TYPE Original Research

PUBLISHED 28 July 2022

DOI 10.3389/fmars.2022.939533

Economic contribution and

OPEN ACCESS social welfare of recreational
EDITED BY
Francois Bastardie,
Technical University of Denmark,
charter boat fisheries in the
Denmark

REVIEWED BY
northeast Atlantic: The cases
Andrew M. Scheld,
College of William &Mary,
United States
of Galicia (Spain) and Madeira
Fikret Öndes,
Izmir Kâtip Çelebi University, Turkey archipelago (Portugal)
*CORRESPONDENCE
Pablo Pita,
[email protected] Pablo Pita 1,2*, Gillian B. Ainsworth 1, Manel Antelo 3,
SPECIALTY SECTION Lidia Gouveia 4, Roi Martı́nez-Escauriaza 5, Ana Tubı́o 1
This article was submitted to
Marine Fisheries, Aquaculture and
and Sebastián Villasante 1,2
Living Resources, 1
Cross-disciplinary Research Center in Environmental Technologies (CRETUS), Department of
a section of the journal Applied Economics, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain, 2 Faculty
Frontiers in Marine Science of Economics and Business Administration, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de
RECEIVED 09 May 2022 Compostela, Spain, 3 Faculty of Economics, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de
ACCEPTED 04 July 2022 Compostela, Spain, 4 Direção de Serviços de Investigação – DSI, Direção Regional das Pescas (DRP-
RAM), Funchal, Portugal, 5 OOM - Oceanic Observatory of Madeira, Agência Regional para o
PUBLISHED 28 July 2022
Desenvolvimento da Investigação Tecnologia e Inovação (ARDITI), Edifı´cio Madeira Tecnopolo,
CITATION Funchal, Portugal
Pita P, Ainsworth GB, Antelo M,
Gouveia L, Martı´nez-Escauriaza R,
Tubı´o A and Villasante S (2022)
Economic contribution and social
welfare of recreational charter boat Recreational charter boat fisheries provide alternative economic development
fisheries in the northeast Atlantic: The to traditional commercial fisheries, especially to coastal communities in warm
cases of Galicia (Spain) and Madeira
archipelago (Portugal). seas. Charter boat fishing has been little studied in temperate regions, and the
Front. Mar. Sci. 9:939533. factors that trigger its development and social contribution to fishing
doi: 10.3389/fmars.2022.939533
communities are unknown. We performed an economic analysis of
COPYRIGHT
recreational charter boat fisheries in the Eastern North Atlantic to assess their
© 2022 Pita, Ainsworth, Antelo,
Gouveia, Martı´nez-Escauriaza, Tubı´o contribution to social welfare. We selected two case studies located in Galicia
and Villasante. This is an open-access (NW Spain) and Madeira archipelago (Portugal). The two cases differ in the
article distributed under the terms of
socioecological attributes in which recreational charter boat fishing is
the Creative Commons Attribution
License (CC BY). The use, distribution developed (e.g., relevance of commercial fishing, tourism, or targeted
or reproduction in other forums is species), that were included in the assessment. Up to 7 charter fishing
permitted, provided the original author
(s) and the copyright owner(s) are companies were identified in Galicia (10 boats) and 14 in Madeira (18 boats),
credited and that the original and information on the costs and benefits of the activity were collected by a
publication in this journal is cited, in
questionnaire answered by company managers and skippers. Charter boats in
accordance with accepted academic
practice. No use, distribution or Galicia are operating throughout the year, and anglers mostly engage in
reproduction is permitted which does bottom fishing targeting demersal predators like ballan wrasse (Labrus
not comply with these terms.
bergylta) and European seabass (Dicentrarchus labrax) that they retain.
Despite the strong seasonality of the fishery in Madeira, focused on
summers, the fishing effort is higher than in Galicia. On average, charter
boats go fishing for 39.3 ± 41.5 (SD) fishing journeys and take 2 500 anglers
on board per year in Galicia, while in Madeira they fish 63.7 ± 32.7 journeys and
take 3 200 anglers on board. Anglers target in Madeira pelagic top predators
like blue marlin (Makaira nigricans), or some tuna species, e.g., bigeye (Thunnus

Frontiers in Marine Science 01 frontiersin.org

Pita et al. 10.3389/fmars.2022.939533

obesus), by trolling in a catch and release fishery. The economic balance of

companies was more favorable in Madeira, with an average gross annual profit
of € 28 883 ± 30 755, while economic yield in Galicia was € 4 444 ± 7 916. We
also applied a travel cost method to assess the recreation demand of
recreational fishing trips based on a questionnaire answered by 150 clients in
Galicia and 55 in Madeira. We estimated the visitor surplus mean value to be € 1
385 per year in Galicia (95% confidence interval, CI95%= € 1 219 – € 1 550), and €
1 738 in Madeira (CI95%= € 1 433 – 2 043). The social annual recreation value of
Galician fishery was worth € 3.4 Million, ranging between € 3.0 M and € 3.8 M, a
value well below the annual economic impact generated by commercial fishing
(€ 700 M). The recreation value of the charter boat fishery in Madeira, € 6.3 M,
ranging between € 5.2 M and € 7.5 M, is comparable to the annual economic
impact of commercial fishing, that contributes to the local economy with €
12 M.

KEYWORDS

travel cost method (TCM), marine recreational fisheries, economic contribution, big
game fishing, blue economy

Introduction Since marine recreational fisheries can have a significant

impact on European fish stocks (Radford et al., 2018),
Marine recreational fishing is defined as an activity aimed at recreational charter boat fishing in Europe is under some
the capture of aquatic resources for leisure and/or personal management restrictions designed to ensure the sustainability
consumption (Pawson et al., 2008; ICES, 2013). Marine of fish stocks (Council of the European Union, 2008), and to a
recreational fisheries are very important worldwide, with control regime aimed to reduce conflicts arising from the
millions of practitioners and involving a considerable concurrent use of the same fishing areas and fish stocks with
economic contribution to the global economy (Cisneros- commercial fishing vessels (Council of the European
Montemayor and Sumaila, 2010; FAO, 2012; Arlinghaus et al., Union, 2009).
2014). In Europe there are about 9 million recreational fishers On the other hand, the Parliament of the European Union
operating along the coastlines that each year generate around 6 € (EU) encourages further development of recreational charter
billion in direct expenditures (Hyder et al., 2018). boat fishing initiatives to improve local economic development,
Fishing for commercial purposes is rarely considered as a particularly in rural areas and in outer regions of the EU
traditional component of marine recreational fishing (FAO, (European Parliament, 2018). To facilitate this process, it is
2012). However, recreational charter boat fishing (where necessary to understand the mechanisms that encourage the
clients pay for the transfer on board to a suitable fishing spot, creation of charter boat fishing opportunities and their resilience
among other potential services, like fishing guides), is a thriving over time. However, and despite its socioeconomic importance,
business widely distributed in warm coastal waters worldwide to date, charter boat fishing has been little studied in Europe, and
(Ditton and Stoll, 2000; Ditton and Stoll, 2003; Shiffman and the factors that trigger its potential business development are
Hammerschlag, 2014). There are also some relevant charter boat unknown for the most part.
fisheries in temperate waters, e.g., in Australia (Lynch et al., The basic characterization of this activity is essential to
2020) and North America (Steinback, 1999; Lew and Larson, understand the public policies necessary to favor its
2015). In Europe, charter boat fishing is a relatively important sustainable development, including support for the
economic activity in the Mediterranean (Öndes et al., 2020) and development of ancillary services needed for implementing
in the Atlantic archipelagos of Canary, Madeira, and Azores new charter operations (Williams et al., 2020). To obtain key
islands (Leó n et al., 2003; Vieira and Antunes, 2017; Diogo et al., information on this activity in Europe, especially in areas where
2020; Martinez-Escauriaza et al., 2021). However, in the Atlantic its development is most necessary due to a high dependence on
continental coast of Southern Europe there are relatively few marine resources and the scarcity of economic alternatives, we
companies dedicated to charter boat fishing. selected two recreational charter boat fisheries located in rural

