Black bass fishing in the U.S.: addendum to the 1996 national survey of fishing, hunting and wildlife-related recreation

              Black Bass Fishing

in the U.S.

Addendum to the 1996 National

Survey of Fishing, Hunting and

Wildlife-Associated Recreation

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Report 96-3

Black Bass Fishing

in the U.S.

Addendum to the 1996 National

Survey of Fishing, Hunting and

Wildlife-Associated Recreation

Report 96-3

March 1999

Revised September 1999

Genevieve Pullis

Division of Federal Aid

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Washington, D.C.

and

Andrew Laughland

Division of Economics

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Washington, D.C.

Division of Federal Aid

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Washington, D.C. 20240

Director, Jamie Clark

Chief, Division of Federal Aid, Bob Lange

This report is intended to complement the National and State reports from the

1996 National survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation.

The conclusions are the authors’ and do not represent official positions of the

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Front Cover—USFWS photo

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Black bass fishing is the most popular

type of fishing in the United States.

Black bass include largemouth,

smallmouth, and spotted bass. In 1996,

44 percent of all freshwater anglers in

the United States fished for black bass.

This report uses information from the

1996 National Survey of Fishing,

Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated

Recreation (FHWAR) to describe black

bass fishing in the United States and

the characteristics of black bass anglers.

For this report, a bass angler is anyone

16 years of age and older who fished for

black bass at least once during the year.

They may have fished for other species

too. White bass, striped bass, striped

bass hybrids, and rock bass are not

included in this definition. Great Lakes

bass fishing raises some different issues

so it is not included in this report.

This report has five sections. The first

section shows the extent of participation

in bass fishing. It presents the numbers

of bass anglers and fishing days for the

nation and state-by-state. The second

section discusses the demographic

characteristics of bass anglers and

compares them to other freshwater

anglers and the overall U. S. population.

The third section considers changes in

bass fishing participation through time

by comparing results from the 1991 and

1996 surveys. The fourth section develops

a statistical model of bass fishing

participation which predicts whether a

freshwater angler will fish for bass or

not, based on the person’s demographic

characteristics and residency. The final

section summarizes the report.

2

Introduction

USFWS photo

In 1996, black bass were the most sought

after fish in the United States with

12.7 million freshwater bass anglers,

44 percent of all freshwater anglers

(Table 1). In comparison, 9.0 million

anglers (31percent) fished for trout,

8.0 million (28 percent) fished for panfish,

7.4 million (26 percent) fished for catfish/

bullheads, and 6.4 million (22 percent)

fished for crappie. Since anglers can fish

for more than one species, the sum of the

number of anglers by species is larger

than the total number of anglers.

Anglers fished for bass on more than

191 million days for an average of 15 days

per year. Keeping in mind that anglers

can fish for more than one species in a

day, bass were sought on 39 percent of

all freshwater fishing days.

Tables 2, 3 and 4 contain state-by-state

estimates of bass fishing. These

estimates represent fishing in these

states by residents and nonresidents

combined. The percent of freshwater

anglers that fish for bass ranged

widely — from more than 60 percent in

Rhode Island, Delaware and Texas to

less than 15 percent in North Dakota,

Oregon, Utah, and Colorado. Generally,

the Southern and Eastern states had the

highest level of bass fishing. Western

and Northwestern states had the lowest

levels of participation. This can be seen

graphically in Figure 1 which shows the

percent of anglers who fished for bass

in each state.

Columns one and two of Table 3 show

the number of days spent fishing in

freshwater and fishing for bass. The third

column shows the share of all freshwater

days that anglers spent fishing for bass.

These days do not represent fishing for

bass exclusively; anglers may have

sought more than one species a day of

fishing.

3

Bass Fishing

Participation Levels

Table 1. Freshwater Anglers and Days of Fishing by Type of Fish: 1996

(Population 16 years of age and older. Numbers in thousands.

Excludes Great Lakes fishing.)

Anglers Days of Fishing Average Days per

Type of fish Number Percent Number Percent Angler

Total, all types of fish 28,921 100 485,474 100 17

Black bass (largemouth, 12,708 44 191,350 39 15

smallmouth, etc.)

Trout 8,974 31 93,566 19 10

Panfish 7,961 28 103,041 21 13

Catfish and bullheads 7,430 26 91,498 19 12

Crappie 6,363 22 91,031 19 14

White bass, striped bass 4,756 16 61,386 13 13

and striped bass hybrids

Anything 4,218 15 39,035 8 9

Another type of freshwater fish 3,729 13 44,401 9 12

Walleye and sauger 3,276 11 48,726 10 15

Salmon 1218 4 11,742 2 10

Steelhead 470 2 6,699 1 14

Note: Detail does not add to total because of multiple responses. Respondent identified “anything” from a

list of categories of fish.

The pattern of days of bass fishing is

similar to angler participation; Eastern

participants spend a greater share of

freshwater fishing days bass fishing than

Western participants. Notable exceptions

to this pattern are Pennsylvania, Iowa,

and Mississippi which have higher (45

percent or over ) bass participation rates

but relatively lower levels (less than 40

percent) of freshwater days fishing for

bass. This suggests that bass anglers in

these states fished fewer days than other

anglers or fewer days for bass than bass

anglers in other states. That is, although

many people fish for bass in these states,

they spend relatively more time pursuing

other species.

