Abstract

Due to increased pressure on the fishery resource, there is a need for angling rules and regulations. These are intended to maintain the fishery resource while retaining quality fishing experiences. If regulations are not supported by anglers, the resource could be harmed, and the quality of fishing experiences degraded. This could result in the loss of economic and social benefits, as well as related tourism income. Not all anglers are likely to respond to regulations in the same fashion. Knowing the extent of support or opposition to angling rules and regulations in that support would be useful information to fisheries managers.\A sample of licensed (1995) Texas anglers was surveyed and asked if they supported or opposed various rules and regulations. These included length limits (maximum, minimum and slot), retention of fish caught, restricted waters, closed seasons and allowable use of various types of fishing gear and bait. The sample was segmented into four subgroups according to the concept of “Recreational Specialization”. These groups represent a continuum of anglers ranging from the most specialized and the most likely to support angling rules and regulations, to the least specialized and potentially, less supportive of regulations.\Results were consistent with “Recreational Specialization” theory. On nearly all measures, the most specialized anglers were more supportive of regulations than were the less specialized anglers. There was a pattern of support for fisheries rules and regulations. These results suggest that although anglers support management measures, they differ in their degree of support. Understanding the segmentation of anglers in their level of support for regulations will assist fisheries managers.

PDF Preview