Frontiers in Marine Science 02 frontiersin.org

Pita et al. 10.3389/fmars.2022.939533

and outer European regions, namely in Galicia (Spain) and angling (Martı́nez-Escauriaza et al., 2020). The main threat to
Madeira archipelago (Portugal) (Figure 1). the continuity of recreational charter boat fishing companies
Galicia, located in the Atlantic coast of Spain, has a long and comes from the high tourist pressure that can reduce the benefits
strong tradition in marine recreational fisheries, with 60 000 derived from the stay for visitors who value natural
fishers and 4 000 boats engaged in this activity in coastal waters environments the most (Oliveira and Pereira, 2008; Almeida
(Pita et al., 2018). The high primary productivity of its waters, et al., 2014; Almeida, 2016), and the impacts of different fisheries
enriched by a coastal upwelling (Bode et al., 2009), the great along the wide distribution ranges of the targeted fish stocks,
importance of its commercial fishing sector, with the largest mostly large and vulnerable oceanic top predators (Martinez-
European fleet and one of the largest in the world (STECF, Escauriaza et al., 2021).
2017), and the concurrence of many other maritime activities, In this study we characterized for the first time, and
including maritime transport (Suá rez de Vivero and Rodrı́guez compared, the main attributes of recreational charter boat
Mateos, 2012), aquaculture (Pé rez-Camacho et al., 1991) and fisheries of Galicia and Madeira archipelago, including an
growing tourism (Corté s-Jimé nez, 2008), make up a very estimation of their direct economic contribution by assessing
complex socio-ecological system. Many Galician coastal towns the financial performance of the companies operating in the two
and villages are highly dependent on marine resources, especially studied regions. We also evaluated the recreation demand of
commercial fisheries due to the lack of alternative jobs, this both recreational charter fisheries by characterizing recreation
sector being of key relevance in terms of the Galician Gross fishing use as a benefit generating social welfare.
Domestic Product (GDP) (Freire and Garcı́a-Allut, 2000;
Villasante et al., 2013; Villasante et al., 2016). Despite the
multiple human impacts exerted on coastal ecosystems, there Methods
is potential for the development of sustainable charter boat
fishing, which is currently little developed (Pita et al., 2017; Interviews with company owners and
Pita and Villasante, 2019). skippers
The case of Madeira archipelago, in the Macaronesia region,
is very different in terms of charter boat fishing, since it is one of In January 2019 we interviewed owners and skippers of
the best-known places in the world to practice big game fishing recreational fishing charter boat companies of Spain (Galicia)
(Martinez-Escauriaza et al., 2021). The Madeira archipelago and Portugal (Madeira archipelago) to collect key economic,
consists of two main inhabited islands (Madeira, and Porto social, and ecological information. To identify the charter boat
Santo), and two other uninhabited islands (Desertas and companies operating in the two areas we followed a snowball
Selvagens islands), with some adjacent islets. The local model (Goodman, 1961), starting with a small group of initial
population also shows a relevant participation in recreational informants, and expanding through their contacts and social

FIGURE 1
Map showing the location of Galicia (NW Spain) and Madeira archipelago (Portugal). We also show the marinas harboring recreational fishing
charter boats.

Frontiers in Marine Science 03 frontiersin.org

Pita et al. 10.3389/fmars.2022.939533

networks. Although the supply of charter boat companies was travel distance from home and transport modality; 4) other
simple to identify in Madeira, with the boats concentrated in a recreational activities practiced during the trip (number of days
few marinas, in Galicia the offer was much more dispersed and during the current trip); and 5) socioeconomic and demographic
less accessible to the uninitiated. For this reason, in our characteristics (age, gender, civil status, education level, number
interviews we specifically asked respondents for the name and of people living in the household, number of underage people
location of other companies, or contacts that could provide living in the household, job, working hours per month, revenue
further references. per month, residence country, and if they belonged to any
In-depth interviews were carried out to obtain information fishing association or club). We also included an open-ended
on the characteristics of the fishing boats (i.e., length, power, and question about the Willingness To Pay of a tax (WTPt) to
onboard crew and clients), used fishing gears, seasonality, fishing support the ecological sustainability of the local environment.
effort (i.e., number of fishing journeys per year, number of hours The margin of error of the client survey, with a 95%
per journey, and number of anglers per year), targeted species confidence (ME95%), was obtained by following the equation:
(including the ratio of retained and released fish), and on the
s
economic performance of the companies, including costs and ME95 % = 1:96
pffiffiffi ½1
n
investments (i.e., in boat mooring, fuel and maintenance, fishing
gears, food and drinks served onboard, insurances, licenses and Where s represented the population standard deviation, and
taxes, staff salaries, publicity, and other), and also gross annual n the sample size.
revenue. Company owners and boat skippers also reported the
percentage of dedication of their boats to fishing in relation to
other recreational activities with clients (e.g., tourist visits, Travel cost calculation
wildlife watch, etc.) that was used to weigh the economic
balance of the companies. To prevent recall bias in the We estimated recreation value with the Travel Cost Method
responses, the company owners and skippers were asked to (TCM) (Clawson, 1959), a widely used revealed preference
provide averages in their responses for the last three years. method of non-market valuation. Recreation value was
estimated based on anglers’ WTP obtained in an on-site
survey, from which we estimated the Consumer Surplus (CS),
Client survey i.e., the excess of social value for consumers over the price
actually paid.
Between February 2019 and October 2020, we performed The Combined Travel Cost (CTC) was calculated as the sum
interviews with clients of recreational fishing charter boat of the individual travel cost (tC), the Opportunity Cost of Time
companies in Galicia and Madeira by using a structured (OCT), and Other Costs (OC) like fishing fee, accommodation,
questionnaire (Appendix 1). In Galicia, due to the dispersion and food. The information on OC was provided by the anglers in
of the companies along the coast, we provided the owners and the questionnaires. We then calculated tC as the product
skippers of the companies with paper copies of the questionnaire between the travelled distance in kilometers, also reported by
so that they could deliver them to the anglers. To facilitate the anglers, and the cost per kilometer, separately for anglers that
responses, we also enabled an online form with the same arrived at the boat by walking (set to 0), by car or motorbike, and
questionnaire so that it could be answered by mobile phone, by national, European, and international flights. We multiplied
or computer. In Madeira, the owners and skippers preferred that by 2 the travelled distance to account for forward and return
the surveys be carried out by the researchers involved in this travels. In the case of cars and motorbikes, we estimated the cost
study. Thus, researchers visited the ports on a temporary per kilometer by using the official fiscal value. The travel cost
random basis, including working and non-working days, both for Spain and Portugal was 0.19 € per km (Agencia
through the annual fishing cycle. Tributaria, 2022). In the case of flights, we used the
Our survey aimed at collecting information on 1) visiting information provided by one of the most popular flight search
profile and frequency (number of fishing journeys during the engines in Europe (Kayak España, 2017). For both Spanish and
current trip, number of fishing journeys during the previous Portuguese national flights, we used 0.08 € per km, and for
year in the same, and in other locations, group size, type of European and international flights we used 0.05 €/km, as
accommodation, and daily expenses including accommodation, estimated for flight searches conducted for round flights
fishing fee and travel allowances); 2) characteristics of the fishing departing from Madrid and Barcelona in economic class
experience influencing the trip decision, e.g., reasonable cost, fish between 2016 and 2017. In the case of multi-mode trips (e.g.,
abundance or diversity, presence of particular fish species, anglers who traveled by plane and then by car, or other vehicle),
natural or cultural values of the area, uncrowded, or close to we only considered the distance traveled by plane.
my home, among other set of response options (the respondents We finally used the product between the round trip time and
could write their own option if it was not available in the list); 3) 1/3 of the wage rate to estimate the OCT (Martı́nez-Espiñeira