Table 4 shows the average number of

days freshwater and bass fishing by

state. Nationally, anglers averaged

17 days of freshwater fishing and 15 days

of bass fishing. The majority of states

had a lower average number of days

bass fishing than all freshwater fishing.

Eleven states however, had slightly

higher than average days of fishing for

bass than for all freshwater fish. This

is noteworthy considering that a bass

fishing day is also a freshwater fishing

day. However, it can be explained by the

fact that many avid anglers in these

states fished exclusively for bass on many

of their fishing days. This, combined with

the fact that some freshwater anglers did

not fish for bass at all, explains how the

average days of bass fishing can be

greater than the average days of all

freshwater fishing.

The average number of days anglers

spent fishing for bass, by state, is shown

graphically in Figure 2. Several states

have no marking in them. The sample

size for these states was less than 30 so

their average days are not judged

reliable enough to include in this figure.

The lightly shaded areas show states

where the average number of bass

fishing days is less than or equal to ten.

States with moderate shading indicate

average days greater than or equal to

11 but less than 15. The heavily shaded

states are states where the average days

of bass fishing are equal to or greater

than fifteen.

4

Table 2. Freshwater and Black Bass

Anglers, by State Where Fishing

Occurred: 1996

(Population 16 years of age and older.

Numbers in thousands. Excludes Great

Lakes fishing.)

Freshwater

Bass Anglers

State Anglers Number Percent

United States 28,921 12,708 44

Alabama 843 454 54

Alaska 313 ** **

Arizona 483 247 51

Arkansas 739 335 45

California 2,175 652 30

Colorado 787 84 11

Connecticut 318 131 41

Delaware 66 43 65

Florida 1,137 663 58

Georgia 967 496 51

Hawaii 22 *7 *32

Idaho 474 73 15

Illinois 1,123 602 54

Indiana 863 505 59

Iowa 477 218 46

Kansas 341 188 55

Kentucky 772 405 52

Louisiana 815 409 50

Maine 290 117 40

Maryland 319 146 46

Massachusetts 377 228 60

Michigan 1,311 494 38

Minnesota 1,421 428 30

Mississippi 487 246 51

Missouri 1,138 620 54

Montana 329 ** **

Nebraska 247 91 37

Nevada 219 52 24

New Hampshire 237 114 48

New Jersey 428 240 56

New Mexico 312 73 23

New York 1,111 548 49

North Carolina 1,009 495 49

North Dakota 90 *6 *6.7

Ohio 908 480 53

Oklahoma 891 325 36

Oregon 589 *73 *12

Pennsylvania 1,277 576 45

Rhode Island 72 49 68

South Carolina 716 407 57

South Dakota 213 49 23

Tennessee 767 399 52

Texas 2,147 1,315 61

Utah 397 *46 *12

Vermont 176 66 38

Virginia 761 446 59

Washington 768 150 20

West Virginia 323 151 47

Wisconsin 1,232 372 30

Wyoming 379 ** **

*Estimate based on small sample size.

**Sample size too small to report data reliably.

Table 3. Days Freshwater and

Black Bass Fishing, by State Where

Fishing Occurred: 1996

(Numbers in thousands. Excludes Great

Lakes fishing.)

Days of

Days Fishing

Bass Fishing

State in Freshwater Number Percent

United States 485,474 191,350 39

Alabama 14,256 5,906 41

Alaska 3,602 ** **

Arizona 4,689 2,440 52

Arkansas 9,661 4,275 44

California 28,987 7,162 25

Colorado 8,232 661 8

Connecticut 3,880 1,724 44

Delaware 980 678 69

Florida 18,409 12,647 69

Georgia 12,857 6,359 49

Hawaii 189 *58 *31

Idaho 4,411 498 11

Illinois 17,089 7,964 47

Indiana 13,456 6,567 49

Iowa 7,062 2,455 35

Kansas 6,355 4,442 70

Kentucky 9,631 4,633 48

Louisiana 18,493 8,276 45

Maine 4,107 1,351 33

Maryland 4,290 2,247 52

Massachusetts 6,746 3,524 52

Michigan 19,456 6,244 32

Minnesota 25,897 6,077 23

Mississippi 8,213 3,197 39

Missouri 14,682 8,368 57

Montana 2,617 ** **

Nebraska 3,004 1,025 34

Nevada 1,976 492 25

New Hampshire 3,139 1,352 43

New Jersey 6,021 3,018 50

New Mexico 2,836 482 17

New York 17,412 7,051 40

North Carolina 15,831 8,013 51

North Dakota 1,321 *131 *10

Ohio 12,878 6,237 48

Oklahoma 14,674 5,546 38

Oregon 7,117 *1,212 *17

Pennsylvania 18,635 5,444 29

Rhode Island 1,347 755 56

South Carolina 11,341 5,256 46

South Dakota 2,748 316 11

Tennessee 11,317 5,787 51

Texas 37,575 17,913 48

Utah 3,936 *301 *8

Vermont 1,951 583 30

Virginia 9,282 5,006 54

Washington 10,975 2,122 19

West Virginia 5,040 1,624 32

Wisconsin 14,398 3,733 26

Wyoming 2,415 ** **

*Estimate based on small sample size.

**Sample size too small to report data reliably.

5

Figure 1. Percent of Anglers Who Sought Bass

Small sample size

≤ 32 percent

33–49 percent

≥ 50 percent

Figure 2. Average Number of Bass Fishing Days

Small sample size

≤ 10 days

≥ 11<15 days

≥ 15 days

Table 4. Average Days Freshwater and

Bass Fishing, by State Where Fishing

Occurred: 1996

(Excludes Great Lakes fishing.)

