (about 11% of te national total) occurred outside of te fiser s ome State. Interstate fising as a reciprocal aspect, wit eac State or Territory importing and as well as exporting effort to and from oter regions of Australia. Te number of fising events contributed to eac State or Territory by interstate fisers (i.e imported fising effort) is presented in te columns in Appendix 5.6 and te proportion of total effort in eac State or Territory tat was imported is sown in Figure 5.11a. New Sout Wales (1.5 million events or 19% of total) and Queensland (645,000 events or 11%) imported te largest quantities of fising effort wereas te igest proportion of imported effort occurred in te Nortern Territory (135,000 events or 38%). Wit te exception of te Australian Capital Territory (17% imported effort), te level of imported fising effort was below 5% for te remaining States. Te distribution of effort exported interstate by State or Territory of residence is sown te rows in Appendix 5.6 and proportionally in Figure 5.11b. Victorians exported te largest amount of fising effort (1.0 million events or 28% of teir annual fising effort), but residents of te Australian Capital Territory exported te igest proportion (252,000 events or 91%). Proportionally less tan 10% of te fising effort expended by residents of eac of te remaining States and Territory was exported interstate. Closer examination of te information arranged in columns and rows of Appendix 5.6 provides an insigt into te dynamics of interstate fising activity around Australia. Most of te effort exported from New Sout Wales was directed to Queensland and to some extent to te Nortern Territory, wit te bulk of te imported effort originating from Victorian, Queensland and Australian Capital Territory residents. Victoria exported relatively ig levels of effort to New Sout Wales and Queensland in addition to Western Australia, wilst importing effort mainly from Sout Australian residents. As noted, Queensland imported effort primarily from New Sout Wales and Victorian residents, wilst exporting most effort into New Sout Wales and secondarily into te Nortern Territory. As tis analysis reveals, muc of te interstate fising activity was directed to adjacent States. In many instances tis may ave only involved relatively sort trips tat crossed jurisdictional boundaries, particularly true for residents of te Australian Capital Territory fising in New Sout Wales. Oter examples include Victorians fising in New Sout Wales, were almost alf of teir exported effort (events) was directed at te Murray River wile te majority (85%) of te effort by Queensland residents in New Sout Wales was directed at te nort coast, including te Tweed and Clarence Rivers. By considering te balance between imported and exported effort at te State or Territory level it was apparent tat New Sout Wales, Queensland, te Nortern Territory and, to a lesser extent, Western Australia were net importers of fising effort (Figure 5.11c). By contrast, Victoria, te Australian Capital Territory and Sout Australia were net exporters of fising effort. In Tasmania, imported and exported fising effort largely balanced eac oter. 9 State or Territory of residence was defined as tat wic applied at te time of te screening interview. For te purposes of analysis, diarists wo moved interstate during te diary survey were deemed to be still residents of teir former State or Territory.

62 National Recreational Fising Survey 62 a) Proportion of effort imported (%) % nationally NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT State/Territory b) Proportion of effort exported (%) NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT State/Territory c) Interstate fiser effort (no. events) Imported effort NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT Exported effort Figure 5.11 Interstate fising activity by Australian recreational fisers age 5 or older: (a) Proportion of annual fising effort (events) imported into eac State or Territory by interstate residents, (b) proportion of annual effort (events) exported interstate by State or Territory of residence and (c) balance between imported and exported fising effort (events) by State or Territory fised.

63 National Recreational Fising Survey Fising Frequency Nationally, recreational fisers fised for an average of 6.13 days per fiser between May 2000 and April 2001 (Figure 5.12). Western Australian residents averaged te igest levels of fising activity (6.94 days per fiser) followed by Tasmanians (6.55 days per fiser) and Victorians (6.37 days per fiser). Residents of te Nortern Territory (5.02 days per fiser) and te Australian Capital Territory (4.61 days per fiser) averaged te lowest fising activity levels. 10 Mean 6.13 days per fiser Mean days fised per fiser NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT State/Territory Figure 5.12 Mean annual number of days fised per recreational fiser aged 5 or older, by State or Territory of residence. Averages, owever, fail to recognise te fact tat te distribution of fising effort (and catc) amongst recreational fisers is usually igly skewed. Tat is, a large number of fisers usually do relatively little fising (and catc few fis) wile, at te oter extreme; relatively few fisers are very active and contribute disproportionately to te overall effort (and catc). Tis feature of fiser beaviour was evident for Australian recreational fisers, wit about two tirds of all fisers (i.e. 2.2 million persons) fising for 5 or less days over te 12 mont survey period wile just 3% of all fisers (about 101,000 persons) fised for more tan 25 days (Figure 5.13). Te impact on total fising effort of individual fisers was examined by ranking tem based on teir level of annual fising effort (days fised) and ten calculating te effect of progressively adding a fiser s effort to te total (Figure 5.14). At te lower end of te effort scale, about 60% of all fisers (i.e. about 2.26 million persons) accounted for less tan 20% of te total effort (about 4.1 million fiser days). By contrast, at te top of te activity scale, just 15% of fisers were responsible for about alf of te overall fising effort, wit te upper 3% (wo eac fised for greater tan 25 days) also contributing about 20% of te national fising effort. Tis analysis clearly igligts te potential for a relatively small proportion of te recreational fiser population to exert a substantial impact in terms of effort (and also catc), suggesting tat minor sifts in te dynamics of participation (based on activity levels) at te upper end of te fisery will ave significant implications on effort (and catc) levels.