Frontiers in Marine Science 04 frontiersin.org

Pita et al. 10.3389/fmars.2022.939533

and Amoako-Tuffour, 2008; Roussel et al., 2016). The wage rate foreign country, and High included visitors that fished ≥15 days
was approximated by the monthly income divided by the in a foreign country. Si represents a set of visitors’ socio-
monthly hours of work (information that was provided in the economic and demographic characteristics, including age,
questionnaires answered by the anglers). We calculated the trip gender, civil status, education level, number of people living in
time from the reported travel distance and assuming a driving the household, number of underage people living in the
average speed of 80 km·h-1 and a flying average speed of 600 household, job, working hours per month, revenue per month,
km·h-1. residence country, and level of associativism (i.e., membership to
CS was derived from a recreation demand function obtained fishing associations or clubs) to account for fishing avidity.
from the relationship between the number of fishing journeys Unadjusted GAMs were fitted first (i.e., considering the
undertaken to the site per year (outcome), and the price (the effect of only one predictor), whereas a backward stepwise
travel cost), among a set of other predictors, including the avidity selection procedure was followed to fit adjusted models (i.e.,
for substitute sites, the number of days dedicated to practicing from saturated models to final models, removing non-significant
other leisure alternatives during the current fishing trip, group variables at each step). The best models were selected based on
size, and visitors’ socio-economic characteristics collected in the the Akaike’s information criterion (Akaike, 1973), deviance
survey. We finally estimated the social annual value of fishing explained, and appropriate residual structure. Models with
trips for the overall anglers’ population to provide a first highly dispersed and anomalous distribution of residuals were
valuable reference. discarded. All calculations were performed with the statistical
software R ver. 4.0.2 (R Core Team, 2019).
We used the parameters of the final models to calculate
Econometric models recreation benefit, or welfare in terms of the CS anglers derive
from trips to Galicia and Madeira. We calculated the average
In the econometric models (fitted separately for each individual CS for access by computing the area under the
geographic area), Yi was the outcome representing the number demand curve (Haab and McConnell, 1996) by adaptive
of fishing journeys made by the respondent to the same quadrature methods and obtained confidence intervals
destination during the past year (including the current trip) as following a Monte Carlo simulation to solve the numerical
a function of the Combined Travel Cost (CTC) and other integrals. We then multiplied the results by the predicted
independent predictors (see equation 2). Since the outcome is number of persons by trip to obtain the predicted annual CS
a nonnegative integer variable, linear models are unsuitable to for the average visitor group.
estimate the recreation demand function (Shaw, 1988). We kept Finally, we used the expected number of anglers in Galicia
zero-truncation and potential overdispersion controlled by using and Madeira to obtain the overall social welfare for the two
more flexible negative binomial Generalized Additive Models recreational charter boat fisheries. Since in our study we also
(GAMs) (Hastie and Tibshirani, 1990). We used the maximum assessed the economic performance of the charter boat
possible flexibility in the smoothed terms (i.e., the basis companies operating in both recreational fisheries we did not
dimension) allowed by the available amount of data for each consider their benefits as part of total social welfare. We
predictor, and cubic regression splines to avoid erratic behaviors computed the overall CS for the whole population of potential
of the fitted values at the extremes (Ferrini and Fezzi, 2012). clients (P). Following Parsons (2003), the Population Surplus
The demand function for the ith visitor was: (PS) can be estimated as follows:

Yi = f ½CTCi , pi (Ni , Gi , Ai , Si ) ½2 PS = CS
P ½3

Where pi(·) represents the vector of other visitor-specific

independent predictors. These predictors included Ni, which
accounted for the number of days devoted to the practice of Results
alternative leisure activities during the current fishing trip
(following Roussel et al., 2016). Gi included group size, i.e., the Interviews with company owners and
number of people traveling with the angler, in the fitted GAMs skippers
(including non-angling travelers). A i accounted for the
willingness to choose alternative trips by including a factor In Galicia we interviewed owners and skippers of 10 charter
variable (avidity) with 3 levels (Low, Medium, and High), fishing boats belonging to 7 companies, which represents all the
based in the fishing days during the past year (that ranged recreational fishing companies based in Galicia. In Madeira, we
between 0 and 80), and the country in which the fishing took interviewed owners and skippers of 18 boats of a total of 20
place (national or foreign). Thus, Low included visitors that currently operating in Madeira, belonging to the 14 companies,
fished <40 days in their own country, Medium included visitors mainly based in Funchal and Calheta (Martinez-Escauriaza
that fished ≥40 days in their own country, or <15 days in a et al., 2021).

Frontiers in Marine Science 05 frontiersin.org

Pita et al. 10.3389/fmars.2022.939533

The average length of Galician charter fishing boats was 8.63

± 2.96 (SD) m, while the boats operating in Madeira were bigger
(9.57 ± 2.46 m on average). Average engine power and crew size
were also higher in Madeira (465.0 ± 298.43 HP, and 2.06 ± 0.24
crew members, respectively) than in Galicia (246.0 ± 214.53 HP,
and 1.2 ± 0.42 crew members) (Table 1).
The most popular fishing gear of recreational fishing
onboard Galician boats was bottom fishing (65.2% of total
annual fishing time), followed by spinning (29.2%), jigging
(3.2%), and trolling (2.3%). In Madeira, fishing charter boats
mainly engaged in trolling (74.4%), and to a lesser extent in
bottom fishing (16.9%), and jigging (5.2%) (Table 1).
Recreational fishing charter boat companies in Galicia
maintained their activity throughout most of the year, while in
Madeira the activity showed a very strong seasonality, since
fishing charter boats mainly operated during the summer
months (Figure 2).
In Galicia, charter boat companies performed an average of
39.30 ± 41.45 fishing journeys per year, while charter boats in
Madeira sailed out 63.69 ± 32.71 journeys. Average duration of
FIGURE 2
the fishing trips was also lower in Galicia (5.0 ± 2.21 hours) than Annual cycle of activity of recreational fishing charter boat
in Madeira (5.89 ± 1.02 hours). On average, Galician charter companies in Spain (Galicia) and Portugal (Madeira archipelago).
The percentage of active boats in each month is shown.
boat companies reported 246.0 ± 444.73 clients per year.
Portuguese skippers and owners did not report the number of
clients per year. Instead, they reported the number of clients per
trip (3.18 ± 0.75). Therefore, since the annual number of fishing conger), John dory (Zeus faber), Mediterranean rainbow wrasse
journeys performed in Madeira by the 18 charter boats was 1 019 (Coris julis), and pollack (Pollachius pollachius). Company
trips, the total number of clients per year was estimated at 3 242 managers also mentioned some catches of blue shark
anglers (2 460 in Galicia). (Prionace glauca), and squids Loligo spp.
Main targeted species in Galicia were ballan wrasse (Labrus In the archipelago of Madeira recreational anglers mainly
bergylta), black seabream (Spondyliosoma cantharus), European targeted Atlantic white marlin (Kajikia albida), bigeye tuna
seabass (Dicentrarchus labrax), pouting (Trisopterus luscus), and (Thunnus obesus), blue marlin (Makaira nigricans), and
white seabream (Diplodus sargus). Other relevant species wahoo (Acanthocybium solandri). Also, anglers onboard
reported were Atlantic horse mackerel (Trachurus trachurus), charter boats caught amberjacks (Seriola spp.), barred hogfish
Atlantic mackerel (Scomber scombrus), blackspot seabream (Bodianus scrofa), barracudas (Sphyraena spp.), bluefish
(Pagellus bogaraveo), comber (Serranus cabrilla), common (Pomatomus saltatrix), dolphinfish (Coryphaena spp.), grey
two-banded seabream (D. vulgaris), European conger (Conger triggerfish (Balistes capriscus), island grouper (Mycteroperca

TABLE 1 Mean (and SD) characteristics of recreational fishing charter boats and percentage of annual fishing time using each gear in Spain
(Galicia) and Portugal (Madeira archipelago).

Attributes Spain (Galicia) Portugal (Madeira)

Boat
Length (m) 8.63 ± 2.99 9.57 ± 2.46
Power (HP) 246.0 ± 214.53 465.0 ± 298.43
Crew (N) 1.20 ± 0.42 2.06 ± 0.24
Fishing gear
Bottom (%) 65.20 ± 44.43 16.94 ± 19.64
Jigging (%) 3.20 ± 7.83 5.17 ± 11.45
Spinning (%) 29.20 ± 46.64 0.0 ± 0.0
Trawling (%) 2.30 ± 3.09 74.44 ± 24.25
Other (%) 0.10 ± 0.32 3.44 ± 9.67