Average Days Average Days

State Freshwater Bass

United States 16.7 15

Alabama 16.9 13

Alaska 11.5 **

Arizona 9.7 9.9

Arkansas 13.1 12.9

California 13.3 11.1

Colorado 10.5 7.9

Connecticut 12.2 13.2

Delaware 14.8 15.9

Florida 16.2 19.1

Georgia 13.3 12.9

Hawaii 8.6 *8.6

Idaho 9.3 7

Illinois 15.2 13.2

Indiana 15.6 13.1

Iowa 14.8 11.5

Kansas 18.6 23.9

Kentucky 12.5 11.4

Louisiana 22.7 20.3

Maine 14.2 11.5

Maryland 13.4 15.4

Massachusetts 17.9 15.4

Michigan 14.8 12.6

Minnesota 18.2 14.2

Mississippi 16.9 13.1

Missouri 12.9 13.5

Montana 8 **

Nebraska 12.2 11.3

Nevada 9 9.7

New Hampshire 13.2 11.8

New Jersey 14.1 12.6

New Mexico 9.1 6.6

New York 15.7 13.1

North Carolina 15.7 16.5

North Dakota 14.7 *21.3

Ohio 14.2 13.1

Oklahoma 16.5 17.2

Oregon 12.1 *16.6

Pennsylvania 14.6 9.5

Rhode Island 18.7 15.4

South Carolina 15.8 13

South Dakota 12.9 6.5

Tennessee 14.8 14.6

Texas 17.5 13.6

Utah 9.9 6.6

Vermont 11.1 8.9

Virginia 12.2 11.2

Washington 14.3 15

West Virginia 15.6 11

Wisconsin 11.7 10.3

Wyoming 6.4 **

*Estimate based on small sample size.

**Sample size too small to report data reliably.

The geographic distribution in Figure 2

is similar to that in Figure 1 which shows

participation rates in bass fishing. This

comparison shows that states with the

highest levels of participation tend also

to be the states with the highest average

days of bass fishing. Exceptions to

this generalization are Oregon and

Washington which had high average

days of bass fishing but low bass

participation levels. This suggests that

although there are only a relatively small

number of bass anglers in these states,

these bass anglers are avid and spend a

greater than average time pursuing bass

than bass anglers in other states.

Freshwater fishing is a very popular

activity with 14 percent of the U.S.

population 16 years of age and older

participating in 1996. Forty-four percent

of all freshwater anglers fished for black

bass, nearly 6 percent of the U.S.

population 16 years of age and older.

In the following pages we present a

comparison of freshwater and bass

anglers to the U.S. population by age,

sex, education, income, geographic

region, and population density of

residence.

Tables 5 through 10 show the proportion

of the population that participates in

each activity for each category (e.g.,

what proportion of the 45-54 year old

U.S. population freshwater fishes and

what proportion of the 45-54 year old

anglers bass fish). The columns labeled

“Percent” in tables 5 through 10 show

the percent of participants who were in

each activity by category (e.g., what

percent of all freshwater anglers were

45-54 years old). Because of the

relatively large sample sizes for

national estimates, differences in

characteristics that are 3 percent or

larger are usually significant at the

90 percent confidence interval.1

Age

Bass fishing is popular with all age

groups. Among freshwater anglers, bass

participation was highest for anglers

45-54 years old (53 percent) and anglers

55-64 years old (48 percent).

Comparing bass anglers to the U.S.

population shows that bass anglers

were younger. Sixty-eight percent of

all bass anglers were 25 to 54 years

old, while only 56 percent of the U.S.

population was in that age group. The

percent of bass anglers 55 and older

(17 percent) is lower than the percent of

the U.S. population (28 percent) in that

age category. Bass anglers had a similar

age distribution to other freshwater

anglers.

Sex

Eighty-one percent of bass anglers

were male. Table 6 shows this is

disproportionately high compared to

the U.S. population, where women were

the majority at 52 percent. The percent

of male bass anglers (81 percent) is

also higher than the percent of male

freshwater anglers (74 percent).

6

Characteristics of

Black Bass Anglers

Table 5. Age Distribution of the U.S. Population, Freshwater Anglers, and Bass Anglers: 1996

(Population 16 years of age and older. Numbers in thousands. Excludes Great Lakes fishing.)

Freshwater Anglers Bass Anglers

U.S. Population Percent Percent of

of U.S. Freshwater

Age Number Percent Number Percent Population Number Percent Anglers

U.S. Total 201,472 100 28,921 100 14 12,708 100 44

16-17 7,222 4 1,224 4 17 560 4 46

18-24 25,120 12 3,493 12 14 1,301 10 37

25-34 40,918 20 7,037 24 17 2,761 22 39

35-44 42,600 21 7,632 26 18 3,334 26 44

45-54 31,204 15 4,806 17 15 2,571 20 53

55-64 21,213 11 2,610 9 12 1,241 10 48

65 Plus 33,670 17 2,399 8 7 940 7 39

Note: Data may differ from previous reports due to ratio adjustments of age cohorts. Detail does not add to total due to rounding.

Table 6. Sex Distribution of the U.S. Population, Freshwater Anglers, and Bass Anglers: 1996

(Population 16 years of age and older. Numbers in thousands. Excludes Great Lakes fishing.)

