Abstract
Shifting demographics among angling communities mean that managers may need different amenities at fishing sites to satisfy new constituents. Anglers approach recreational fishing from diverse demographic and cultural perspectives which influence the sites they access and utilize. Understanding linkages between landscape preferences at fishing sites and demographics in sha** those preferences can improve plans for providing better fishing experiences for diverse constituents. We began addressing this need with a survey of 811 resident anglers in North Carolina. Respondents were asked to state their preference for development at fishing locations, and choose between pictures of streams, rivers, and lakes with and without visible docks and walkways. We used logistic regression analysis to model preference for development in each of the four contexts, with demographics and fishing practices as independent variables. Anglers who stated a preference for developed fishing sites and chose pictures with docks and walkways tended to be non-White minorities, female, older than average, and fish more frequently. Consumptive anglers, however, preferred the less developed site. These results suggest that should the current angling population continue to age and diversify, more individuals will desire development of user amenities at fishing sites. Development of family oriented sites may successfully attract and maintain key groups of anglers and encourage intergenerational transfer of fishing as a cultural practice.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allen SM, Hawkins AJ (1999) Maternal gatekee**: Mothers' beliefs and behaviors that inhibit greater father involvement in family work. J Marriage Fam 61:199–212
Arlinghaus R (2006) Overcoming human obstacles to conservation of recreational fishery resources, with emphasis on Central Europe. Environ Conserv 33:46–59
Arlinghaus R, Mehner T, Cow IG (2002) Reconciling traditional inland fisheries management and sustainability in industrialized countries, with emphasis on Europe. Fish Fish 3:261–316
Arlinghaus R, Tillner R, Bork M (2015) Explaining participation rates in recreational fishing across industrialised countries. Fish Manag Ecol 22:45–55
Arlinghaus R, Cooke SJ, Sutton SG, Danylchuk AJ, Potts W, Freire KMF, Alós J, da Silva ET, Cowx IG, van Anrooy R (2016) Recommendations for the future of recreational fisheries to prepare the social-ecological system to cope with change. Fish Manag Ecol 23:177–186
Balsman DM, Shoup DE (2008) Opportunities for urban fishing: develo** urban fishing programs to recruit and retain urban anglers. In: American fisheries society symposium, vol 67, pp 31–40
Bengston DN, Schermann M, Moua M, Lee TT (2008) Listening to neglected voices: Hmong and public lands in Minnesota and Wisconsin. Soc Nat Resour 21:876–890
Bergstrom JC, Cordell HK, Ashley GA, Watson AE (1990) Economic impacts of recreational spending on rural areas: a case study. Econ Dev Q 4:29–39
Blahna DJ (1992) Comparing the preferences of black, Asian, Hispanic, and white fishermen at Moraine Hills State Park, Illinois In Symposium on Social Aspects 42
Buijs AE (2009) Public support for river restoration. A mixed-method study into local residents' support for and framing of river management and ecological restoration in the Dutch floodplains. J Environ Manag 90:2680–2689
Buijs AE, Elands BH, Langers F (2009) No wilderness for immigrants: cultural differences in images of nature and landscape preferences. Landsc Urban Plan 91:113–123
Burger J, Stephens WL, Boring CS Kuklinski M, Gibbons JW, Gochfeld M (1999) Factors in exposure assessment: ethnic and socioeconomic differences in fishing and consumption of fish caught along the Savannah River. Risk Anal 19:427
Byrnes JP, Miller DC, Schafer WD (1999) Gender differences in risk taking: a meta-analysis. Psychol Bull 125:367–383
Campbell MB (1989) Fishing lore: the construction of the “sportsman”. Ann Tour Res 16:76–88
Carolina Demography University of North Carolina (2014) 2013 County Population Estimates: Race & Ethnicity Retrieved from http://demography.cpc.unc.edu/2014/06/30/2013-county-population-estimates-race-ethnicity/. Accessed 15 Nov 2016
Dann SL, Alvarado A, Palmer D, Schroeder B, Stephens M (2008) Angler participation, recruitment, and retention in Michigan, 1995–2004: using data-mining techniques for customer relationship management. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Research Report, 2088
Dearden P (1984) Factors influencing landscape preferences: an empirical investigation. Landscape Plan 11:293–306
Dillman DA, Smyth JD, Christian LM (2014) Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: the tailored design method. John Wiley & Sons
Ditton RB, Hunt KM (1996) Demographics, participation, attitudes, management preferences, and trip expenditures of Texas anglers. Human Dimensions Fisheries Research Laboratory Report # HD-605. Texas A&M University, College Station
Ditton RB, Loomis DK, Choi S (1992) Recreation specialization: re-conceptualization from a social worlds perspective. J Leis Res 24:33–51
Dustin D, McAvoy L, Rankin JS (1991) Land ethics in a culturally diverse society. Trends 28:25–27
Elmendorf WF, Willits FK, Sasidharan V (2005) Urban park and forest participation and landscape preference: a review of the relevant literature. J Arboric 31:311–316
Fedler AJ, Ditton RB (1994) Understanding angler motivations in fisheries management. Fisheries 19:6–13
Fedler AJ, Ditton RB, Duda M (1998) Factors influencing recreational fishing and boating participation. Strategic Plan for the National Outreach and Communication Program. Washington, DC, US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service 80–124
Floyd M (1999) Race, ethnicity and use of the National Park System. Social Science Research Review 1:1–24
Franzini L, Caughy M, Spears W, Esquer MEF (2005) Neighborhood economic conditions, social processes, and self-rated health in low-income neighborhoods in Texas: a multilevel latent variables model. Soc Sci Med 61:1135–1150