Frontiers in Marine Science 06 frontiersin.org

Pita et al. 10.3389/fmars.2022.939533

fusca), pink dentex (Dentex gibbosus), red scorpionfish Client survey

(Scorpaena scrofa), skipjack tuna (Katsuwonus pelamis), white
seabream, and zebra seabream (D. cervinus). Portuguese We performed 150 interviews with clients of Galician
skippers and company owners also reported some catches on recreational fishing charter boat companies and 55 interviews
pelagic sharks. Notably, while almost all catches were released in with clients of Madeiran companies. Most clients fishing in
Madeira, only 25.8% ± 22.8% of the catches were released Galician companies were from Spain (94.7% of total), although
in Galicia. some anglers also traveled from other European countries
(France, Germany, the Netherlands, Russia, and Switzerland),
and from the USA (Table 3). On the contrary, only 16.3% of total
Economic performance of recreational clients of Madeiran companies were from Portugal. In fact, the
fishing charter boat companies UK was the most relevant country of origin (38.2%), although
many anglers also arrived from other European countries
Galician fishing charter boat companies spent on average € 9 (Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Latvia,
799 ± 18 793 per year to carry out their activities, and in Madeira Luxembourg, Russia, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland), and
€ 21 299 ± 5 216 (Figure 3). Although in general more costly in from Canada, Costa Rica, and the USA (Table 3).
Madeira, the breakdown of the main company expenses was Almost half of the anglers in both destinations (43.9%, and
similar between the two regions. Expenses on publicity and 45.5% in Galicia and Madeira, respectively) were between 35 and
mandatory operational licenses were the only costs that were 49 years old. Most anglers were men (85.4% in Galicia, and
higher in Galicia than in Madeira. The highest annual expenses 89.1% in Madeira), married or living with a partner (58.3% in
and investments were made in the fishing boats, especially in Galicia, and 79.6% in Madeira), and did not belong to any
fuel, but also in equipment and maintenance, and in moorings. fishing association or club (80.3% in Galicia, and 70.2% in
Staff salaries were also a relevant cost for charter boat companies, Madeira). Most anglers in Madeira finished university studies
followed by the purchase of fishing gears, different insurances, (85.7%), while in Galicia they mostly finished vocational training
and food and beverages served on board (Table 2). (36.9%), or university studies (36.2%) (Table 3).
Average annual income was higher in Madeiran companies Mean household size was up to 3.04 ± 1.22 persons in the
(€ 50 182 ± 35 971) than in Galician ones (€ 14 243 ± 26 709) case of Galicia, and 2.16 ± 1.19 persons in the case of clients of
(Figure 3). Therefore, and despite their higher costs, the Madeiran companies, while on average 0.79 ± 0.84 and 0.68 ±
economic balance of charter fishing companies was more 0.87 were minors, respectively. Mean monthly income of visitors
favorable in Madeira, with an average gross annual profit of € to Galicia was € 1 692 ± 492, while € 2 071 ± 646 in the case of
28 883 ± 30 755, while economic yield in Galicia was € 4 444 ± the visitors to Madeira. Almost half of the anglers of the two
7 916. countries were employees (48.6% in Galicia, and 50.0% in

FIGURE 3
Annual expenses and income of companies engaged in commercial MRF in Spain (Galicia, in grey; left y-axis) and Portugal (Madeira archipelago,
in black; right y-axis). The top and bottom sides of the boxes correspond to the first and third quartiles of the values, the vertical lines extend up
to 1.5 times the interquartile range, the median is indicated with a horizontal line, and the mean with a black dot. Outliers are not shown for
visualization purposes.

Frontiers in Marine Science 07 frontiersin.org

Pita et al. 10.3389/fmars.2022.939533

TABLE 2 Mean (and SD) annual expenses and investments (€) of recreational fishing charter boat companies operating in Spain (Galicia) and
Portugal (Madeira archipelago).

Expenses Spain (Galicia) Portugal (Madeira)

Boat equipment and maintenance 539 ± 898 4 650 ± 5 111
Boat fuel 2 776 ± 6 492 5 194 ± 2 967
Boat mooring 517 ± 990 2 994 ± 2 320
Fishing gears 1 800 ± 1 568 708 ± 1 211
Food and beverages 92 ± 206 850 ± 961
Insurances 415 ± 429 1 396 ± 715
Licenses 280 ± 492 189 ± 6
Publicity 2 870 ± 8 717 965 ± 1 330
Salaries 4 947.53 ± 3 615.48 12 500.0 ± 0.0

Madeira), who on average worked 8.0 ± 1.26 hours per day in the ± 101.11, respectively. Consequently, mean individual CTC in
case of Galicia, and 8.3 ± 0.44 hours per day in the case of Madeira, i.e., the sum of tC, OCT, and OC (€ 475.01 ± 247.66),
Madeira. Self-employed and businessmen were the other almost doubled the CTC in Galicia (€ 249.77 ± 214.83).
occupations of fishers of working age, while the access of However, Willingness To Pay of an ecological tax (WTPt) to
students and retirees was much lower (Table 3). support the local environment was a bit higher in the case of
The natural value of the environment was the most valuable visitors to Galicia (€ 7.40 ± 12.72), than that of visitors of
attribute of the fishing trip in the case of clients of Galician Madeira (€ 3.05 ± 6.88) (Table 3).
companies (45.0% of respondents), followed by the price
(28.6%), and the presence of certain fish species (23.6%).
Clients of Madeiran boats primarily valued the complete Association between fishing journeys,
experience (36.5%), followed by the presence of certain fish willingness to pay and other predictors
species (23.1%) (Table 3).
Mean number of fishing journeys while on their current trip In the econometric models the outcome was the number of
was 1.81 ± 2.71 days in Galicia, and 1.91 ± 1.69 days in Madeira. fishing journeys performed by the respondent angler to the same
The previous year, these anglers fishing in Galicia spent another location during the past year (including the current trip).
0.84 ± 3.12 days in the same location, 1.11 ± 2.90 days in the case Although the main predictor was expected to be the CTC (as a
of Madeira. The anglers interviewed in Galicia spent another proxy of the WTP), we included other independent variables,
3.39 ± 8.94 days in other fishing places, 7.38 ± 12.76 days in the like the number of days practicing alternative leisure activities,
case of clients of Madeiran companies. Moreover, the visitors the willingness to choose alternative trips, the group size, and
also spent on average 0.52 ± 1.27 days in Galicia, and 2.73 ± 3.31 socio-economic characteristics.
days in Madeira in alternative recreational activities (Table 3). The CTC had a significative effect in the number of fishing
Mean group size was similar in both locations (2.69 ± 0.93 in journeys in Galicia and Madeira, both in the unadjusted (p=
Galicia, and 2.36 ± 1.09 in Madeira). Visitors to Galicia traveled 0.024; R2 = 0.005, and p= 0.041; R2 = 0.047, respectively), and in
on average 335.55 ± 566.19 km to arrive at the fishing location, the adjusted GAMs (p= 0.024; R2 = 0.005, and p= 0.025; R2 =
while visitors to Madeira traveled 2 800 ± 1 880 km. According 0.230, respectively) (Table 4). The CTC had a clearer negative
to the distances and the isolated nature of the Madeira effect on the number of fishing journeys in Galicia than in
archipelago, cars were the main transport in the case of Galicia Madeira, where the demand function was not decreasing at the
(93.3% of total), while plane (87.3%) was the main transport right tail of the CTC values (Figure 4).
used to arrive in Madeira. In the same way, most clients of The different relative importance given by the anglers to the
Galician companies did not sleep away from home (59.3%), journeys dedicated to alternative recreational activities could
while up to 76.4% of anglers traveling to Madeira stayed in a partly explain the differences in the demand functions of Galicia
hotel or in a vacation rental (Table 3). and Madeira, affecting the expected negative slope of the
All travel costs were higher in Madeira than in Galicia: mean demand function in the case of Madeira. To assess this, we
individual travel cost (tC) was € 100.42 ± 140.38 in Galicia and € fitted GAMs that modeled the association between the journeys
282.63 ± 185.56 in Madeira; mean Opportunity Cost of Time devoted to fishing and alternative activities on the full duration
(OCT) was € 21.39 ± 33.54 and € 36.20 ± 25.47, respectively; and of the trips, i.e., including days not dedicated to angling
mean daily costs (OC), that included fishing fees, (Table 4). We found that although fishing journeys always
accommodation, and food was € 127.97 ± 128.01 and € 156.18 exceed those dedicated to other activities in Galicia, after 10

Frontiers in Marine Science 08 frontiersin.org

Pita et al. 10.3389/fmars.2022.939533

TABLE 3 Descriptive characteristics of the fishing activity valued by clients of recreational fishing charter boat companies in Spain (Galicia) and
Portugal (Madeira archipelago).

