Survey Highlights

1. Data Source

The tables and charts presented in this report have been prepared using data from the Ontario component of the 1990 Survey of Recreational Fishing in Canada, a nationally co-ordinated study conducted at five-year intervals in all provinces and territories. The purpose of the survey is to provide data on a wide variety of topics of interest to fisheries managers at the various levels of government. The results presented in this report reflect data specifically defined for the Great Lakes Fishery.

2. Definition of "Great Lakes Areas"

Anglers were asked to provide the name of the lake, river or stream on which they fished, the nearest town or village, the number of days fished, the number of fish caught and kept by species as well as other attitudinal and socio-economic information regarding their fishing activities. Estimates for Great Lakes waters were produced using the geographic coding used to identify each town, grouped according to their proximity to Great Lakes waters. The areas defined by the grouped codes form a continuous border along the system, generally one township deep (8 to 24 kilometres). This definition was used to facilitate comparison with the broader definition used in the United States survey. Individuals fishing tributaries of the Great Lakes further inland than defined by the geographic coding are not included as participants in the Great Lakes fishery.

3. Estimates of Effort and Numbers of Anglers

All estimates of effort and numbers are for adults (18 years of age and over for residents; 17 years of age and over for nonresidents). Averages for each lake are based on the numbers of participants determined for each, while those for the system as a whole are based on the total number of participants on any of the lakes in the system (see Table 1). Information in tables referring to totals for Ontario is based on the activities of Great Lakes anglers only. This information is presented in order to reflect the relative degree of importance associated with the Great Lakes when compared to all fishing activities of Great Lakes anglers in Ontario.

4. Expenditures

Although expenditures were collected on a household basis, allocation for the Great Lakes system was based on the fishing activity of individuals. The following procedure was used:

1. if all days were spent on the Great Lakes system, all expenditures were assigned to the system. Expenditures for each water body within the system were allocated on the basis of the proportion of time spent on each water body.
2. if the days spent on the Great Lakes system represented only a subset of all days in Ontario, the portion of the expenditures to be assigned to the system was estimated using the proportion of activity on the system. Estimates by water body within the system were then allocated on the basis of the amount of activity on each as a percentage of all days on the Great Lakes system.

5. Major Purchases and Investments, Package Deals

In the 1985 report on the Great Lakes fishery, no attempt was made to allocate expenditures made on major purchases and investments or package deals insofar as such purchases could not be "attributed" to Great Lakes fishing. This position has been reconsidered for this report. Expenditures for major purchases and investments have been provided using the allocation of expenditure dollars described above. This has been done both for expenditures made in whole or in part for recreational fishing and for the estimated amount directly attributable to recreational fishing. Expenses incurred for package deals have also been allocated on the basis of the proportion of activity.

6. Willingness to Pay

In 1990, anglers were asked how much they were willing to pay per day, over and above their direct expenditures, before deciding it would have been too expensive to fish the same number of days. The question was based on increased costs for services required for fishing (accommodation, gasoline, supplies, etc.), not for licence fees or similar access charges. For respondents indicating a willingness to pay additional costs, options on a daily amount were provided ranging for a specified amount under $10, $10 per day, amounts in $10 increments to $100 and then, a specified amount more than $100 per day. Since the question covered the entire fishing experience in Ontario, it is recognized that the allocation per day within the Great Lakes system may not reflect the willingness to pay had the question been specific to the Great Lakes. The estimates are being provided in order to give the reader some indication of the additional amounts over and above expenses incurred in 1990 for Great Lakes fishing that anglers might be prepared to pay.

7. Attitudes

In this report two tables are provided which reflect anglers' behavioural predispositions with respect to the choice of a place to fish and the reasons why they fish where they do. Anglers were asked to rate options on a scale of 0 (not important) to 5 (extremely important). For purposes of analysis, 0's were recoded to 1's to ensure an odd scale with a mid-range value of 3. As with willingness to pay, these questions were general and did not ask for attitudes with respect to Great Lakes fishing. They are presented solely as indicators of the attitudes of anglers who fished on the Great Lakes.

8. Data Processing and Data Availability

Standard coding and editing procedures used in the 1990 Survey of Recreational Fishing in Canada were used to prepare the data used in this report. Data was analyzed using SPSS Version 3.0 on a Hewlett-Packard 3000-917LX system. System files and raw data files can be generated for analysis.

9. Reliability

Because the information provided in this report is a subset of a larger survey, the reliability of the data should be considered when making statements with respect to the data. It should be noted that all data are presented without rounding to the nearest hundred or thousand. This is not intended to reflect the degree of reliability of the data but was done in this way to facilitate production of tables to reflect data generated from the system. A table indicating the reliability of key variables (as coefficients of variation) is provided in Appendix 3.