Freshwater Anglers Bass Anglers

U.S. Population Percent Percent of

of U.S. Freshwater

Sex Number Percent Number Percent Population Number Percent Anglers

U.S. Total 201,472 100 28,921 100 14 12,708 100 44

Male 96,660 48 21,371 74 22 10,238 81 48

Female 104,812 52 7,550 26 7 2,470 19 33

1 This means that for 90 percent of all possible

samples, percentage differences 3 percent or

greater will still be different.

While many females 16 years of age and

older participated in freshwater fishing

(7.5 million), this was only 7 percent of

the female population in the U.S. In

comparison, 22 percent of the U.S. male

population 16 years of age and older

participated in freshwater fishing. In

addition, female anglers were less likely

to participate in bass fishing than male

anglers. Female freshwater anglers

participated in bass fishing at a rate of

33 percent while male freshwater anglers

participated at a rate of 48 percent. As a

result, women made up 26 percent of

freshwater anglers and only 19 percent

of bass anglers.

Education

Table 7 shows that 17 percent of

Americans 16 years of age and older

had 11 or fewer years of education.

Only 13 percent of bass anglers had not

completed high school. A slightly higher

number of bass anglers had 4 or more

years of college (27 percent) compared

to the U.S. population (25 percent).

Freshwater anglers’ educational levels

are virtually identical to those of

bass anglers. Freshwater anglers’

participation in bass fishing increased

with an increase in the level of

education — from 41 percent for anglers

with less than a 12th grade education to

46 percent for anglers with 4 or more

years of college.

Income

In 1996, the median household income

for the U.S. was slightly more than

$35,000. As shown in Table 8,

freshwater anglers had higher incomes

than the U.S. population. Fifty-five

percent lived in households with annual

incomes greater than $35,000. For bass

anglers, an even greater proportion

(57 percent) came from households

with incomes above the median income.

Households with incomes below the

national median accounted for 33

percent of freshwater anglers and 31

percent of bass anglers. Twelve percent

of freshwater and bass anglers lived in

households where income was not

reported.

Freshwater anglers’ participation in bass

fishing increased with income up to the

$30,000-34,900 income category. The

percent of freshwater anglers who fished

for bass increased from 30 percent for

the less than $10,000 income category

up to 47 percent for persons living in

households with incomes greater than

$30,000. Freshwater anglers from homes

not reporting their incomes participated

in bass fishing at a rate of 44 percent.

Census Geographic Division

Table 9 shows the distribution of the U.S.

population, and of freshwater and bass

anglers by Census Geographic Divisions.

These geographic regions are defined in

Figure 3. As a percent of the total

regional population 16 years and older,

the West North Central had the highest

participation rate in freshwater fishing

with 23 percent. As a percent of total

freshwater anglers in the U.S., the

East North Central and the South

Atlantic regions had the highest level of

participation, both making up 17 percent.

The pattern is similar with bass anglers.

7

Table 7. Educational Distribution of the U.S. Population, Freshwater Anglers, and Bass Anglers: 1996

(Population 16 years of age and older. Numbers in thousands. Excludes Great Lakes fishing.)

Freshwater Anglers Bass Anglers

U.S. Population Percent Percent of

of U.S. Freshwater

Education Number Percent Number Percent Population Number Percent Anglers

U.S. Total 201,472 100 28,921 100 14 12,708 100 44

0-11 Years 33,743 17 3,959 14 21 1,630 13 41

12 Years 71,098 35 10,470 36 15 4,552 36 43

1-3 Years College 45,573 23 7,017 24 15 3,110 24 44

4+ Years College 51,057 25 7,474 26 29 3,415 27 46

Table 8. Income Distribution of the U.S. Population, Freshwater Anglers, and Bass Anglers: 1996

(Population 16 years of age and older. Numbers in thousands. Excludes Great Lakes fishing.)

Freshwater Anglers Bass Anglers

U.S. Population Percent Percent of

of U.S. Freshwater

Household Income Number Percent Number Percent Population Number Percent Anglers

U.S. Total 201,472 100 28,921 100 14 12,708 100 44

Under $10,000 15,043 7 1,164 4 8 346 3 30

$10-19,900 19,690 10 2,199 8 11 819 6 37

$20-24,900 13,080 6 1,852 6 14 740 6 40

$25-29,900 12,337 6 2,287 8 19 1,039 8 45

$30-34,900 12,572 6 2,054 7 16 969 8 47

$35-39,900 10,653 5 1,999 7 19 933 7 47

$40-49,900 18,274 9 3,581 12 20 1,496 12 42

$50-74,900 32,223 16 5,988 21 19 2,797 22 47

$75-99,900 28,835 7 2,444 8 16 1,147 9 47

$100,000 or More 13,756 7 1,968 7 14 926 7 47

Not Reported 38,774 19 3,394 12 9 1,495 12 44

Twenty percent of all bass anglers lived

in the South Atlantic region and 18

percent lived in the East North Central

region. As the state-by-state analysis

suggests, the regions with the lowest

share of bass anglers were the New

England, Mountain, and Pacific regions.

Overall, 44 percent of freshwater anglers

participated in black bass fishing. The

percent participating by region varied

from a low of 21 percent in the Mountain

region to a high of 53 percent in the

South Atlantic and East South Central

regions. The West South Cental and

Middle Atlantic regions also had high

levels of participation in black bass

fishing by freshwater anglers at 52 and

50 percent, respectively.

