Lifting the goliath grouper harvest ban: Angler perspectives and willingness to pay

Geoffrey S. Shideler, David W. Carter, Christopher Liese, Joseph E. Serafy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

22 Scopus citations


Despite uncertainties surrounding the protected Atlantic goliath grouper's stock size and resilience, fishery managers are under pressure to end the harvest moratorium in place since 1990. The present study sought to measure the proportion of anglers interested in reopening the goliath grouper fishery and to identify key reasons for this interest. We also present an estimate of the amount that anglers would be willing to pay for a goliath grouper harvest tag (the right sold to an angler to harvest one goliath grouper). A survey was mailed to a random sample of Florida (USA) residents with a recreational fishing license. Approximately half of the respondents agreed that the goliath grouper should now be open to recreational take. A probit analysis indicated that the best predictor for the opinion the fishery should be open is the belief that there are "too many goliath grouper." Also, more anglers agreed than disagreed that goliath grouper are eating "all the fish on the reef," a belief that was related to anglers personally viewing goliath grouper depredation. The mean willingness to pay for a goliath grouper harvest tag was estimated to be between $34 and $79. This information can be used to estimate the potential revenues available from a hypothetical tag system and can be compared with the economic value of goliath grouper in non-consumptive uses such as recreational diving.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)156-165
Number of pages10
JournalFisheries Research
StatePublished - Jan 2015


  • Angler motivations
  • Epinephelus itajara
  • Fishery management
  • Mail survey
  • Willingness to pay

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Aquatic Science


Dive into the research topics of 'Lifting the goliath grouper harvest ban: Angler perspectives and willingness to pay'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this