Attributes Spain (Galicia) Portugal (Madeira)

Selected features % (N=140) % (N=52)
Companionship 2.9 0.0
Crew friendliness 3.6 7.7
Cultural values of the area 15.0 0.0
Fish abundance 18.6 0.0
Fish diversity 20.0 0.0
Low crowding 5.7 0.0
Natural values of the area 45.0 7.7
Presence of particular fish species 23.6 23.1
Price 28.6 0.0
Proximity 19.3 7.7
Trophy fish 0.0 1.9
Whole experience 4.3 36.5
Fishing journeys Mean (N=150) Mean (N=55)
1.8 ± 2.7 1.9 ± 1.7
Past fishing journeys Mean (N=150) Mean (N=55)
3.4 ± 9.0 7.38 ± 12.8
Past fishing journeys same place Mean (N=150) Mean (N=55)
0.8 ± 3.1 1.1 ± 2.9
Activity journeys Mean (N=150) Mean (N=55)
0.5 ± 1.3 2.7 ± 3.3
Travel distance (km) Mean (N=150) Mean (N=55)
335.6 ± 566.2 2 800.2 ± 1 880.0
Transport % (N=150) % (N=55)
Walking 0.0 3.6
Motorbike 0.7 0.0
Car 93.3 9.1
National plane 2.0 3.6
European plane 3.3 76.4
International plane 0.7 7.3
Group size Mean (N=150) Mean (N=55)
2.7 ± 0.9 2.4 ± 1.1
Accommodation % (N=150) % (N=55)
Home 59.3 12.7
Family/friend 2.0 10.9
Car 1.3 0.0
Motorhome 0.7 0.0
Camping 1.3 0.0
Vacation rental 12.7 14.5
Hotel 22.7 61.8
Daily expenses (€) Mean (N=150) Mean (N=55)
128.0 ± 128.0 156.2 ± 101.1
WTPt (€) Mean (N=93) Mean (N=22)
7.4 ± 12.7 3.1 ± 6.9
Age % (N=148) % (N=55)
18-24 4.1 0.0

(Continued)

Frontiers in Marine Science 09 frontiersin.org

Pita et al. 10.3389/fmars.2022.939533

TABLE 3 Continued

Attributes Spain (Galicia) Portugal (Madeira)

Selected features % (N=140) % (N=52)
25-34 25.0 7.3
35-49 43.9 45.5
50-64 23.0 34.5
>65 4.1 12.7
Gender % (N=144) % (N=55)
Men 85.4 89.1
Women 14.6 10.9
Civil status % (N=148) % (N=54)
Single 34.0 13.0
Married or living with a partner 58.3 79.6
Divorced or separated 7.6 7.4
Education % (N=141) % (N=49)
Primary 6.4 4.1
Secondary 20.6 4.1
Vocational training 36.9 6.1
University 36.2 85.7
Household members Mean (N=150) Mean (N=55)
3.0 ± 1.2 2.2 ± 1.2
Underage Mean (N=150) Mean (N=55)
0.8 ± 0.9 0.7 ± 0.9
Occupation % (N=146) % (N=48)
Student 4.8 0.0
Employee 48.6 50.0
Public employee 0.7 6.3
Self-employed 23.3 10.4
Businessman 13.7 18.8
Retired 8.9 14.6
Working hours per day Mean (N=150) Mean (N=55)
8.0 ± 1.3 8.3 ± 0.4
Monthly family income (€) Mean (N=150) Mean (N=55)
1 692.0 ± 491.6 2 070.9 ± 645.7
Association % (N=142) % (N=47)
No 80.3 70.2
Yes 19.7 29.8
Country % (N=149) % (N=55)
Canada 0.0 1.8
Costa Rica 0.0 1.8
Finland 0.0 7.3
France 0.7 10.9
Germany 2.0 3.6
Hungary 0.0 1.8
Italy 0.0 3.6
Latvia 0.0 1.8
Luxembourg 0.0 1.8
Netherlands 0.7 0.0
Portugal 0.0 16.4

(Continued)

Frontiers in Marine Science 10 frontiersin.org

Pita et al. 10.3389/fmars.2022.939533

TABLE 3 Continued

Attributes Spain (Galicia) Portugal (Madeira)

Selected features % (N=140) % (N=52)
Russia 0.7 1.8
Spain 94.6 1.8
Sweden 0.0 1.8
Switzerland 0.7 1.8
UK 0.0 38.2
USA 0.7 3.6

We also show the mean (and SD) number of fishing journeys performed during the current recreational trip, the mean number of fishing journeys performed during the past year, the mean
number of fishing journeys performed during the past year in the same location, the mean number of journeys devoted to alternative recreational activities during the current recreational
trip, the mean distance traveled from home, the main transport used, the mean total group size, the type of accommodation during the stay, the mean daily expenses, and mean Willingness
To Pay of an ecological tax (WTPt) to support the local environment. In addition, we show basic demographics.

days of vacation the time dedicated to alternatives to angling was club (p= 0.001; R 2 = 0.186) had a positive effect. Only
greatly reduced. On the contrary, in Madeira, after 8 days of membership of a fishing association or club (p= 0.004) was
vacation, alternative recreational activities became more retained in the adjusted model (Table 4).
important than fishing (Figure 5). These results suggest that
trips to Madeira have a higher multi-purpose character than in
the Galician case, which could have affected the expected Consumers’ surplus
negative relationship between the CTC and the fishing days
estimated by the demand function in Madeira, especially in the We estimated the individual CS mean value (as a reliable
case of higher travel costs (as shown in the Figure 4). proxy for individual value) to be € 1 385 per year in Galicia (95%
In the case of Galicia, an increase in the number of minors confidence interval, CI95%= € 1 219 – € 1 550), and € 1 738 in
living in the visitor household (p= 0.002; R2 = 0.030), and Madeira (CI95%= € 1 433 – € 2 043) (Figure 6).
membership to a fishing association or club (p< 0.001; R2 = The yearly mean CS per visit in Galicia could then be set to €
0.050) had a positive effect on the number of fishing journeys 3 729, ranging from € 3 103 to € 4 404, since the observed size of
predicted in the unadjusted models. In the adjusted model only the average group was 2.69 people (CI95%= 2.55 people – 2.84
the number of underage members of the family was retained (p< people). In Madeira, the average fishing group was 2.36 people
0.001) (Table 4). (CI95%= 2.07 – 2.65), for what the yearly mean CS per visit was €
In Madeira, the bigger the visitor group size (p= 0.034; R2 = 4 108, ranging from € 2 973 to € 5 420.
0.026) the lower the number of fishing journeys predicted in the To estimate the yearly social welfare of the recreational
unadjusted model, while membership of a fishing association or charter fishery in Galicia, i.e., the Population Surplus (PS), we

TABLE 4 Outputs of the GAMs fitted on the number of angling days and number of vacation days (including non-angling days, devoted to
alternative recreational activities).

Country Outcome Predictor P value Deviance explained (%) AIC

Spain Angling days CTC (WTP) 0.0242 3.5 636
Angling days Underage 0.0020 11.0 460
Angling days Association: No vs. Yes <0.0001 13.3 624
Angling days CTC (WTP) 0.0051 21.6 453
Underage 0.0004
Vacation days Angling days*Non-angling days <0.0001 98.8 392
Portugal Angling days CTC (WTP) 0.0408 10.6 245
Angling days Group size 0.0344 9.7 245
Angling days Association: No vs. Yes <0.0001 32.8 232
Angling days CTC (WTP) 0.0245 42.1 229
Association: No vs. Yes 0.0040
Vacation days Angling days*Non-angling days <0.0001 98.9 192

We show the p-values for the different significant predictors of unadjusted (i.e., considering the effect of only one predictor) and of final adjusted models (i.e., including more than one
predictor), and the values of deviance explained, and Akaike’s information criterion (AIC) (*stands for interaction term; CTC stands for Combined Travel Cost; WTP stands for Willingness
To Pay; and “association” indicate anglers’ membership to a recreational fishing association).

Frontiers in Marine Science 11 frontiersin.org

Pita et al. 10.3389/fmars.2022.939533

FIGURE 4
Partial effect of the WTP (as a function of the travel cost) on the number of fishing journeys to Spain (Galicia) and Portugal (Madeira). It is shown
the prediction (dark lines), and their 95% confidence interval (thin lines) estimated by the adjusted GAMs.

FIGURE 5
Partial effect of the interaction between the days devoted to angling and the days devoted to other recreational activities on the total days of
the vacation in Spain (Galicia) and Portugal (Madeira). It shows the predictions of the total vacation duration estimated by a GAM.