As the participation rates suggest, the

geographic distribution of bass anglers

differs from the U.S. population and

other freshwater anglers. For example,

16 percent of the U.S. population lived in

the Pacific region yet only 12 percent of

freshwater anglers, and 7 percent of bass

anglers lived there. Also of note is that 11

percent of the U.S. population lived in the

West South Central region while 14

percent of freshwater anglers and 17

percent of bass anglers lived in that

region.

Population Density of Residence

The 1996 FHWAR asked respondents

whether they considered their place of

residence to be in a big city or urban

area, a small city or town, or a rural area.

These categories were not defined for the

respondent (e.g., by big city we mean “a

city with a population of 500,000 or

more”). Consequently, one respondent

may consider an area to be a small city

while another respondent may consider

the same area to be a big city. Therefore,

the results discussed below should be

viewed from the perspective of where the

respondents classified themselves as

living and not some generally assigned

definition for the size of a big city, small

city or rural area.

As a percent of the U.S. population,

people in rural areas participated in

freshwater fishing almost twice as much

as residents of a big cities, 21 percent

versus 11 percent. Table 10 shows that

participation in bass fishing by

freshwater anglers was about the same

for all population density levels, between

42 and 45 percent. As a result, the

distribution of bass anglers among

population density levels is similar to that

of all freshwater anglers. As a percent of

total bass anglers, most bass anglers are

from small cities and towns (42 percent).

8

Figure 3. Map of U.S. Showing Bureau of Census Regions

West

Mountain West

North Central

West

South

Central

East

South

Central

South

Atlantic

East

North Central

Middle

Atlantic

New

England

Pacific

Midwest

South

Northeast

AK

Alaska

WA

Washington

ID

Idaho

OR

Oregon

CA

California

HI

Hawaii

NV

Nevada

UT

Utah

AZ

Arizona NM

New Mexico

CO

Colorado

WY

Wyoming

MT

Montana

ND

North

Dakota

MN

Minnesota

IA

Iowa

WI

Wisconsin

OH

Ohio

KY

Kentucky

WV

VA

Virginia

TN

Tennessee

GA

Georgia

FL

SC

IL

Illinois

MO

Missouri

SD

South

Dakota

NE

Nebraska

KS

Kansas

OK

Oklahoma

AR

Arkansas

TX

Texas

AL

Alabama

IN

Indiana

LA

Louisiana

MS

Mississippi South

Carolina

NC

North Carolina

Florida

West Virginia

DE Delaware

NJ New Jersey

CT Connecticut

RI Rhode Island

MA Massachusetts

NH New Hampshire

VT Vermont

MD Maryland

PA

Pennsylvania

ME

Maine

NY

MI New York

Michigan

9

Table 9. Geographic Distribution of the U.S. Population, Freshwater Anglers, and Bass Anglers: 1996

(Population 16 years of age and older. Numbers in thousands. Excludes Great Lakes fishing.)

Freshwater Anglers Bass Anglers

U.S. Population Percent Percent of

of U.S. Freshwater

Region Number Percent Number Percent Population Number Percent Anglers

U.S. Total 201,472 100 28,921 100 14 12,708 100 44

New England 10,306 5 1,143 4 11 547 4 48

Middle Atlantic 29,371 15 2,529 9 9 1,262 10 50

E. North Central 33,121 16 4,963 17 15 2,293 18 46

W. North Central 13,875 7 3,244 11 23 1,330 10 41

South Atlantic 36,776 18 4,774 17 13 2,555 20 53

E. South Central 12,459 6 2,339 8 19 1,247 10 53

W. South Central 21,811 11 4,046 14 19 2,093 17 52

Mountain 11,966 6 2,283 8 19 480 4 21

Pacific 31,787 16 3,599 12 11 900 7 25

Table 10. Population Density Distribution of the U.S. Population, Freshwater Anglers, and Bass Anglers: 1996

(Population 16 years of age and older. Numbers in thousands. Excludes Great Lakes fishing.)

Freshwater Anglers Bass Anglers

U.S. Population Percent Percent of

of U.S. Freshwater

Density of Location Number Percent Number Percent Population Number Percent Anglers

U.S. Total 201,472 100 28,921 100 14 12,708 100 44

Big City/Urban 73,480 36 8,013 28 11 3,396 27 42

Small City/Town 83,720 42 11,978 41 14 5,295 42 44

Rural 42,976 21 8,883 31 21 3,989 31 45

No Response 1,295 1 47 0 4 28 0 60

From 1991 to 1996 the number of

freshwater anglers changed little —

30.2 million to 28.9 million. Similarly, the

number of bass anglers remained almost

the same—12.9 million in 1991 and 12.7

million in 1996. Both of these changes are

within the margin of error for this

sample size at the 95 percent confidence

level so we cannot be sure that the

number of anglers actually changed.2

However, fishing activity has increased.

Freshwater fishing days rose 13 percent

while bass fishing days increased 21

percent. Corresponding with this, the

average fishing days per angler increased

for freshwater anglers from 14.3 days in

1991 to 16.7 days in 1996, and for bass

anglers from 12.3 days in 1991 to 15.0 days

in 1996 (Table 12). This indicates that

freshwater anglers and bass anglers are

not increasing in numbers but they are

becoming more avid — that is, they

spend more time fishing.