Fulton DC, Manfredo MJ, Lipscomb J (1996) Wildlife value orientations: a conceptual and measurement approach. Hum Dimens Wildl 1:24–47
Gobster PH (2002) Managing urban parks for a racially and ethnically diverse clientele. Leis Sci 24:143–159
Hansen HP, Peterson MN, Jensen C (2012) Demographic transition among hunters: a temporal analysis of hunter recruitment dedication and motives in Denmark. Wildl Res 39:446–451
Hayes MC, Peterson MN, Heinen-Kay JL, Langerhans RB (2015) Tourism-related drivers of support for protection of fisheries resources on Andros Island, the Bahamas. Ocean Coastal Manag 106:118–123
Howley P, Donoghue CO, Hynes S (2012) Exploring public preferences for traditional farming landscapes. Landsc Urban Plan 104:66–74
Hunt LM (2005) Recreational fishing site choice models: insights and future opportunities. Hum Dimens Wildl 10:153–172
Hunt KM, Ditton RB (1997) The social context of site selection for freshwater fishing. N Am J Fish Manag 17:331–338
Hunt KM, Ditton RB (2002) Freshwater fishing participation patterns of racial and ethnic groups in Texas. N Am J Fish Manag 22:52–65
Hunt KM, Floyd MF, Ditton RB (2007) African-American and Anglo anglers' attitudes toward the catch-related aspects of fishing. Hum Dimens Wildl 12:227–239
Hutchison R (1993) Hmong leisure and recreation activity. In: Gobster PJ (ed) Managing urban and high-use recreation settings. General Technical Report NC-163. USDA Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul
Hutt CP, Neal JW (2010) Arkansas urban resident fishing site preferences, catch related attitudes, and satisfaction. Hum Dimens Wildl 15:90–105
Johnson CY, Bowker JM, Cordell HK (2001) Outdoor recreation constraints: an examination of race, gender, and Rural Dwelling. South Rural Sociol 17:111–133
Kalton G (1983) Compensating for missing survey data. Research Report Series, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
Kaplan R (1985) The analysis of perception via preference: a strategy for studying how the environment is experienced. Landscape Plan 12:161–176
Kaplan R, Talbot JF (1988) Ethnicity and preference for natural settings: a review and recent findings. Landsc Urban Plan 15:107–117
Kearney AR, Bradley GA (2011) The effects of viewer attributes on preference for forest scenes: contributions of attitudes, knowledge, demographic factors, and stakeholder group membership. Environ Behav 43:147–181
Kuehn D, Luzadis V, Brincka M (2013) An analysis of the factors influencing fishing participation by resident anglers. Hum Dimens Wildl 18:322–339
Lee KJ, Scott D, Floyd MF, Edwards MB (2016) Social stratification in fishing participation in the United States: a multiple hierarchy stratification perspective. J Leis Res 48:245–263
Manning RE, Krymkowski DH (2014) Standards of quality for parks and protected areas. Int J Sociol 40:11–29
Peterson MN, Thurmond B, Mchale M, Rodriguez S, Bondell HD, Cook M (2012) Predicting native plant landsca** preferences in urban areas. Sustain Cities Soc 5:70–76
Pullis G (2000) Participation, and expenditure patterns of African-American, Hispanic, and women hunters and anglers. Addendum to the 1996 national survey of fishing, hunting, and wildlife-associated recreation. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report 96–96 Washington, D.C
Radonski GC (1984) Opportunities for urban fishing. In: Allen J (ed) Urban fishing symposium proceedings. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, pp 1–8
Sharp R, Wollscheid KU (2009) An overview of recreational hunting in North America, Europe and Australia. In: Dickson B, Hutton J, Adams WA (eds) Recreational hunting, conservation and rural livelihoods: science and practice. John Wiley & Sons, UK, pp 25–38
Stodolska M, Shinew KJ, Floyd MF, Walker GJ (2013) Race, ethnicity, and leisure: perspectives on research, theory, and practice. Human Kinetics, Champaign
Toth JF, Brown RB (1997) Racial and gender meanings of why people participate in recreational fishing. Leis Sci 119:129–146
U.S. Census Bureau (2011) Census 2010 and 2000 interactive map, demographics, statistics, quick facts. North Carolina. Retrieved October 12, 2015, http://censusviewer.com/state/NC
U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau (2001) National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation
U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau (2011) National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation
U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau (2016) National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation
Van den Berg AE, Koole SL (2006) New wilderness in the Netherlands: an investigation of visual preferences for nature development landscapes. Landsc Urban Plan 78:362–372
Van den Berg AE, Vlek CA, Coeterier JF (1998) Group differences in the aesthetic evaluation of nature development plans: a multilevel approach. J Environ Psychol 18:141–157
Vaske JJ, Donnelly MP (1999) A value-attitude-behavior model predicting wildland preservation voting intentions. Soc Nat Resour 12:523–537
Washburne RF (1978) Black under-participation in wildland recreation: Alternative explanations. Leis Sci 1:175–189
West PC, Fly JM, Larkin F, Marans RW (1992) Minority anglers and toxic fish consumption evidence from a statewide survey of Michigan. In: Bryant B, Mohal P (eds) Race and the incidence of environmental hazards: a time for disclosure. Westview Press, Boulder, pp 100–113
**ao X, Perry E, Manning R, Krymkowski D, Valliere W, Reigner N (2017) Effects of transportation on racial/ethnic diversity of National Park Visitors. Leis Sci 39:126–143
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Valdez, R.X., Drake, M.D., Burke, C.R. et al. Predicting development preferences for fishing sites among diverse anglers. Urban Ecosyst 22, 127–135 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-018-0800-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-018-0800-8