64 National Recreational Fising Survey 64 Recreational fisers (%) >40 Days fised Figure 5.13 Distribution of annual fising effort (days fised) amongst Australian recreational fisers aged 5 or older. 100 Total effort (% days fised) % effort 20% effort 15% fisers 60% fisers Recreational fisers (%) Figure 5.14 Relationsip between te number of fisers and teir cumulated impact in terms of fising effort (days fised) for Australian recreational fisers aged 5 or older Effort by Water Body Type Five categories of water body were identified to describe te distribution of fising activity, namely offsore (>5km from te coast), coastal (soreline to 5km), estuarine, freswater rivers and lakes or dams. In many instances, offsore waters also coincide wit waters managed by te Commonwealt Government.

65 National Recreational Fising Survey 65 Te distribution of effort (events) by water body type is summarised in Figure 5.15 and Appendix 5.7. Nationally, about 41% of te total fising effort (9.5 million events) occurred in coastal waters, wit estuarine waters accounting for a furter 35% (8.1 million events). Te level of recreational fising directed at offsore waters was relatively low, about 4% (937,000 events) of te national total. Freswater fising accounted for almost 20% of te national fising effort, around 11% (2.7 million events) in rivers and 8% (1.9 million events) in lakes or dams. No. of fising events (x1000) (4%) 9518 (41%) 8146 (35%) 2655 (11%) 1948 (8%) 0 Offsore Coastal Estuarine Rivers Lakes/Dams Water body Type Figure 5.15 Annual recreational fising effort (events) by water body type for Australian recreational fisers aged 5 or older. Error bars represent one standard error. At te State or Territory level, te relative distribution of effort between specific water body types was variable, influenced by a range of factors including geograpy, population distribution and access to aquatic resources (Figure 5.16, Appendix 5.7). New Sout Wales and Victoria ave major urban population centres (Sydney, Melbourne) located adjacent to relatively large estuarine systems (Port Hacking, Botany Bay, Port Jackson, Hawkesbury, Port Pillip, Western Port) and consequently a substantial proportion of te fising effort was directed in estuarine waters. Queensland also as urban populations adjacent to large estuaries in addition to an extensive coastal fising region bounded by te Great Barrier Reef. Te bulk of te recreational fising effort in tat State was divided between te estuarine and coastal waters. Te predominance of fising in coastal waters was feature of recreational fiseries in Sout Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania. Tese States ave relatively limited estuarine systems and prominent extensions of te continental self adjacent to metropolitan centres. Fising effort was more evenly distributed between river, estuarine and coastal waters in te Nortern Territory wile freswater fising, especially in lakes or dams, was, not surprisingly, te exclusive feature of fisery in te Australian Capital Territory.

66 National Recreational Fising Survey 66 Figure 5.16 Proportion of annual fising effort (events) for recreational fisers aged 5 or older by water body type and State or Territory fised. Nationally about 80% of te fising effort (events) occurred in saltwater (offsore, coastal and estuarine waters) as opposed to 20% in freswater (freswater rivers, lakes and dams) (Figure 5.17, Appendix 5.7). However, at te State or Territory level it was apparent tat saltwater fising effort exceeded te national level in Queensland, Sout Australia and Western Australia (84-95%) and was sligtly lower for New Sout Wales, Tasmania and te Nortern Territory (71-76%). In Victoria tere was greater reliance on freswater fising, wit saltwater fising effort representing just 57% of te total for tat State. As noted above, fising activity in te landlocked Australian Capital Territory occurred exclusively in freswater (Figure 5.17, Appendix 5.7). Total effort (%) NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT State/Territory freswater saltwater Figure 5.17 Proportion of annual fising effort (events) in salt and freswater by State or Territory fised for recreational fisers aged 5 or older.