Frontiers in Marine Science 12 frontiersin.org

Pita et al. 10.3389/fmars.2022.939533

A B

FIGURE 6
Consumer surplus (CS) per person and year estimated from fishing charter boat trips to Spain (Galicia; A) and Portugal (Madeira archipelago; B)
by bidimensional GAMs. The covariate Willingness To Pay (WTP) was a function of the full individual travel cost. In the case of Galicia, the other
covariate was the number of underage people in the household, while in Madeira we used a dummy numeric variable to include the
membership (1) or not (0) to a recreational fishing association (see in Table 4 the outputs of the GAMs fitted on the fishing journeys).

used equation [3]. Since Spanish managers and boat skippers As a general reference, commercial fishing generates some €
reported the number of clients per year in each of the charter 700 M annually in Galicia, which represents just over 1% of GDP
boats, we obtained an estimate of total clients per year in Galicia (Surı́s -Regueiro and Santiago, 2014), while in Madeira,
(P = 2 460 anglers). This figure was then multiplied by the mean commercial fishing accounts for 0.7% of the GDP, which is
CS, to obtain a yearly recreation social welfare of € 3.41 Million about € 12 M annually (Vallerani et al., 2017). Gross output,
in Galicia, ranging between € 3.0 M and € 3.81 M. representing the annual revenue from charter boats, estimated
In Madeira we estimated that the 18 charter boats had 3 by extrapolating the mean annual turnover by company to the
242 clients per year. However, the total number of fishing total number of companies, was of € 99 700 in Galicia and € 702
boats in Madeira was 20 (Martinez-Escauriaza et al., 2021). 550 in Madeira. The relatively low figure that we obtained in
Therefore, we assumed that the two charter boats that were Galicia, compared to gross outputs exceeding one million euros
not included in our survey carried out the same average in similar charter boat fisheries (in terms of covered area,
number of clients per trip that the assessed 18 boats (3.18 ± ambient conditions, visitation, and targeted species) of
0.75), so the total number of clients per year in Madeira was Southern England (Williams et al., 2020), indicates that it is
estimated at 3 648 anglers. Applying the equation [3], the possible to increase the economic contribution of this sector,
yearly social welfare of the recreational charter fishery of helped by the low seasonality of the fishery. The similarity
Madeira was € 6.34 M, ranging between € 5.23 M and between the social welfare we derived from the charter boat
€ 7.45 M. fisheries in Galicia and Madeira (€ 3 M, and € 6 M, respectively)
also points in this direction.
In our client survey we sampled up to 6.1% of the anglers
Discussion fishing from charter boat companies operating each year in
Galicia. Therefore, applying the equation [1] our survey had a
In our study we showed that the direct contribution to local potential margin of error of 7.8%. The margin of error was 13.1%
economies derived from the operation of the recreational fishing in the case of the Madeiran survey (we interviewed 1.5% of
charter boat companies is important, especially in Madeira. We charter boat anglers). Although our sampling error was
believe that our results provide a first useful baseline, e.g., for the moderate, we cannot rule out problems of representativeness
formulation of public policies aimed at increasing the resilience of our sample with respect to the total population of anglers, that
of coastal populations highly dependent on marine resources in may ultimately affect the estimates of aggregated social welfare of
remote and rural areas, as demanded by the EU Parliament the two recreational fisheries. It is possible, for example, that we
(European Parliament, 2018). Managed in a sustainable way, we have interviewed avid anglers more frequently (i.e., those who
demonstrated that recreational charter boat fisheries can provide use the services of the companies the most), and that their
viable economic alternatives to commercial fishing, being answers differ in some way from those of other groups of anglers.
possible to further increase its development in the European On the other hand, we expect that the broad temporal and
continental coasts. spatial coverage of our sampling has contributed to moderating

Frontiers in Marine Science 13 frontiersin.org

Pita et al. 10.3389/fmars.2022.939533

this bias. Moreover, some sample biases (i.e., recall, non- of the trip for the clients of the Galician charter boat companies
response, and declaration) inherent to recreation data and on- suggests that economically adjusted packages would need to
site surveys could also affect our estimates (see Pollock et al., be offered.
1994) for an overview of bias affecting recreational fishing The high dependence of the Madeiran charter boat fishery
surveys). Also, the relatively low values of explained deviation on big game fishing is a potential weakness in the face of the
in the GAMs could indicate that part of the variability has not effects of environmental changes on the abundance and
been fully explained by the predictors evaluated. Furthermore, in catchability of these species, e.g., because of the impact of
our client survey we did not obtain disaggregated information on climate change that could alter distribution ranges and/or
the expenses of the anglers. Although fishing fees are relatively affect the environmental conditions that anglers need to fish
small compared with the full cost of the trip, these should have (Martinez-Escauriaza et al., 2021). In fact, the presence of
been excluded from the calculation of CS. Therefore, the “billfish” and other big predators was highly valued by the
obtained welfare measures should be seen as a reasonable interviewed anglers in Madeira, which was found to be a key
estimate for the full benefit derived by anglers. component of satisfaction, closely linked to loyalty to the fishing
We have not found significant differences according to the site in another recreational fishery in Macaronesia (Gonzá lez
gender of the anglers in the models we used to estimate et al., 2021). Therefore, basing this fishery on catch and release
recreation value with the TCM. However, it would be possible seems a correct strategy in the long term. However, concerns
to increase the social benefits provided by recreational fishing about the impacts of both commercial and recreational fisheries
charter boat companies by reducing the important gender gap in on main targeted stocks (Restrepo et al., 2003; Maguire et al.,
this activity (Pita et al., 2020a). Companies exploring this 2006; Ehrhardt and Fitchett, 2016), make it necessary to assess
possibility should highlight the social aspect of the activity, the impacts of this charter boat fishery, specifically on post-
little valued by the anglers in our survey, which included release mortality. Increasing the percentage of released fish in the
mostly men. Increased female participation in angling would case of Galicia should be contemplated, especially if there is an
be especially feasible in Madeira, due to the multi-purpose increase in recreational fishing mortality, due to the current high
nature of the trip (in fact, anglers visiting Madeira valued human pressures on Galician marine ecosystems and fish stocks
above all the overall experience of their trip), its longer (Pita and Freire, 2014; Pita et al., 2020b), and the concerning
duration, and the larger size of the visiting group. The state of conservation of some stocks of the most targeted species,
development of marketing strategies that promote trips such as European seabass (Council of the European
combining angling experiences and other family leisure Union, 2018).
activities could be good to increase trips to Madeira.
The contribution of companies to nature conservation could
strategically increase the value and participation of anglers, Conclusions
especially in the case of Galician companies, since this was one
of the best valued attributes in our survey, as well as in other The social and economic importance of charter fisheries,
recreational fisheries in the Northeast Atlantic (Gonzá lez et al., both in Galicia and Madeira, demonstrated in our study, should
2021). Indeed, the anglers in Galician companies showed higher be duly recognized by public European administrations and
WTPt to help conservation measures. Furthermore, the carbon economic, coastal and resource management at different levels.
footprint of the trips made to Galicia was lower than that of The development of programs and agreements with private
those made to Madeira, both because of the shorter distance companies to provide the basic services necessary to promote
traveled by the anglers and because of the use of less polluting sustainable angling tourism is key to meet public directives
means of transport, mainly private cars, instead of airplanes. The aiming to foster economic and social development in rural
development of green strategies by charter boat companies and/ areas and in outer regions of the EU (European Parliament,
or public institutions, which include the ecological restoration of 2018). For instance, while Funchal, the capital of Madeira, offers
the impacts produced during angling, could be well received different recreational alternatives to visitors, in Calheta (the
by clients. other port in the islands harboring recreational charter boats)
Another strategy that could increase numbers and length of visitors’ main attraction is the marina with recreational fishing
anglers’ trips to Galicia could be developed around promoting operators, fueling the arrival of tourists to this island and
accommodation in the towns near the base port of the boat, since improving the local economy.
many of the clients spent the night back in their homes. For this, It would also be necessary to review the current EU fishing
the support of public and private institutions is necessary to regulations, which contemplates the allocation of quotas to
improve the infrastructure of basic tourist services in some of the recreational fishing in a very limited way, leaving to the power
areas of Galicia, with important deficiencies derived mainly from of the member states the possibility of allocating part of the
the high seasonality of tourism to Galicia, mainly focused on the assigned quota to the recreational sector, including recreational
summer (Garı́n-Muñoz, 2009). The high importance of the cost charter boat operators. Current EU legislation only requires

Frontiers in Marine Science 14 frontiersin.org

Pita et al. 10.3389/fmars.2022.939533

countries to provide data on the catches obtained in recreational innovation program (grant agreement No 101002784). PP, GA,
fisheries (e.g., European Commission, 2016), but does not MA, AT, and SV acknowledge support by Grupo de Referencia
explicitly recognize the right of access by citizens or Competitiva GI-2060 AEMI, under Grant ED431C2019/11. PP,
recreational charter boats. MA, and SV acknowledge support of the project Grupo de
This acknowledgment of fishing opportunities, in similar Trabajo Sobre Pesca Marı́tima Recreativa en España, funded by
terms to that of commercial fishing fleets, should not necessarily the Fundació n Biodiversidad of the Spanish Ministerio Para la
drive an increase in total fishing mortality. In this sense, the Transició n Ecoló gica y el Reto Demográ fico, co-funded by the
further development of catch and release in charter boat fishing European Maritime and Fisheries Fund. RM-E was financially
(Holland et al., 1998) could favor the socioeconomic supported by the Oceanic Observatory of Madeira Project
development of this activity and avoid conflicts over access to (M1420-01-0145-FEDER-000001-Observató rio Oceâ nico da
resources with commercial fisheries. This is particularly Madeira-OOM).
important for regions, such as Galicia, highly dependent on
fishing, and in general to avoid undesired local shortages of
fishery products and the provision of other ecosystem services Acknowledgments
(see, e.g., Brown, 2016; Voyer et al., 2017).
We appreciate the involvement of the owners, skippers,
and clients of recreational charter fishing companies in
Data availability statement Portugal and Spain who voluntarily shared their knowledge
during this study.
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will
be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
Conflict of interest
Ethics Statement The authors declare that the research was conducted in the
absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could
Ethical review and approval were not required for the study be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
on human participants in accordance with the local legislation
and institutional requirements. Written informed consent for
participation was not required for this study in accordance with Publisher’s note
the national legislation and the institutional requirements.
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the
authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated
Author contributions organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the
reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or
All co-authors contributed to the elaboration of the claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed
manuscript. All authors contributed to the article and or endorsed by the publisher.
approved the submitted version.