A comparison of the average number of

fishing days by state finds that the

average days spent fishing increased a

great deal for some states. (Table 12). In

Kansas, for example, the average number

of freshwater days increased from 11.0

days in 1991 to 18.6 days in 1996; days

spent black bass fishing increased from

9.8 days in 1991 to 23.9 days in 1996.

Other states which saw large increases

(greater than 5 days) in average

freshwater and/or black bass average

days were Florida, Louisiana, Maryland,

Minnesota, North Carolina, North

Dakota, Oregon and Washington.3

10

1991–1996 Comparison of

Bass Fishing Activity

Table 11. 1991-1996 Comparison of Activity: Participants and Days of Fishing

(Population 16 years of age and older. Numbers in thousands.

Excludes Great Lakes fishing.)

1991 1996 Percent

Participants and Days Number Number Change

Anglers, All Freshwater 30,186 28,921 *–4

Anglers, Bass 12,857 12,708 *–1

Days, All Freshwater 430,922 485,474 13

Days, Bass 158,226 191,350 21

Figure 4. 1991-1996 Participants and Days

(In millions)

* The difference is within the margin of error of the sample size at the 0.05 level of significance. This means

that for 95 percent of all possible samples, the estimates for the number of freshwater and bass anglers in

1991 are not different from the estimate for 1996.

2 This means that for 95 percent of all possible

samples, the estimates for the number of

freshwater and bass anglers in 1991 are not

different from the estimates for 1996.

3 North Dakota’s estimates for 1991 and 1996 and

Oregon’s estimates for 1996 are based on small

sample sizes and may not be as reliable as estimates

for other states.

30.2

12.9 12.7

485

431

191

158

Number of Bass Anglers*

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

28.9

Number of Freshwater Anglers*

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

Freshwater Days of Fishing

500

400

300

200

100

0

Bass Days of Fishing

250

200

150

100

50

0

1991 1996 1991 1996

1991 1996 1991 1996

One explanation for the increase in the

number of days is that anglers were older

in 1996 than they were in 1991 and may

have had more leisure time. As shown in

Figure 5, the number of bass anglers 45

years of age and older increased from 28

percent in 1991 to 37 percent in 1996.

Likewise, freshwater anglers 45 years of

age and older increased from 29 percent

in 1991 to 34 percent in 1996. The aging of

anglers is related to the aging of the

“Baby Boom” generation. The U.S.

population over 45 increased from 41

percent in 1991 to 43 percent in 1996.

11

Table 12. 1991-1996 Comparison of Average Days of Fishing in

Freshwater and for Bass by State Where Fishing Occurred.

(Excludes Great Lakes fishing.)

1991 1996 1991 1996

Freshwater Freshwater Bass Bass

State Average Days Average Days Average Days Average Days

United States 14.3 16.7 12.3 15.0

Alabama 13.5 16.9 12.4 13.0

Alaska 9.8 11.5 ** **

Arizona 8.5 9.7 8.1 9.9

Arkansas 14.3 13.1 14.6 12.9

California 8.8 13.3 7.5 11.1

Colorado 8.1 10.5 7.6 7.9

Connecticut 13.6 12.2 10.5 13.2

Delaware 12.6 14.8 12.3 15.9

Florida 11.8 16.2 11.9 19.1

Georgia 14.4 13.3 12.5 12.9

Hawaii 6.5 8.6 *6.3 *8.6

Idaho 8.6 9.3 7.6 7.0

Illinois 12.4 15.2 10.6 13.2

Indiana 12.7 15.6 12.2 13.1

Iowa 10.9 14.8 8.7 11.5

Kansas 11.0 18.6 9.8 23.9

Kentucky 12.9 12.5 10.5 11.4

Louisiana 15.3 22.7 13.3 20.3

Maine 11.0 14.2 7.2 11.5

Maryland 11.1 13.4 7.8 15.4

Massachusetts 16.1 17.9 14.1 15.4

Michigan 11.4 14.8 9.3 12.6

Minnesota 13.9 18.2 9.1 14.2

Mississippi 14.8 16.9 13.8 13.1

Missouri 11.4 12.9 10.6 13.5

Montana 9.2 8.0 *0.7 **

Nebraska 10.8 12.2 9.4 11.3

Nevada 7.1 9.0 6.2 9.7

New Hampshire 10.2 13.2 8.7 11.8

New Jersey 14.4 14.1 12.5 12.6

New Mexico 6.9 9.1 6.7 6.6

New York 12.8 15.7 10.1 13.1

North Carolina 12.8 15.7 10.8 16.5

North Dakota 10.0 14.7 *3.7 *21.3

Ohio 12.0 14.2 11.1 13.1

Oklahoma 15.0 16.5 14.0 17.2

Oregon 10.7 12.1 7.0 *16.6

Pennsylvania 17.3 14.6 11.3 9.5

Rhode Island 15.9 18.7 15.4 15.4

South Carolina 14.5 15.8 11.2 13.0

South Dakota 10.9 12.9 9.3 6.5

Tennessee 13.7 14.8 14.0 14.6

Texas 14.0 17.5 12.4 13.6

Utah 8.4 9.9 4.5 6.6

Vermont 12.5 11.1 7.3 8.9

Virginia 13.5 12.2 11.9 11.2

Washington 12.6 14.3 8.8 15.0

West Virginia 12.1 15.6 8.4 11.0

Wisconsin 14.2 11.7 10.0 10.3

Wyoming 7.8 6.4 *5.3 **

*Estimate based on small sample size.