67 National Recreational Fising Survey Effort by Fising Metod Eigteen different fising metods were classified for te purposes of recording fising activity and tese ave been grouped into five main categories for reporting purposes. Te grouped categories are line fising, fising wit pots or traps, fising wit nets, diving and oter collection metods. Line fising (including te use of bait, artificial lures and jigs as well as set-lines) accounted for 19.7 million fising events, tat is nearly 85% of te overall annual fising effort (Figure 5.18, Appendix 5.8). Fising using bait was more popular tan fising wit artificial lures, eiter solely or in combination wit bait fising. Fising wit set-lines was reported in all States and Territories but effort levels were comparatively low. Fising wit pots and traps (including crab and lobster pots, oop nets and fis traps) was next in order of importance, representing 1.7 million events or 7% of te total effort. Pots and traps can be categorised as passive or active depending on te manner in wic tey are operated. Passive gear, suc as lobster pots, are generally baited and left unattended, te target species is attracted to te pot or trap and once inside are effectively unable to escape. Active pots or traps, wic include oop nets, require fisers to actively aul te gear to te surface to retain te target species, wic are more or less free to move into and out of te trap. Passive gear was more te commonly used metod (73% of pot/trap events). Netting metods, including actively worked gear (cast nets, drag or seine and scoop or pus nets) and set nets (gillnets), comprised 634,000 events, equivalent to 3% of te total effort. Cast nets and scoop or pus nets were te main netting metods used, (46% and 33% of net events) followed by drag or seine nets (12%) and set-nets (9%). Diving (using spears or underwater and collection) contributed 266,000 events or just 1% of te overall effort. SCUBA/surface air and snorkel diving (and collection) was te primary activity (55% of dive events) altoug spearfising (36%) was also significant. Spearing fis from te surface accounted for te balance of te dive effort (9%). Oter metods (including and collection, te use of pumps, rakes and spades) accounted for 915,000 events, about 4% of te total fising events nationally. Te use of pumps, rakes or spades dominated (68%) over and collection (31%) in tis metod category. No. of fising events (x1000) ,671 (85%) 1,718 (7%) (3%) (1%) 915 (4%) Lines Pots/traps Nets Diving Oter Fising Metod Figure 5.18 Annual fising effort (events) by fising metod for Australian recreational fisers aged 5 or older.

68 National Recreational Fising Survey 68 Te prominence of line fising was clearly evident in all States and Territories, altoug alternative fising metods were also relatively important in Western Australia and Queensland, accounting for over 20% of te total effort (Figure 5.19, Appendix 5.8). Pot and trap usage was relatively more prominent in Western Australia, Sout Australia, Queensland, Nortern Territory and Tasmania (7-16% of events) tan in New Sout Wales, Victoria and te Australian Capital Territory (1-4% of events) (Figure 5.19, Appendix 5.8). Pots were commonly used to target lobsters in Sout Australia and Tasmania wereas tey were used mainly to target crabs in Queensland and te Nortern Territory. In Western Australia, passive gear was used to target lobsters wereas active gear was te primary metod used to capture crabs (refer section 5.11). Te use of recreational netting metods was proportionally greater in Tasmania and Queensland (6% of events) compared to elsewere (Figure 5.19, Appendix 5.8). In Queensland, cast nets dominant net metod wile in Tasmania te majority of te net fising was based on gillnet usage. Scoop or pus nets accounted for te bulk of te net effort in New Sout Wales, Western Australia and Victoria. Tasmania and Western Australia reported above average levels of dive effort (3-4%) (Figure 5.19, Appendix 5.8). In Tasmania, Western Australia, Victoria and Sout Australia dive (and) collection (mainly for rock lobster and abalone) using snorkel, scuba or surface air supply accounted for te bulk of te dive effort. Spearfising was te main dive activity in New Sout Wales and Queensland but was also of significance in Western Australia. Oter collection metods, especially te use of pumps, rakes or spades were particularly important in New Sout Wales and Queensland, largely concerned wit te collection of bait species (including yabbies/nippers) (Figure 5.19, Appendix 5.8). Figure 5.19 Proportion of annual fising effort (events) by metod and State or Territory fised for recreational fisers aged 5 or older. Appendix 5.9 provides estimates of total ours fised by metod and Appendix 5.10 average duration by event, based on fising metod. Nationally, line fising accounted for over 72 million fiser ours of effort (70% of total ours fised). Line fising events, weter using bait or artificial lures, averaged around 3.5 ours, te duration being relatively consistent across all States and Territories. In situations were a combination of bait and lure fising occurred fising times were sligtly longer, wit an average duration of over 4 ours. By contrast set-line events averaged almost 20 ours, reflecting te fact tat set lines are generally left unattended for long periods.