Supplementary material
Funding
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found
This work was funded by the Xunta de Galicia (RECREGES II online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/
project under Grant ED481B2018/017) 2020 research and fmars.2022.939533/full#supplementary-material

References
Agencia Tributaria (2022) Asignaciones para gastos de locomoció n. Available at: Almeida, A. (2016). Modelling tourism demand in Madeira since 1946: and
https://sede.agenciatributaria.gob.es/Sede/manuales/ejercicio-2018/modelo-100/7- historical overview based on a time series approach. J. Spat. Organ. Dyn. 4, 145–
cumplimentacion-irpf/7_2-rendimientos-trabajo-personal/7_2_1-rendimientos- 156. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.03.035
integros/7_2_1_2-dietas-gastos-viaje/asignaciones-gastos-locomocion.html Almeida, A., Correia, A., and Pimpão, A. (2014). Segmentation by benefits
(Accessed May 22, 2022). sought: the case of rural tourism in Madeira. Curr. Issues Tour. 17, 813–831. doi:
Akaike, H. (1973). Information theory and an extension of the maximum 10.1080/13683500.2013.768605
likelihood principle. In Second International Symposium of Information Theory Arlinghaus, R., Tillner, R., and Bork, M. (2014). Explaining participation rates in
B. N. Petrov and F. Csaki ed. (Tsahkadsor, Armenia, USSR: Akademiai Kiado), recreational fishing across industrialised countries. Fish. Manage. Ecol. 22, 45–55.
267–81. doi: 10.1111/fme.12075

Frontiers in Marine Science 15 frontiersin.org

Pita et al. 10.3389/fmars.2022.939533

Bode, A., Alvarez-Ossorio, M. T., Cabanas, J. M., Miranda, A., and Varela, M. ICES (2013). Report of the ICES working group on recreational fisheries surveys
(2009). Recent trends in plankton and upwelling intensity off Galicia (NW Spain). (WGRFS) (Esporles, Spain: ICES).
Prog. Oceanogr. 83, 342–350. doi: 10.1016/j.pocean.2009.07.025 Kayak España (2017) Las rutas má s caras segú n el precio por km. Available at:
Brown, C. J. (2016). Social, economic and environmental effects of closing https://www.kayak.es/news/vuelos-precio-por-km/#:~:text=VuelosenEuropa,
commercial fisheries to enhance recreational fishing. Mar. Policy 73, 204–209. esde0%2C03€ (Accessed April 24, 2022).
doi: 10.1016/j.marpol.2016.08.010 Leó n, C. J., Araña, J. E., and Meliá n, A. (2003). Tourist use and preservation
Cisneros-Montemayor, A. M., and Sumaila, U. R. (2010). A global estimate of benefits from big-game fishing in the canary islands. Tour. Econ. 9, 53–65. doi:
benefits from ecosystem-based marine recreation: potential impacts and 10.5367/000000003101298268
implications for management. J. Bioeconomics. 12, 245–268. doi: 10.1007/s10818- Lew, D. K., and Larson, D. M. (2015). Stated preferences for size and bag limits
010-9092-7 of Alaska charter boat anglers. Mar. Policy 61, 66–76. doi: 10.1016/
Clawson, M. (1959). Methods of measuring the demand for and value of outdoor j.marpol.2015.07.007
recreation. Res. Future 10. Lynch, T. P., Smallwood, C., Williams, J., Ochwada-Doyle, F., and Devine, C.
Corté s-Jimé nez, I. (2008). Which type of tourism matters to the regional (2020). A cross continental scale comparison of Australian offshore charter boat
economic growth? the cases of Spain and Italy. Int. J. Tour. Res. 10, 127–139. recreational fisheries research and its applications to marine park and fisheries
doi: 10.1002/jtr.646 management. Report to the National Environmental Science Program, Marine
Council of the European Union (2008). Council regulation (EC) no 199/2008 of Biodiversity Hub. Hobart, Tasmania, Australia: CSIRO.
25 February 2008 concerning the establishment of a community framework for the Maguire, J.-J., Sissenwine, M., Csirke, J., Garcia, S., and Grainger, R. (2006). The
collection, management and use of data in the fisheries sector and support for state of world highly migratory, straddling and other high seas fishery resources and
scientific advice regarding the common fisheries policy (Brussels, Belgium: Official associated species (Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Journal of the European Union). Nations).
Council of the European Union (2009). Council regulation (EC) no 1224/2009 Martı́nez-Escauriaza, R., Hermida, M., Villasante, S., Gouveia, L., and Pita, P.
establishing a community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of (2020). Importance of recreational shore angling in the archipelago of Madeira,
the common fisheries policy (Brussels, Belgium: Official Journal of the European Portugal (northeast Atlantic). Sci. Mar. 84, 331–341. doi: 10.3989/
Union). scimar.05046.30A
Council of the European Union (2018). Council regulation (EU) 2018/1308 of 28 Martinez-Escauriaza, R., Pita, P., de Gouveia, M. L., Gouveia, N. M., Teixeira, E.,
September 2018 amending regulation (EU) 2018/120 as regards fishing opportunities de Freitas, M., et al. (2021). Analysis of big game fishing catches of blue marlin
for European seabass (Brussels, Belgium: Official Journal of the European Union). (Makaira nigricans) in the Madeira archipelago (Eastern Atlantic) and factors that
Diogo, H., Veiga, P., Pita, C., Sousa, A., Lima, D., Pereira, J. G., et al. (2020). affect its presence. Sustainability 13:8975. doi: 10.3390/su13168975
Marine recreational fishing in Portugal: Current knowledge, challenges, and future Martı́nez-Espiñeira, R., and Amoako-Tuffour, J. (2008). Recreation demand
perspectives. Rev. Fish. Sci. Aquac. 28, 536–60. doi: 10.1080/ analysis under truncation, overdispersion, and endogenous stratification: An
23308249.2020.1777083 application to gros morne national park. J. Environ. Manage. 88, 1320–1332. doi:
Ditton, R. B., and Stoll, J. R. (2000). A socio-economic review of recreational 10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.07.006
billfish fisheries. In Proceedings of the 51 st Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute L. Oliveira, P., and Pereira, P. T. (2008). Who values what in a tourism destination?
R. Creswell ed. (US Virgin Islands: St. Croix), 666–81. the case of Madeira island. Tour. Econ. 14, 155–168. doi: 10.5367/
Ditton, R. B., and Stoll, J. R. (2003). Social and economic perspective on 000000008783554758
recreational billfish fisheries. Mar. Freshw. Res. 54, 545–554. doi: 10.1071/MF01279 Öndes, F., Ünal, V., Öndes, H., and Gordoa, A. (2020). Charter fishing in the
Ehrhardt, N., and Fitchett, M. (2016). Status of billfish resources and billfish Aegean Sea (Turkey), eastern Mediterranean: The missing point of fisheries
fisheries in the western central Atlantic (Bridgetown, Barbados: Food and management. Fish. Res. 224, 105457. doi: 10.1016/j.fishres.2019.105457
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). Parsons, G. R. (2003). “The travel cost model BT - a primer on nonmarket
European Commission (2016). “Commission implementing decision (EU) 2016/ valuation,” Eds. P. A. Champ, K. J. Boyle and T. C. Brown (Dordrecht: Springer
1251 of 12 July 2016 adopting a multiannual union programme for the collection, Netherlands), 269–329. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-0826-6_9
management and use of data in the fisheries and aquaculture sectors for the period Pawson, M. G., Glenn, H., and Padda, G. (2008). The definition of marine
2017-2019,” (Brussels, Belgium: Official Journal of the European Union). recreational fishing in Europe. Mar. Policy 32, 339–350. doi: 10.1016/
European Parliament (2018). European Parliament resolution of 12 June 2018 on j.marpol.2007.07.001
the state of play of recreational fisheries in the European union (Brussels, Belgium: Pé rez-Camacho, A., Gonzá lez, R., and Fuentes, J. (1991). Mussel culture in
Official Journal of the European Union). Galicia (NW Spain). Aquaculture 94, 263–278. doi: 10.1016/0044-8486(91)90122-
FAO (2012). Recreational fisheries (Rome: FAO). N

