Using Decision Analysis to Balance Angler Utility and Conservation in a Recreational Fishery

Recreational fisheries are often managed to provide satisfying fishing experiences for anglers while conserving wild fish stocks. However, managing recreational fisheries is difficult because fish populations are often infrequently monitored and fishing effort is uncontrolled; moreover, a satisfying fishery may draw many anglers, which may lead to enhanced risk of overfishing. Furthermore, external pressures will also affect fisheries, leading to fishery collapses despite the best intentions of management. Any management decision about regulations and habitat alteration will have effects on angler satisfaction and conservation. Decisions should be made with the intention of achieving fisheries objectives despite the uncertainties that arise from sampling data, ecosystem processes, and external factors, yet they must be defensible to stakeholders and the public. We show herein how decision analysis can be used to evaluate and communicate the relative efficacy of management decisions that are made to achieve fisheries management objectives by using a variety of commonly collected field data. We used a wild kokanee population at risk of overfishing as a case study and evaluated the medium‐term effects of fishing regulations and habitat alterations on conservation and angler utility objectives. Using a flexible age‐structured model, we determined that these two objectives are often at odds, where management actions leading to high angler utility in this fishery also lead to high conservation risk. Overall, decision analysis helps to communicate these tradeoffs and makes it clear how particular decisions were made. Decision analysis is not new, but it is often underused in recreational fisheries. This work demonstrates how it may streamline decisions, even for infrequently monitored fisheries, and lead to better fisheries overall.