**Sample size too small to report data reliably.

12

Figure 5. 1991-1996 Comparison of Age Distribution

(Population 16 years of age and older. Excludes Great Lakes fishing.)

Percent of Bass Anglers, by Age

Percent

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

Age 16-17 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65 plus

Note: Data may differ from previous reports due to ratio adjustments of age cohorts.

Detail does not add to total due to rounding.

1991 1996

1991 1996

1991 1996

Percent of U.S. Population, by Age

Percent

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

Age 16-17 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65 plus

Percent of Freshwater Anglers, by Age

Percent

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

Age 16-17 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65 plus

The descriptive statistics presented in

the previous section show that bass

anglers are different from freshwater

anglers in some ways. These descriptive

characterizations of anglers have

limitations. First, without conducting

the appropriate statistical test, it is

impossible to determine whether an

observed difference between two groups

is statistically significant. However,

because of the relatively large sample

sizes for national estimates, differences

in characteristics that are 3 percent or

larger are usually significant at the 90

percent confidence level. Second, even

if the difference was statistically

significant, the isolated effect of the

characteristic on an angler’s decision to

fish for bass cannot be measured. For

example, in the general population,

income level is correlated with gender.

The previous section found participation

in bass fishing is also correlated with

gender. This raises the question: Were

men more likely to have fished for bass

because of their gender or because they

were more likely than women to come

from households with higher income

levels? A participation model may be

used to analyze this type of question.

The probability of fishing for bass was

estimated to predict what sort of angler

was most likely to fish for bass and to

evaluate the isolated effects of

sociodemographic and other factors on

that decision. In participation models, the

effect of a particular characteristic is

calculated in an “other things being

equal” context. In the example above,

this procedure removes the confounding

effects of the correlation between gender

and income to show how each

characteristic contributes to participation

in bass fishing.

The model hypothesizes that a

freshwater angler’s decision whether or

not to fish for bass, given that he or she

already fishes in freshwater, depends on

the angler’s sociodemographic

characteristics, whether the angler fished

more than average, the region of the

country where he or she resides, and the

water quality (WQ) of rivers and streams

in the respondent’s state of residence.

The RiverWQ variable represents the

percentage of river and stream shore

miles described by the EPA as “good

water quality that fully supports aquatic

life uses”. Data for this variable were

taken from the Environmental Protection

Agency’s 1996 National Water Quality

Inventory biennial report to Congress.

These data are based on information

collected and evaluated by the states in

1994 and 1995.4

The participation variable is one if the

angler fished for bass and zero if he or

she did not fish for bass. This type of yes

or no response is modeled in the

logarithm of the odds that the individual

fished for black bass. This is called the

logit equation and appears on the left

side of equation 1. Equation 1 shows the

model estimated.

where:

(1)

Pi ln _____ = α + βxi (l-Pi)

Pi= Probability that the i-th individual

fished for black bass

xi= Vector of explanatory variables

α = Intercept to be estimated

β = Vector of coefficients to be estimated

The explanatory variables xi were a

combination of binary and continuous

variables. They are described in Table 13.

The means of the binary variables repeat

some of the percentages reported earlier.

For example, 26 percent of freshwater

anglers are women. The region of

residence provides a rough indicator of

the availability and quality of bass fishing

sites.

Table 14 shows the model estimated from

a nationwide sample of 7,939 freshwater

anglers. All variables were significant at

the 1 percent level. Variables for age,

Hispanic ethnicity, urban residence,

13

Participation Model

Table 13. Explanatory Variables in the Black Bass Fishing Model

Variable Description Mean

Income Annual household income, 49.5

in thousands of dollars

Female 1 if respondent is female 0.26

0 otherwise

Avid 1 if respondent fished 20 days or more 0.22

0 otherwise

African-American 1 if respondent’s ethnicity is African-American 0.05

0 otherwise

South 1 if respondent resided in the South5 0.39

0 otherwise

West 1 if respondent resided in the West6 0.20

0 otherwise

RiverWQ Percent of river and stream miles reported to 55.7

have good water quality that fully supports

aquatic life.7

5 South includes the West South Central, East South Central, and South Atlantic regions as defined by the

U.S. Census Bureau. See Figure 3.

6 West includes Mountain and Pacific regions as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau. See Figure 3.

7 Data from EPA’s National Water Quality Inventory: 1996 Report to Congress

4 States do not use identical survey methods and

criteria to rate their water quality. There are no

data available for Alaska, Oregon and Idaho.

partial derivatives shown in Table 14

show a change from a base case of a

non-African-American male, with

average income who lives in a

Northeastern or Midwestern state

with average river water quality. The

derivatives can be used to make

statements like “being a woman

decreases the probability of fishing by

14 percent.” Or a 50 percent increase

in water quality increases the probability

of fishing by 7 percent.

The whole equation can also be

reevaluated to make more complex

comparisons. For example, a female,

African-American angler residing in a

Western state has a 16 percent chance

of fishing for bass, while an avid,

non-African-American male angler

residing in the South has a 73 percent

chance of fishing for bass. Because the

model predicts the log of the odds ratio,

the calculation of these probabilities is

rather involved. A note at the end of this

document explains the calculation.