Ferrini, S., and Fezzi, C. (2012). Generalized additive models for nonmarket Pita, P., Alos, J., Antelo, M., Artetxe, I., Biton-Porsmoguer, S., Carreño, A., et al.
valuation via revealed or stated preference methods. Land. Econ. 88, 782–802. doi: (2020a). Assessing knowledge gaps and management needs to cope with barriers
10.3368/le.88.4.782 for environmental, economic and social sustainability of marine recreational
fisheries: the case of Spain. Front. Mar. Sci. 7. doi: 10.3389/
Freire, J., and Garcı́a-Allut, A. (2000). Socioeconomic and biological causes of fmars.2020.00023Assessing
management failures in European artisanal fisheries: the case of Galicia (NW
Spain). Mar. Policy 24, 375–384. doi: 10.1016/S0308-597X(00)00013-0 Pita, P., Antelo, M., Hyder, K., Vingada, J., and Villasante, S. (2020b). The use of
recreational fishers’ ecological knowledge to assess the conservation status of
Garı́n-Muñoz, T. (2009). Tourism in Galicia: domestic and foreign demand. marine ecosystems. Front. Mar. Sci. 7, 242. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2020.00242
Tour. Econ. 15, 753–769. doi: 10.5367/000000009789955107
Pita, P., Artetxe, I., Diogo, H., Gomes, P., Gordoa, A., Hyder, K., et al. (2017).
Gonzá lez, L., Leon, C. J., Gonzalez Hernandez, M. M., and De Leon, J. (2021). Research and management priorities for Atlantic marine recreational fisheries in
The structural relationships of destination image, satisfaction, expenditure and southern Europe. Mar. Policy 86, 1–8. doi: 10.1016/j.marpol.2017.08.030
loyalty in the context of fishing tourism. Scand. J. Hosp. Tour. 21, 422–441. doi:
10.1080/15022250.2021.1884596 Pita, P., and Freire, J. (2014). The use of spearfishing competition data in
fisheries management: evidence for a hidden near collapse of a coastal fish
Goodman, L. A. (1961). Snowball sampling. Ann. Math. Stat. 32, 148–170. doi: community of Galicia (NE Atlantic ocean). Fish. Manage. Ecol. 21, 454–469.
10.1214/aoms/1177705148 doi: 10.1111/fme.12095
Haab, T. C., and McConnell, K. E. (1996). Count data models and the problem of Pita, P., Hyder, K., Gomes, P., Pita, C., Rangel, M., Veiga, P., et al. (2018).
zeros in recreation demand analysis. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 78, 89–102. doi: 10.2307/ Economic, social and ecological attributes of marine recreational fisheries in
1243781 Galicia, Spain. Fish. Res. 208, 58–69. doi: 10.1016/j.fishres.2018.07.014
Hastie, T., and Tibshirani, R. J. (1990). Generalized additive models (London: Pita, P., and Villasante, S. (2019). The building of a management system for
Chapman and Hall). marine recreational fisheries in Galicia (NW Spain). Ocean. Coast. Manage. 169,
Holland, S. M., Ditton, R. B., and Graefe, A. R. (1998). An ecotourism 191–200. doi: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2018.12.027
perspective on billfish fisheries. J. Sustain. Tour. 6, 97–116. doi: 10.1080/ Pollock, K. H., Jones, C. M., and Brown, T. L. (1994). Angler survey methods and
09669589808667305 their application in fisheries management (Bethesda, Maryland: American Fisheries
Hyder, K., Weltersbach, M. S., Armstrong, M., Ferter, K., Townhill, B., Ahvonen, Society Special Publication), 25.
A., et al. (2018). Recreational sea fishing in Europe in a global context–participation Radford, Z., Hyder, K., Zarauz, L., Mugerza, E., Ferter, K., Prellezo, R., et al.
rates, fishing effort, expenditure, and implications for monitoring and assessment. (2018). The impact of marine recreational fishing on key fish stocks in European
Fish. Fish. 19, 225–243. doi: 10.1111/faf.12251 waters. PloS One 13, e0201666. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0201666

Frontiers in Marine Science 16 frontiersin.org

Pita et al. 10.3389/fmars.2022.939533

R Core Team (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Surı́s-Regueiro, J. C., and Santiago, J. L. (2014). Characterization of fisheries
Vienna, Austria. dependence in Galicia (Spain). Mar. Policy 47, 99–109. doi: 10.1016/
Restrepo, V., Prince, E. D., Scott, G. P., and Uozumi, Y. (2003). ICCAT stock j.marpol.2014.02.006
assessments of Atlantic billfish. Mar. Freshw. Res. 54, 361–367. doi: 10.1071/ Vallerani, M., Martı́, C.-P., and Ojamaa, P. (2017). Fisheries in Madeira
MF02057 (Brussels: European Parliament).
Roussel, S., Salles, J.-M., and Tardieu, L. (2016). Recreation demand analysis of Vieira, J. C., and Antunes, M. C. (2017). Touristic big-game fishing in saint
sensitive natural areas from an on-site survey. Rev. dEconomie. Reg. Urbaine. 2, Michael island (Azores) evaluating anglers’ profiles, perceptions about the
355–384. doi: 10.3917/reru.162.0355 destination and business revenues. Tour. Econ. 23, 1362–1368. doi: 10.1177/
Shaw, D. (1988). On-site samples’ regression: Problems of non-negative integers, 1354816616686414
truncation, and endogenous stratification. J. Econom. 37, 211–223. doi: 10.1016/ Villasante, S., Pierce, G., Pita, C., Guimerá ns, C., Garcia Rodrigues, J., Antelo,
0304-4076(88)90003-6 M., et al. (2016). Fishers’ perceptions about the EU discards policy and its economic
Shiffman, D. S., and Hammerschlag, N. (2014). An assessment of the scale, impact on small-scale fisheries in Galicia (North West Spain). Ecol. Econ. 130, 130–
practices, and conservation implications of florida’s charter boat–based recreational 138. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.05.008
shark fishery. Fisheries 39, 395–407. doi: 10.1080/03632415.2014.941439 Villasante, S., Rodrı́guez-Gonzá lez, D., Antelo, M., Rivero-Rodrı́guez, S., and
STECF (2017). The 2017 annual economic report on the EU fishing fleet (STECF- Lebrancó n-Nieto, J. (2013). Why are prices in wild catch and aquaculture
17-12) (Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union). doi: 10.2760/ industries so different? Ambio 42, 937–950. doi: 10.1007/s13280-013-0449-8
36154 Voyer, M., Barclay, K., McIlgorm, A., and Mazur, N. (2017). Connections or
Steinback, S. R. (1999). Regional economic impact assessments of recreational conflict? a social and economic analysis of the interconnections between the
fisheries: an application of the IMPLAN modeling system to marine party and professional fishing industry, recreational fishing and marine tourism in coastal
charter boat fishing in Maine. North Am. J. Fish. Manage. 19, 724–736. doi: communities in NSW, Australia. Mar. Policy 76, 114–121. doi: 10.1016/
10.1577/1548-8675(1999)019<0724:REIAOR>2.0.CO;2 j.marpol.2016.11.029
Suá rez de Vivero, J. L., and Rodrı́guez Mateos, J. C. (2012). The Spanish Williams, C., Davies, W., Clark, R. E., Muench, A., and Hyder, K. (2020). The
approach to marine spatial planning. marine strategy framework directive vs. EU economic contribution of sea angling from charter boats: A case study from the
integrated maritime policy. Mar. Policy 36, 18–27. doi: 10.1016/ south coast of England. Mar. Policy 119, 104066. doi: 10.1016/
j.marpol.2011.03.002 j.marpol.2020.104066

Frontiers in Marine Science 17 frontiersin.org