Pike (Esox lucius) stock management in designated brown trout (Salmo trutta) fisheries: anglers’ preferences

The sustainable management of fisheries is increasingly as much about people as it is about stock management and an important prerequisite for managing stakeholder disagreement is an understanding of each party's position and perspective. In Ireland pike stocks are actively managed within specific fisheries for the purpose of protecting brown trout stocks. Associated public discussion is increasingly polarized with a clear message that trout anglers favour and pike anglers oppose such management intervention. A first step towards successfully managing the tension between all stakeholders is a better understanding of the broad spectrum of anglers’ views. Latent-class site-choice models are estimated with choice experiment data to reveal information on anglers’ preferences with the data collected via an online survey from 341 members of a recreational angling research panel. Several policy relevant lessons arise from the analysis. First, anglers’ preferences are not homogeneous, either among pike or trout anglers. Angler stakeholder groups cannot reasonably attest to represent all pike or trout anglers. There are multiple distinct classes of anglers with quite different preferences on pike stock control as well as other fishery attributes, such as bag limits and catch rates. Second, while anglers have strong preferences across a number of fishery attributes (e.g. catch rates, pollution, invasive weeds, etc.), pike stock control is the predominant attribute affecting anglers’ behaviour. Third, among trout anglers there is a sizeable majority opposed to the maintenance of existing pike stock control measures, which is at odds with a vociferous public campaign led by trout angling representative organizations. The preferences of this ‘silent’ majority reflect the fact that approximately 2-in-5 trout anglers also fish for pike. In general, the research helps inform fishery management decisions, dispelling the idea of a clear dichotomy between pike and trout anglers and instead illuminates the complexity of anglers’ preferences.