The results show that gender, race,

region of residence, income and water

quality have significant impact on the

probability of bass fishing. The effects

of income and water quality are not

as strong as the other explanatory

variables. For example, a $1,000 increase

in income or a 1 percent increase in river

water quality increased the probability

of participation by only one-eighth of

one percent (0.13 percent).

retired anglers and water quality of lakes

and ponds initially included in the model

were excluded after chi-square likelihood

ratio tests determined that their

coefficients were not significantly

different from zero and therefore did not

provide additional predictive power to

the model.

The likelihood ratio index can be

interpreted in a similar way as a multiple

correlation coefficient (R2) in ordinary

least squares regression. The index value

of 0.0859 indicates that the equation

explains about 9 percent of the variation

in the logit.

The equation shows that the probability

of fishing for bass increases with income,

others things being equal. It also shows

that avid freshwater anglers and anglers

who live in the South have a higher

probability of fishing for bass. Female

anglers, African-American anglers and

anglers who live in the West were less

likely to fish for bass, other things being

equal.

The equation also shows that the

probability of anglers fishing for bass

increases with the water quality of rivers.

This result makes intuitive sense as bass

fishing would be more desirable when

water quality is good.

The estimated coefficients do not provide

a direct measure of how the explanatory

variables affect the probability that a

freshwater angler will fish for bass. The

coefficients show the effect of the

variable on the logarithm of the odds

ratio. To get around this, partial

derivatives were calculated at the means

of the continuous variables with all

dichotomous choice variables equal to

zero to show how each variable affects

the probability of fishing for bass. These

14

Table 14. Logit Equation Results for Black Bass Fishing Model

Estimated Standard Partial

Variable Coefficient Error Derivative

Intercept –0.756 0.080 – – –

Income 0.005 0.001 0.0013

Female –0.580 0.056 –0.1434

African-American –0.457 0.116 –0.1129

Avid 1.019 0.058 0.2517

South 0.188 0.069 0.0463

West –0.834 0.091 –0.2061

RiverWQ 0.005 0.001 0.0013

Pseudo R2 = 0.0859

All variables significant at the 0.01 level.

Note on Calculation Probabilities of

Participation from the Bass

Participation Model

Equation 1 (page 13) can be solved for the

individual’s probability of participation in

bass fishing, Pi, as

As they appear in both the numerator

and the denominator of this equation, the

interpretation of the coefficients (or

“Betas”) shown in equation 2 is not

direct. An individual’s probability of

participation can be calculated using the

coefficients in equation 2 and a scientific

calculator or a spreadsheet. Table 15

illustrates the process for an avid, male,

non-African-American angler from the

South.

1. First, determine the values you wish to

use for each independent variable. The

intercept is α and is constant. For the

example, we assume average income, 49.5

(in thousands) and average water quality

of rivers (55.7 percent). The rest of the

variables are dichotomous, i.e., equal to

one if the statement is true and 0 if it is

false. Notice that South and West are

mutually exclusive, if one is true the

other cannot be true.

(2)

eα + βxi

Pi = __________

(l+eα + βxi)

2. Multiply each value by the beta for

that variable. The betas are the

estimated coefficients in Table 14.

3. Sum the results in the calculation in

step 2. In this example, this sum is

0.990067. This is the α+βx term from

equation 2.

4. Take the antilog of the sum. On most

calculators this is the ex function. In most

spreadsheets it is the @EXP (.) function.

This is 2.691415 in this example.

5. Calculate Pi as the result of step 4

divided by the sum of 1 and the result of

step 4 as shown in equation 2, 0.7291 in

this example.

The probability is interpreted as the

probability that an angler with the

characteristics described by the

independent variables will be a bass

angler. In this case, the probability that

an avid, non-African-American male who

resides in a southern state is a bass

angler is 72.91 percent.

15

Table 15. Calculation of Bass Fishing for an Avid, Male, non-African-American

Angler from the South

Variable Beta Value Beta X Value

Intercept –0.75550 1 –0.7555

Income 0.00509 49.5 0.251955

Female –0.58030 0 0

African-American –0.45670 0 0

Avid 1.01870 1 1.0187

South 0.18750 1 0.1875

West –0.83400 0 0

RiverWQ 0.00516 55.7 0.287412

Sum (α+βx) 0.990067

e(α+βx) 2.691415

Probability 0.7291

The 1996 National Survey of Fishing,

Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated

Recreation shows that fishing for black

bass appealed to a large number of

freshwater anglers. In fact, bass were

pursued by more anglers than any

other fish that the survey covered.

A comparison of 1991 and 1996 FHWAR

surveys finds that the average number of

days fishing for bass increased although

the number of bass anglers remained

almost the same.

From a sociodemographic standpoint,

there are some interesting differences

between freshwater anglers overall and

bass anglers. Bass anglers tend to be

wealthier, more Southern and more

male than other anglers. A probability

16

of participation showed that

sociodemographic characteristics and

water quality had a significant impact

on whether an angler sought bass or

another species. Also of note is the

finding that avid freshwater anglers are

much more likely to fish for bass than

non-avid freshwater anglers. This means

that bass anglers tend to be more avid

than freshwater anglers in general.

These findings from the 1996 FHWAR

underscore the importance of bass

for millions of freshwater anglers.

Information about who these bass anglers

are, their age, sex, race, where they live,

and so on can be used by recreation

managers and others to enhance the

fishing experiences of many anglers.

Summary

© Corel Corporation

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Division of Economics

Arlington, Virginia

http://www.fws.gov